Starfox
Hero
For those of us familiar with Forge, they have a pretty strictly defined vocabulary. For those of us not familiar with Forge, it is worth reading up on, it has a lot of interesting ideas and terms, and you are going to get pointed out if you use similar terms and don't use them right. Check out http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forge/index.php and specifically the glossary.
But this is not the subject of this thread, rather the opposite. With forge having camped some terms in common usage here at ENworld, we need alternatives. I'll make some suggestions for alternate terms to use here on these boards and explain how they differ from Forge terms.
I will briefly discuss the Forge meaning of the terms. If this description isn't completely correct, please leave them be with possibly a minor comment - this thread is about proposed ENworld terms, not a Forge debate.I will try and use Forge only to explain how these proposed ENworld terms differ from Forge terminology. Some of my proposed terms describe things Forge believes to be impossible to achieve - in particular Storytelling has a lot of "The Impossible Thing Before Breakfast". Live with it, or challenge me to discuss it in a separate thread - this thread is about ENworld terminology, and Forge only enters into it as far as avoiding conflicts with their terms and as a basis for discussion.
Gamey vs Gamist
Gamist is not used all that often on ENworld, but often causes contention when it is - I propose the recently popular gamey as a less conflicted alternative.
Gamism is a creative agenda in Forge. A term for challenge and risk elements in a game - either player vs. player or player vs GM. It is defined around "step on up" when the player decides to stand up to a challenge and accept risk. I propose that gamey, on the other hand, describes a game or an element of a game that has a bordgame feel or where the mechanism is naked, making players lose their identification with the game world or story. Gamey can also refer to specific mechanical elements or mini-games introduced into play, separate rules modules only used in certain situations. Examples include the skill challenge rules of 4E or the dramatic skill resolution of TORG. The combat systems of most games can also be described as gamey - a lot of rules mechanics that differ form the general rules and offers much more detail, effectively being a "mini game" or game mode set apart form the usual run of the game.
These terms are related. Gamism often occurs in a gamey sub-scection of the game, mostly in combat. Gamey can be said to be "excessive gamism" or gamism to the point where it interferes with the other creative agendas. Where gamist is a positive term (imo all the creative agendas are), being gamey is usually bad. But gamey need not be bad, it can just refer to a particular game "engine" - while some people dislike the use of d20 + modifiers for most tasks in d20 games and it is definitely a gamey element of these games, many other people like it and finds it a unifying element and a good standard to build a game on. In the final analysis, die-rolling conventions such ad d20 *roll d20 + mods* or Shadowrun's *roll lots of d6 and count those that match the target number* are gamey elements, so no game completely avoids being gamey - the question is not if RPGs are gamey but rather if they are too gamey.
Emulationism vs. Simulationism
Simulationism is a popular word on ENworld, but the meaning differs from Forge. I propose replacing it with the word emulationism.
Simulationism is a creative agenda in Forge, where the group tries to make all their actions make sense in terms of the game world. It is all about the social contract. I propose that emulationism is where game mechanics are motivated by in-world considerations or tries to encourage behavior that makes sense for the genre. Emulationism is simulationism taken out of the social contract and written into the rules of the game.
For example, a rule in a superhero game that gives a bonus for a cheesy one-liner delivered with each attack would be an emulationist rule - it gives a bonus for adhering to the conventions of the genre. So would a rule in a hard-SF game like Traveller that takes into account laser beam dispersal in different mediums - gas,liquid, vacuum - because the hard SF genre is all about such technical aspects. Introducing the "one liner" rule in hard SF or the laser dispersal rule in a superhero game (except as technobabble) would be bad emulationism, as each encourages counter-genre behavior.
