New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 57 of 57
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Banned
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jul 2014

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    The Forge came up, and someone reacted to their terminology.

    In the context of The Forge, I absolutely stand by my comments, both regarding the cultish nature of the place and their use of postmodernist obscurantism.

    As for applicability to the present, the opening post of this thread and its title specifically use the terminology of GNS... are we supposed to fastidiously ignore the subject because you and ImNotTrevor have deemed it "out of date"?
    The only word from GNS used is "Narrative."

    A word everyone here admits is not used in the GNS sense by hardly anyone.

    As for the cult:
    It's gone. Not even EDWARDS is a member of it. Let those old bones rest, dangit! GNS's corpse barely has time to let the dirt settle on its grave before getting dug up to be paraded about as a present threat in some kind of weird "Weekend at Burnie's" parody.

    I'm fairly sure Edwards also used the word "the." We gonna start going into GNS over conjunctions next? Gimme a break. It makes no sense to have a thread where on the one hand there is agreement that nobody uses GNS terminology anymore and on the other hand one (very common, btw) word in common means GNS is suddenly returning to destroy gaming.

    It's still very dead, despite this poster using a very common alternative to the terms "story-focused" or "fiction-first."

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by ImNotTrevor View Post
    I'm still confused about why we're rehashing Edwards' triumvirate and the Forge stuff when all of the following is true:
    1. The Forge no longer operates
    2. Edwards himself doesn't really use it anymore
    3. Game designers don't use the theory except in rare cases
    4. Nobody on this thread is using it in that way
    5. According to everyone in this thread, almost no one uses the term "Narrative" to mean that anymore.


    It feels like I'm going on a videogames forum in 2017 and seeing people bringing up ps2 games as evidence of modern problems. It's weird.
    Well, because nobody has a clear definition of "narrative".
    "Gosh 2D8HP, you are so very correct (and also good looking)"

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by ImNotTrevor View Post
    The only word from GNS used is "Narrative."
    The OP posited a middle ground between narrativist and gamist. It's a huge stretch to think that's not a direct reference to GNs theory terms.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Banned
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jul 2014

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    The OP posited a middle ground between narrativist and gamist. It's a huge stretch to think that's not a direct reference to GNs theory terms.
    Yes and even after OP clarified and is clearly not using the GNS words in the way GNS does, we're still rattling those old bones around. And this is COMMON.

    People use one of the GNS terms and suddenly we have to endure the conga line of people complaining about the mere existence of a theory nobody uses anymore, even if it did give us 3 handy-dandy words to vaguely point in the directions of preferences.

    So allow me to let y'all know how most people use the terms A DECADE LATER:

    Narrative: focused kinda more on the story bits than other bits.
    Gamist: focused kinda more on the mechanical game bits than other bits.
    Simulation: focused kinda more on the setting and verisimilitude than other bits.

    Thats what most people understand of it this far down the line. Kinda like how when I say "spicy food" you have a general idea of things I may like, even if you don't know EXACTLY which spicy foods I happen to be thinking of

    Does that make any sense?

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DrMartin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2014

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    One the groups I am playing with went through something similar. Our solution has been overlaying Fate most recognizable mechanical elements over 5e inspiration mechanics. So the DM can compel the characters based on their ideals, bonds and flaws, rewarding them with inspiration, and the characters can spend inspiration to "bend" or add elements to a scene as if they were creating an aspect. Or you can get advantage on a roll as per normal inspiration rules.

    No player at the table is forced to use the system, since it's entirely possible to just use 5e mechanics. But it definitely adds an element of fun for those comfortable with player contributing to the narratives not directly through the resolution of their character's action.

    As a corollary, we raised the maximum amount of inspiration one can "hoard", to 3 +1 per tier of play (o 4 at 6th, 5 at 11th, etc).

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    People seem to be struggling with the idea that you can use GNS "terms" without GNS definitions, and that without using the GNS definitions, they're not actually GNS terms, they're just WORDS. Words that have, if not rigorously defined meanings, at least vague popular conceptions of what they mean which have nothing to do with GNS at all.
    Last edited by Airk; 2017-12-14 at 10:30 AM.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by Airk View Post
    People seem to be struggling with the idea that you can use GNS terms without GNS definitions, and that without using the GNS definitions, they're not actually GNS terms, they're just WORDS.
    Not really -- it's more that these words get tossed into the discussion, and even in the specific context of gaming, we rarely know exactly what that particular person might mean.

