These are quite different questions and most always lead to quite different experiences. And while the simulation which inaccurately predicts reality may also be an effective teaching device, the chances are that it won't. And the effective teaching device is not likely to an effective research instrument. In designing a teaching experience, there are many constraints imposed by the management requirements of the teaching situation, ability of the students, and the amount of preparation the teacher is willing to undertake. Persons trying to develop a simulation for both research and education will find themselves constantly having to choose between the rigorous demands of accuracy and detail required by the research criteria and the constraints imposed by the educational and managerial needs of the teacher and the students.
Few people are able to satisfy the demands of both.
Inappropriate Use of Chance. When you can't figure out how to simulate a process, have them draw a card, roll the dice and advance three spaces or flip the spinner. It is certainly appropriate to use chance to determine whether a player has been hit by lightening, suffered crop damage from a violent storm or been born into a family of poverty and disease. These can be considered chance events. I'll concede that in certain instances a person might be able to develop a creative solution in which chance might be appropriately used to determine non-chance events, but generally it indicates a lack of imagination and greatly reduces the instructional and emotional impact of the game.