The question in both emulationism and simulationism is not whether you simulate or emulate reality - it is if you can stay close to the genre and it's conventions. So it is not poor emulationism that a high level monk in DnD can fall any distance and not get hurt - it is a rule that encourages genre-correct play and thus highly emulationist, given that this is the genre you want to play. In a game emulating medieval fantasy warfare, the monk class as a whole might be contrary to emulationism as thie desired genre does not include wuxia elements. Having the monk class in the game changes what is emulated.
Storytelling vs. Narrativsm
Narrativism is not a word often used on ENworld, but it happens and when it does, it is almost always directly in conflict with what Forge uses the word for. I propose storytelling as an alternative. These two terms are actually highly conflicted, because Forge takes the stance that what is commonly meant by storytelling is a defunct mode of gaming, refereed to as "The Impossible Thing Before Breakfast". I find this derogatory and the appellation is one of the things I don't like about Forge, but again, please lets take the discussion of Forge itself elsewhere.
I must admit that I find it hard to get to grips with Forge narrativsm, but the idea is that the narrative should emerge from the characters and not have an independent, per-determined script. The story does not belong to the GM but should grow out of the motivations and backgrounds of the characters, preferably in a collaborative way. Direct player influence on the story - as opposed to indirect influence via their character's actions - is one method used. This can be termed "godmoding" and is generally discouraged in most other styles of RPGs but is acceptable in narrativist play. Storytelling places the story center-stage, but character acting is more about entertainment value that the source of the story - which is usually heavily scripted. Storytelling definitely includes the characters as active participants, but the GM has the final word on what is "shown on camera" and responsibility for making a coherent whole. Player "godmoding" or in "director stance" is discouraged, tough it can be allowed if discussed with the GM beforehand. Basically the players have to plead to introduce subplots, as opposed to narrative play where player-created suplots are the center of the narrative.
I must admit that this is the one of these first three terms that I've thought through the least, but I do think there is a very sharp difference between them - storytelling is more casual, a "lower", less idealized form of play, whereas narrativism as a "creative agenda" is a bit of a "term with its head in the clouds", more abstract and less down-to-earth. Forge belies that the GM can have control of the story in a narrative game, where storytelling usually has the GM in control and the players being more like actors in theatresports, improvising around a subject given by the GM rather than being playwrights themselves.
But this is not the subject of this thread, rather the opposite. With forge having camped some terms in common usage here at ENworld, we need alternatives. I'll make some suggestions for alternate terms to use here on these boards and explain how they differ from Forge terms.
I will briefly discuss the Forge meaning of the terms. If this description isn't completely correct, please leave them be with possibly a minor comment - this thread is about proposed ENworld terms, not a Forge debate.I will try and use Forge only to explain how these proposed ENworld terms differ from Forge terminology. Some of my proposed terms describe things Forge believes to be impossible to achieve - in particular Storytelling has a lot of "The Impossible Thing Before Breakfast". Live with it, or challenge me to discuss it in a separate thread - this thread is about ENworld terminology, and Forge only enters into it as far as avoiding conflicts with their terms and as a basis for discussion.
Gamey vs Gamist
Gamist is not used all that often on ENworld, but often causes contention when it is - I propose the recently popular gamey as a less conflicted alternative.
Gamism is a creative agenda in Forge. A term for challenge and risk elements in a game - either player vs. player or player vs GM. It is defined around "step on up" when the player decides to stand up to a challenge and accept risk. I propose that gamey, on the other hand, describes a game or an element of a game that has a bordgame feel or where the mechanism is naked, making players lose their identification with the game world or story. Gamey can also refer to specific mechanical elements or mini-games introduced into play, separate rules modules only used in certain situations. Examples include the skill challenge rules of 4E or the dramatic skill resolution of TORG. The combat systems of most games can also be described as gamey - a lot of rules mechanics that differ form the general rules and offers much more detail, effectively being a "mini game" or game mode set apart form the usual run of the game.