    For example, I've never used "Narrativism" or "Narrativist" in exactly the way that The Cult of Edwards wanted them used, regarding "exploration of theme / premise". To me, it's always been about Narrative Causality ("things happen because The Plot demands they happen") and Narrative Mechanics (specific rules/systems exist to allow players to manipulate the setting or NPCs outside their characters' actions and influence, which screams "metagaming" to me). That's taken from the broader usage of the word in both the writing and gaming contexts; see also, I never use "incoherent" in the way Edwards wanted to, either.

    Other people do still mean "narratavist" in a very specifically Edwardian way.

    Other people mean "anything to do with a good story", going so far as to include character, setting, etc.


    That's the problem with "words mean whatever we want them to" linguistics and proliferating terms of art.
    Last edited by Max_Killjoy; 2017-12-14 at 11:44 AM. Reason: Typo
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by ImNotTrevor View Post
    Yes and even after OP clarified and is clearly not using the GNS words in the way GNS does, we're still rattling those old bones around. And this is COMMON.
    For sure. I made several posts based on a very hazy understanding of GNS, basically no more than the three terms and my assumption of what they meant, less than two years ago on these very forums. After several other posters called me out on it, and it being both a dead theory and a stupid one in the first place, I went and researched it and found that was correct.

    GNS is a dead theory, and was BS in the first place.

    So to answer your question, no, it doesn't make sense to talk about GNS.

    However, I think the term Narrative is useful, just not in the commonly-misinterpreted-from-GNS way of "describing stuff", or the BS people throw around about RPGs being "cooperative storytelling".

    That's why I gave my interpretation of what narrative play means, and what it's 'opposite' is. Because emergent storytelling (recounting the story of the game after the fact), narrative resolution (GM determine resolution based on what's needed for the plot), and narrative mechanics (mechanics that allow the player to affect the plot) are not BS.

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by ImNotTrevor View Post
    So allow me to let y'all know how most people use the terms A DECADE LATER:

    Narrative: focused kinda more on the story bits than other bits.
    Gamist: focused kinda more on the mechanical game bits than other bits.
    Simulation: focused kinda more on the setting and verisimilitude than other bits.
    I really wish we'd go back to using GDS and getting rid of the Forge baggage.

    That said, what you've described is a good summary of GDS. It is not, however, how I often see people use narrative. As an example: By that definition, a D&D game could be "narrativist", but I've never heard D&D described as so, even in terms of a specific game.

    That's really all I said about Forge theory - that it was the origin of the term, and I found it ironic that very few people use it in anywhere near that context, especially given the lack of anything near a common definition.

    Which is why my first post was literally just "define what you mean by narrativist". Because if I know what it means to the OP, then I can help them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Airk View Post
    People seem to be struggling with the idea that you can use GNS "terms" without GNS definitions, and that without using the GNS definitions, they're not actually GNS terms, they're just WORDS. Words that have, if not rigorously defined meanings, at least vague popular conceptions of what they mean which have nothing to do with GNS at all.
    I don't think that I agree with the bolded part. I think people often mean *very different* things when they say narrativism.

    Like, when I say "gamist," I kinda get what that means. And I think if you took me and a random gamer, and asked if ten things were gamist or not, we'd probably be in 90% agreement.

    If you said "narrativist", I wouldn't presume that we were over 60% or so.

    That's the problem I've found with terms like this - people *think* that there's more agreement on what they mean than there actually is, and so they can nod along, not realizing that the two people are actually having different conversations.

    Here's some things I've found to be common in what people mean by "narrative":

    1) A moderate to high amount of Type 3 interactions
    2) A game that is structurally closer to a movie or novel, or is more likely to contain the mix of activities of a movie or a novel.
    3) A game that comes out of the game design thought process of the key contributors at the Forge
    4) A game that allows some level of player authorship (arguably redundant with the first point)
    5) Not using common, often wargame-derived, structures

    Apocalypse World, for instance, is almost entirely Point 3 by definition (though it often includes a high amount of Type 4 by cultural assumption).

    Fate is all about Point 2 and 4, though it really has pretty limited player authorship.

    The real common ground is Point 5, though Fate hews closer to them than many other "narrative" games.

    Yet they're both called narrative.

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    Not really -- it's more that these words get tossed into the discussion, and even in the specific context of gaming, we rarely know exactly what that particular person might mean.

    ....

    That's the problem with "words mean whatever we want them to" linguistics and proliferating terms of art.
    Yup. I have similar issues with words like "gritty". Everybody has a vague idea of what they mean, and assumes everyone else means the same thing, but all too often they don't mean the same thing at all.
    "Gosh 2D8HP, you are so very correct (and also good looking)"

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    Yup. I have similar issues with words like "gritty". Everybody has a vague idea of what they mean, and assumes everyone else means the same thing, but all too often they don't mean the same thing at all.
    Oh, gritty is easy. It means easy to die. Except when it means careful attention to resource expenditure, of course. Or noir. Or hard to gain levels. Or horror.

