I would be inclined to say, in fact, that Cause based powers are simulationist. If my character has the power to control electricity, and I say, "Okay, well, if he can generate enough electricity to inflict bodily injuries, he should be able to light up an incandescent bulb, right?" I'm appealing to the physics of electricity as an aspect of how the world works.
I'm not sure what a narrativist approach would be. But I don't think it would be either Cause or Effect.
Incidentally, it seems to me that the GURPS approach has at least some element of Cause-based. That is, if you use the mechanics of GURPS Powers, you define a theme for a power, which includes a bunch of specific abilities that share a common physical or supernatural mechanism; and you define a source, which is something like divine, magical, chi, psionic, or mutant, which is the cause of your having access to that mechanism, and which gives you limitations based on how the mechanism works—for example, if your source is Magical then your powers will fail in a no-mana zone.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2008-04-10 09:02 pm (UTC)I'm not sure what a narrativist approach would be. But I don't think it would be either Cause or Effect.
Incidentally, it seems to me that the GURPS approach has at least some element of Cause-based. That is, if you use the mechanics of GURPS Powers, you define a theme for a power, which includes a bunch of specific abilities that share a common physical or supernatural mechanism; and you define a source, which is something like divine, magical, chi, psionic, or mutant, which is the cause of your having access to that mechanism, and which gives you limitations based on how the mechanism works—for example, if your source is Magical then your powers will fail in a no-mana zone.
Bill Stoddard