These terms are related. Gamism often occurs in a gamey sub-scection of the game, mostly in combat. Gamey can be said to be "excessive gamism" or gamism to the point where it interferes with the other creative agendas. Where gamist is a positive term (imo all the creative agendas are), being gamey is usually bad. But gamey need not be bad, it can just refer to a particular game "engine" - while some people dislike the use of d20 + modifiers for most tasks in d20 games and it is definitely a gamey element of these games, many other people like it and finds it a unifying element and a good standard to build a game on. In the final analysis, die-rolling conventions such ad d20 *roll d20 + mods* or Shadowrun's *roll lots of d6 and count those that match the target number* are gamey elements, so no game completely avoids being gamey - the question is not if RPGs are gamey but rather if they are too gamey.
Emulationism vs. Simulationism
Simulationism is a popular word on ENworld, but the meaning differs from Forge. I propose replacing it with the word emulationism.
Simulationism is a creative agenda in Forge, where the group tries to make all their actions make sense in terms of the game world. It is all about the social contract. I propose that emulationism is where game mechanics are motivated by in-world considerations or tries to encourage behavior that makes sense for the genre. Emulationism is simulationism taken out of the social contract and written into the rules of the game.
For example, a rule in a superhero game that gives a bonus for a cheesy one-liner delivered with each attack would be an emulationist rule - it gives a bonus for adhering to the conventions of the genre. So would a rule in a hard-SF game like Traveller that takes into account laser beam dispersal in different mediums - gas,liquid, vacuum - because the hard SF genre is all about such technical aspects. Introducing the "one liner" rule in hard SF or the laser dispersal rule in a superhero game (except as technobabble) would be bad emulationism, as each encourages counter-genre behavior.
The question in both emulationism and simulationism is not whether you simulate or emulate reality - it is if you can stay close to the genre and it's conventions. So it is not poor emulationism that a high level monk in DnD can fall any distance and not get hurt - it is a rule that encourages genre-correct play and thus highly emulationist, given that this is the genre you want to play. In a game emulating medieval fantasy warfare, the monk class as a whole might be contrary to emulationism as thie desired genre does not include wuxia elements. Having the monk class in the game changes what is emulated.
Storytelling vs. Narrativsm
Narrativism is not a word often used on ENworld, but it happens and when it does, it is almost always directly in conflict with what Forge uses the word for. I propose storytelling as an alternative. These two terms are actually highly conflicted, because Forge takes the stance that what is commonly meant by storytelling is a defunct mode of gaming, refereed to as "The Impossible Thing Before Breakfast". I find this derogatory and the appellation is one of the things I don't like about Forge, but again, please lets take the discussion of Forge itself elsewhere.
I must admit that I find it hard to get to grips with Forge narrativsm, but the idea is that the narrative should emerge from the characters and not have an independent, per-determined script. The story does not belong to the GM but should grow out of the motivations and backgrounds of the characters, preferably in a collaborative way. Direct player influence on the story - as opposed to indirect influence via their character's actions - is one method used. This can be termed "godmoding" and is generally discouraged in most other styles of RPGs but is acceptable in narrativist play. Storytelling places the story center-stage, but character acting is more about entertainment value that the source of the story - which is usually heavily scripted. Storytelling definitely includes the characters as active participants, but the GM has the final word on what is "shown on camera" and responsibility for making a coherent whole. Player "godmoding" or in "director stance" is discouraged, tough it can be allowed if discussed with the GM beforehand. Basically the players have to plead to introduce subplots, as opposed to narrative play where player-created suplots are the center of the narrative.
I must admit that this is the one of these first three terms that I've thought through the least, but I do think there is a very sharp difference between them - storytelling is more casual, a "lower", less idealized form of play, whereas narrativism as a "creative agenda" is a bit of a "term with its head in the clouds", more abstract and less down-to-earth. Forge belies that the GM can have control of the story in a narrative game, where storytelling usually has the GM in control and the players being more like actors in theatresports, improvising around a subject given by the GM rather than being playwrights themselves.
Last edited:
