thread: 2005-10-20 : The Fruitful Void

On 2005-10-26, John Laviolette wrote:

I'd say that in a Sim game, there has to be room for Exploration—which may just be a rephrasing of what Nathan said, but let's expand on it a little more. there has to be choices in how characters can interact with each other and the environment; these choices must be *meaningful*, producing different effects for different choices; and these choices must feel like they explore the "objective" SIS rather than the psyche of one of the other players.

this is why extreme Gam or Nar designs don't appeal to extreme Sim players: in such games, most of the rules deal with metagame concerns and interactions between the players, which makes the Exploration seem arbitrary, the result of player whim; that door wasn't locked because a dice roll said it was locked or the GM's notes said so, but because someone made a decision it would be more dramatic or provide a tactical advantage.

in other words, extreme Gam/Nar designs fill in the Fruitful Void for Sim play.


This makes JB go "Hmm. Not sure I buy that"
What if a player decided that having the door locked just made more sense? I think players make this kind of "arbitrary" call all the time across all CA's. it's just that in the strong immersionist camps no one admits it.

This makes JCL go "OK...."
I didn't mention "makes more sense" as an option, but it fits into a Sim agenda, since it relates back to the SiS. the key point is that the reason the door is locked can't be because of Story Now or Step On Up.

This makes JB go "my point was..."
That it's the same arbitrary metagame decision, just made for a different reason. However: margenalia ain't the place for a(nother) huge "what is Sim" debate.

This makes...
short response
optional explanation (be brief!):

if you're human, not a spambot, type "human":