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    Oh, gritty is easy. It means easy to die. Except when it means careful attention to resource expenditure, of course. Or noir. Or hard to gain levels. Or horror.
    Or "everything is dirty and worn down".

    Or "dung ages".
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    Oh, gritty is easy. It means easy to die. Except when it means careful attention to resource expenditure, of course. Or noir. Or hard to gain levels. Or horror.
    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    Or "everything is dirty and worn down".

    Or "dung ages".
    I personally prefer "human, not superhuman" and "pain". But, hey, that's the point, right? :D
    "Gosh 2D8HP, you are so very correct (and also good looking)"

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Talakeal's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Denver.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    I really wish we'd go back to using GDS and getting rid of the Forge baggage.
    Seconded.

    Its weird, most people seem to use the GNS terminology but with the GDS descriptions.
    Looking for feedback on Heart of Darkness, a character driven RPG of Gothic fantasy.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    If 5e is too "mechanically complex" then I dunno. It sounds like your group would be better off with something really light, if not freeform entirely.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    I really wish we'd go back to using GDS and getting rid of the Forge baggage.
    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    Seconded.

    Its weird, most people seem to use the GNS terminology but with the GDS descriptions.
    I'd love to get rid of the Forge baggage.

    Even without it, though, I've seen disagreements over what goes where. Does "Character" go with D or S? Is "Genre Emulation" a D or S concern?
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RFLS's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Spring, TX
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Woah, hey, so, it sounds like I owe an apology. I started the post, went away, did some reading, and came back to a lot of people trying to figure out what I meant when I hadn't paid serious attention to TTRPG theory in five years. So. Let's ditch the GNS terminology I used. And yes, that was the source of the wording for the title.

    So. I'm looking for a game that is mechanically simple. The base mechanics of FATE are about where it should rest, give or take. I am looking for a game that steers its players (and GM/MC/DM/w/e) away from an adversarial playstyle. Finally, I am looking for a game that has mechanics that encourage players to make choices based on creating an interesting story, rather than entirely trusting that an interesting story will fall out of playing in an adversarial manner.

    For clarification: When I use the word "adversarial," I am referring to the mindset that the game is GM vs. players.

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    If 5e is too "mechanically complex" then I dunno. It sounds like your group would be better off with something really light, if not freeform entirely.
    Yeah. That's what prompted FATE, tbh. I'm tempted to just force PbtA at this point.

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DrMartin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2014

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Mouseguard (a simpler adaptation of Burning Wheel) fits some of the bill. The system is really easy, conflict is abstract and narrative rather than turn-by-turn, and the game pretty much expects the players to state their goals and the GM to adapt and bend the session to those stated goals. It is a game though, where the GM is explicitly encouraged to go hard on the players and throw even the kitchen sink at them, challenge-wise - so I don't know where it stands on your "non adversarial" clause.

    the games suggest a rather formulaic session structure that I find quite interesting, that goes like this:
    1- GM introduces the current mission / task
    2- each players declares a Goal tied to the session task
    3- a GM turn, in which challenges are thrown at the players, and ends either with the resolution of the mission, or in a place where the characters can "slow down" and rest. The game assumes the GM will tailor the challenges to the Goals the players stated in step 2 above
    4- a player's turn, in which the players get a number of "scenes" to either recover from consequences accrued during the GM turn, or to pursue personal goals.

    plus, you are playing anthropomorphic, intelligent mice. It can be enough to sell the game to some audiences :D

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Knaight's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by RFLS View Post
    So. I'm looking for a game that is mechanically simple. The base mechanics of FATE are about where it should rest, give or take. I am looking for a game that steers its players (and GM/MC/DM/w/e) away from an adversarial playstyle. Finally, I am looking for a game that has mechanics that encourage players to make choices based on creating an interesting story, rather than entirely trusting that an interesting story will fall out of playing in an adversarial manner.
    Have I recommended Ubiquity yet? It's simple, it encourages players to make choices that are character based (which works just as well as plot based decisions for story crafting), and it has a couple key mechanics that make it largely non-adversarial.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by Knaight View Post
    Have I recommended Ubiquity yet? It's simple, it encourages players to make choices that are character based (which works just as well as plot based decisions for story crafting), and it has a couple key mechanics that make it largely non-adversarial.
    All else aside, character-based decisions make for far better stories than plot-based decisions.
    Last edited by Max_Killjoy; 2017-12-16 at 12:23 PM.
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Banned
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jul 2014

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    All else aside, I think that character-based decisions make for far better stories than plot-based decisions.
    Fixed that errant opinion-as-fact wording. We've had enough fight in this thread before going off on trying to determine which of these is objectively better.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Why do those have to be mutually exclusive anyway? Actors in stories make decisions based on plot and character simultaneously all the time.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by Original Poster
    I am looking for a game that steers its players (and GM/MC/DM/w/e) away from an adversarial playstyle.
    Again, you can do this in any system with a GM, by not playing adversarially as a GM.

