Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by Josh Roby, August 15, 2005, 06:14:10 PM
QuoteI don't think it would be any undue burden to assume that your typical gamer monkey could consider the elements of a game in both competitive (Gamist) and explorationist (Simulationist) terms simultaneously.
Quote... I think it's hyperbole to state that striking off to one of the GNS poles is the only way to have 'good' roleplay.
QuoteIn fact, taking such an approach to extremes will actually delimit meaning to such a degree that it closes down new opportunities for new meaning. I'd much rather have a little G-and-S in my Narrativist gaming experience, if you will. I don't want to 'stay on target' on just one interpretation of elements within the SIS; I want to play with them, look at them in continually changing light, and see what different facets and subtleties I can find.
QuoteFor a given instance of play, the three modes are exclusive in application. When someone tells me that their role-playing is "all three," what I see from them is this: features of (say) two of the goals appear in concert with, or in service to, the main one, but two or more fully-prioritized goals are not present at the same time. So in the course of Narrativist or Simulationist play, moments or aspects of competition that contribute to the main goal are not Gamism. In the course of Gamist or Simulationist play, moments of thematic commentary that contribute to the main goal are not Narrativism. In the course of Narrativist or Gamist play, moments of attention to plausibility that contribute to the main goal are not Simulationism.
Quote from: Joshua BishopRoby on August 16, 2005, 01:40:31 AMLet me see if I've got this right, then: Creative Agenda is an agreed-upon common goal created at the Social Contract level, intentionally and explicitly negotiated by the players around the table to guide play that occurs thereafter? Or am I stating it too strongly?
QuoteIs a Creative Agenda determined before play begins, or is it only something that can be determined after a complete reward cycle has been completed? That is, is it prescriptive or descriptive?
QuoteThe glossary says there are three 'currently recognized' CAs -- are you still holding out the possibility that other CAs exist? Alternately, is 'Gamism' a CA, or are there many Gamist CAs?
QuoteIs the origin of these terms observed behavior (we have seen people play in three ways), or are they more a matter of design and function of role-playing games (we see that every RPG has three pirmary aspects)?
QuoteAre reward cycles mutually exclusive, incapable of overlap or running concurrently?
QuoteWhat is the status of the term Hybrid?
QuoteAnd probably a question Ron is loathe to answer: what are the differences between the current Creative Agenda and the old-school modes?
QuoteSo Hybrids are vanishingly rare and fragile -- is that another observation (not a a posteriori conclusion)? Do you hazard to speculate why that is?