6 Comments
Aug 21, 2022Liked by DragnaCarta

Interesting article, this paragraph especially stood out to me:

> At times, this can lead to unsatisfying scenarios, especially when a Realist DM is running the game for a Dramatist or Anarchist player. “Why did you let me roll if even a natural 20 wasn’t good enough to do what I wanted?”, the player might ask. “Because I knew that you’d feel unsatisfied if I didn’t let you roll, and I thought you might find this outcome fun, even if it’s not what you were looking for,” the Realist DM might reply.

I think this might be the reason that pushes me towards the simulationist camp.

Expand full comment
Aug 22, 2022Liked by DragnaCarta

You should consider the aspect of anchoring. Plenty of people play with 1/20 auto fail/succeed now despite those not actually being the rules. So the anchoring for this idea is very common.

But it's really hard for a DM to claw back a rule which was added, especially if it's seen against the player's favor. If the rulebook is mute on the topic, than the DM can simply enforce their preference. But the mute perspective is the simulation's perspective. To make a skill check succeed or fail even when it doesn't meet the required DC necessities addition rules be added to the game.

Expand full comment