    Quote Originally Posted by Original Poster
    Finally, I am looking for a game that has mechanics that encourage players to make choices based on creating an interesting story, rather than entirely trusting that an interesting story will fall out of playing in an adversarial manner.
    And you can do that without special mechanics on the players' side, by playing co-operatively as a GM and creating your scenario so that it has such choices for the players to make.

    But what is this interesting story you wish to make, what are these interesting choices you want your players to make?

    Quote Originally Posted by Original Poster
    For clarification: When I use the word "adversarial," I am referring to the mindset that the game is GM vs players.
    Yes, yes, I'm fairly sure everyone got that. You solve most of the problem by choosing to not play adversarially. The rest is making it obvious to your players, which is best done by actually playing co-operatively untill they get it. Choice of system borders on tangential.

    If that does not help, break it down: what are the things that your players would consider adversarial? By contrast, what would be the things they'd consider co-operative?
    "It's the fate of all things under the sky,
    to grow old and wither and die."

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by RFLS View Post
    Woah, hey, so, it sounds like I owe an apology. I started the post, went away, did some reading, and came back to a lot of people trying to figure out what I meant when I hadn't paid serious attention to TTRPG theory in five years. So. Let's ditch the GNS terminology I used. And yes, that was the source of the wording for the title.

    So. I'm looking for a game that is mechanically simple. The base mechanics of FATE are about where it should rest, give or take. I am looking for a game that steers its players (and GM/MC/DM/w/e) away from an adversarial playstyle. Finally, I am looking for a game that has mechanics that encourage players to make choices based on creating an interesting story, rather than entirely trusting that an interesting story will fall out of playing in an adversarial manner.

    For clarification: When I use the word "adversarial," I am referring to the mindset that the game is GM vs. players.

    Yeah. That's what prompted FATE, tbh. I'm tempted to just force PbtA at this point.
    Why not just run Fate slightly more traditionally? I guarantee it can be done. I've done it.

    Heck, based on our conversations, I think most people probably play Fate closer to "traditional' gaming than you think it needs to be played.

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    All else aside, character-based decisions make for far better stories than plot-based decisions.
    I totally agree. Characters pursuing their goals makes for great stories!
    Last edited by kyoryu; 2017-12-16 at 06:42 PM.
    "Gosh 2D8HP, you are so very correct (and also good looking)"

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    Why do those have to be mutually exclusive anyway? Actors in stories make decisions based on plot and character simultaneously all the time.
    They don't have to be.

    The problem is when they are, and "because the plot said so" is chosen over "this is what the character would do in this situation".
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    georgie_leech's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy View Post
    They don't have to be.

    The problem is when they are, and "because the plot said so" is chosen over "this is what the character would do in this situation".
    Where does "I want the plot to go this way, so the character should have traits that lead to them doing this" fall? Like, it would be far more sensible for any given Horror Protagonist to NOPE right on out of whatever scenario is presented, but they're almost always curious enough to take the first peek that sends them down the rabbit hole, or have some person/macguffin they need to get back.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grod_The_Giant View Post
    We should try to make that a thing; I think it might help civility. Hey, GitP, let's try to make this a thing: when you're arguing optimization strategies, RAW-logic, and similar such things that you'd never actually use in a game, tag your post [THEORETICAL] and/or use green text

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Max_Killjoy's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    The Lakes

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Quote Originally Posted by georgie_leech View Post
    Where does "I want the plot to go this way, so the character should have traits that lead to them doing this" fall?
    What's one the tricks of getting it right -- matching the character to the story.


    Quote Originally Posted by georgie_leech View Post
    Like, it would be far more sensible for any given Horror Protagonist to NOPE right on out of whatever scenario is presented, but they're almost always curious enough to take the first peek that sends them down the rabbit hole, or have some person/macguffin they need to get back.
    Depends on what kind of horror story. The stereotypical slasher flick requires a collection of blithering idiots from an alternate universe where slasher movies don't exist.
    It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

    Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.

    The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.

    The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Striking the middle ground between narrativist and gamist

    Not really. The most annoying characters in horror fiction act idiotically even for people who have never heard of horror.

    Others end up in a horrifying position because they act like people who do not believe themselves to be in a horror story, which is far more tolerable.
    "It's the fate of all things under the sky,
    to grow old and wither and die."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •