From theory to practice - GNS, CA, SIS, etc.
Daniel B:
Hello folks,
I'm interested in becoming better acquainted with the theories of the Forge, and as such would like to hear about the results of peoples' attempts to incorporate these concepts into the design and play of their games. In particular, how did you try to incorporate the theories, and what theories were you using? What results were you hoping for? How well did the attempt work? How closely did the game-play meet your expectations?
Please post only those attempts that made it to actual play sessions. I'm not interested if the game never made it past the design phase, even if it did incorporate Forge theories. However, if you used the theories on-the-fly during an existing game, I'd love to hear.
Thanks muchly to anyone who responds! I will most likely not reply in this thread again since I'm not interested in championing a position.
Dan
Eero Tuovinen:
So, to get this straight - why should I care to answer, again, if you're explicitly not engaging in dialogue? Will you read the thread, at least?
For what it's worth, my recent game Zombie Cinema is based on a straight reading of Ron Edwards' Egri-based premise theory, which is a model for implementing a narrativist agenda by formulating a premise and putting protagonist characters in position to comment with choice. The game's been played several dozen times at least, probably over a hundred. The results matched my expectations in a relatively routine manner, as I'd been messing about with the premise model for several years already, and knew what I was doing.
More generally, there's not one game design project I've worked on during the last five years that wasn't somehow influenced by the Big Model. I imagine that this is not a singular example at all, most long-term Forge participants have been influenced by someone or something here; that's pretty much the reason for participating in the first place. Not everybody consumes theory raw, but everybody enjoys the practical results.
Ron Edwards:
Hello,
The single best way to get acquainted with the ideas here is to post about a single experience of your own actual play of any kind, and either to try to apply one of the notions that interests you yourself, or to ask someone to walk you through it.
Surveys of this kind aren't going to help, nor are they allowed as topics here. For one thing, given your question, the only real answer is to point at eight years of posting across a dozen forums. For another, your requested model for the thread is not acceptable at all: you cannot ask a question, then say "I won't post," and expect a bunch of people to perform for you.
I also urge you to reconsider the notion that the only justification for posting in a thread is to champion a position. That may apply to any number of public discussion sites around the internet, but it doesn't apply here. The Forge is not a bear pit. You do not have to mark out turf in order to contribute to a thread. In fact, when you start a thread, you are expected to engage fully with it.
I've considered your points carefully, though. I do see merit in having a way for interested newcomers to see the ideas in action ... perhaps I'll do some hunting for especially illustrative threads and make a sticky post. In fact, if anyone wants to help me with that, I'd appreciate it.
In the meantime, please consider posting like I described in the first paragraph. We can continue in this thread for that purpose.
Best, Ron
David Berg:
Hi Dan, I've put some effort into distilling some Forge concepts into a user-friendly format. You can find it here:
http://www.david-berg.com/forgeglossary.html
This in itself isn't really what you asked for, but might help anyway, and contains links to a bunch of key threads.
Anyone who's thread-hunting, you might want to see if I've already linked what you're looking for.
David Berg:
Crap. Actually, very few of my links go to illustrative AP. So never mind on that front.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page