Let's See - Rethinking "Sim"
Simon C:
Quote from: contracycle on May 12, 2009, 08:42:17 PM
Well having now dug up and read the bulk of the thread, it seems to pretty weird IMO right there; Vincent seems to have leaped on a particular player activity as definitional of the CA, which makes little sense to me. I don't see that as being particularly valid - one particular person may have such a desire to dream their ideal PC, in fixed and determined way, but what this has to do with the kind of social contract that is negotiated among a group is not clear to me. It seems to me that a group seeking the right to dream of, say, a sort of Tolkienesque world, is agreeing right there to grant the right for that world, not for anything that any player might wish to dream about.
Take that up with Vincent, I guess. I'm pretty sold on his description of agendas, I'm just not sure where the kind of play I'm describing fits into that. I also think it'll help me understand Right to Dream better to know why this is or isn't it. I agree with you though that this style of play sits comfortably within what I understand to be Simulationism.
contracycle:
Well thats fair enough and all, but the problem that you present is essentialy one that arises from Some Other Site, and so if I'm going to respond to it it seems reasonable to address the issue as presented there. And in this case I happen to think the particular dichotomy claimed is a false one, and explained why.
Simon C:
I think I've been being slightly dumb.
"Let's see" is basically exploration, and exists in all (known) creative agendas.
In Step on Up, it's something like "Let's see who's the best"
In Story Now, it's "Let's see what meaning emerges"
In Right to Dream, it's "Let's see... something?" I'm still not sure. We sure as heck had a pretty big focus on exploration, on that "Let's see" aspect of play, as I've discussed. But to what end?
contracycle:
IMO its easier to approach when it deals with some external property and can be seen in the light of a kind of fandom. Its quite easy to understand that people keen on Tolkien or Star Wars or whatever might seek out the opportunity dream that dream themselves; to re-experience or extend the original enjoyment they experienced when encountering that dream for the first time. When we are dealing with self-authored things it gets harder to see but the same principle applies - in your case, I would suggest, its the life of the freebooter, your particular setting, and a synthesis of the SF references you mention. To what end such imaginative activity is directed is, I guess, the same end as that of other media, from 'what would the future be like,' 'what was the past like,' 'what would it be like to be a police officer' and so forth. There's plenty of that sort of stuff about in other media, ranging from the seriously investigative to the humorous and tongue-in-cheek.
In the deeper sense of "to what end", if mere entertainment and curiosity are not enough, or not enough for ever, you arrive at the Hard Question posed at the end of the RTD article.
Gregor Hutton:
Hi Simon
To me that sounds like a pretty coherent Right To Dream from the group. It was repeatably fun which makes me think you were all on the same page, and when the game rules didn't match your group's needs you drifted them, ignored them and then switched them to other rules (which I think was necessary considering that the game rules weren't written to support play). However, it sounds like your system satisfied you and stayed pretty constant (no one stepped on each other's toes and you knew what the game needed and players/GM wanted at any time). In play you were all buying into playing Blake's Seven and so on -- exactly the Right To Dream. No one was looking for Story Now or to Step On Up.
I think the "sim" you were seeing before was the group's desire for the technical level to have a level of "realism" and "plausability" to it, but at the same time at that technical level you also wanted something quick and easy to use, which would cut against the traditional thinking of "sim". Is that where your initial thinking was coming from? To me that's just a choice of techniques and preferences.
Underlying it all you had a strong group desire to play in Right To Dream I think.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page