What does GNS mean?

[fusangite]

The most important thing about the GNS model is that its author Ron Edwards is perfectly correct when he says that you will not understand the model unless you read his entire article explaining it. Any attempt at summarizing it will horribly distort it and lead to much misinterpretation.

Even when people do read his essay, many still do not understand it. I read the essay three times before I could even pick locate my preferred style of play within it. Edwards spends some of his time on the Forge correcting people who are convinced of the model but have still misinterpreted parts of it.

In addition, there are some unstated assumptions that underly the model that can be easily picked up by perusing the Forge that may help you to comprehend it.

Now, despite all my warnings, I want to add that the model is by no means valueless; it does help one to understand RPGs better and to address problems that arise in games. It is a smart theory and an important first stab at creating a theoretical framework for discussing gaming.

That said, the model has some totalizing attributes in that it purports to be able to categorize all game dynamics but doesn't.

Finally, if you care about RPG theory, read the whole article. If you don't care that much, don't bother. If you want the Cole's Notes, you are SOL.

 

[Acid_crash]

Okay, so what is the link that directly takes one to this article of Mr. Ron's?

------------

If I go by the definitions in the first page, I would say I an a Narativist because to me, the story is the most important aspect of the game and I gain the most fun by telling the story. However, I do have my moments of being a Gamist and a Simulationist, despite being a Narativist more.


So....I am all three. Therefore, why try to straightjacket people into one category when all three apply depending on circumstances? That's like trying to explain Alignment to my wife, who just doesn't understand how a character can be simplified down to two, single words.

 

[GMSkarka]

Even when people do read his essay, many still do not understand it.

...and an even larger number of people read it, disagree with it or otherwise find it flawed and/or useless, and are continually told by devotees that it's only because we don't understand it.

 

[Nisarg]

...and an even larger number of people read it, disagree with it or otherwise find it flawed and/or useless, and are continually told by devotees that it's only because we don't understand it.

That would be the "academic plague" i'm talking about in the other thread.. something set up in an intentionally complicated way, with little or no real utility, essentially designed to make the author and the author's followers feel intellectually superior.
Any criticism is responded to with the accusation that the critic simply doesn't "understand" the "sophistication" of the work.

Nisarg

 

[Turjan]

Okay, so what is the link that directly takes one to this article of Mr. Ron's?

He's written lots of stuff about this, but a concise treatment of GNS theory can be found on this page of a longer article. Look at his list of "common misunderstandings of GNS", and you see that he is really possessive of his theory. A point like "there is no such thing as a GNS Triangle" just tries to choke an alternative visualisation of the theory in an easy image .

Just don't take it too seriously .

 

[Rayston]

Alternative to the Forge?

What would you guys suggest as an alternative to "The Forge"?

i.e A website that discusses game theory and design in an intelligent manner.

Thank You

Rayston

 

[fusangite]

...and an even larger number of people read it, disagree with it or otherwise find it flawed and/or useless, and are continually told by devotees that it's only because we don't understand it.

I agree that this is a problem. That was my experience the first time I tried to engage in debate about it. But that doesn't take away from the fact that
(a) it's hard to understand; and
(b) it is, for all its warts, the only properly constructed theoretical framework for discussing RPGs

I mentioned the idea of underlying assumptions: I find one of the ways that the model is most likely to provoke the cross-purpose talk is if your idea about RPGs centres on the specialness of the GM's role.

 

[fusangite]

What would you guys suggest as an alternative to "The Forge"?

i.e A website that discusses game theory and design in an intelligent manner.

Until universities start funding research into RPGs, we have to rely on volunteers who will put their systematic academic expertise to use with no essentially financial reward. I think the Forge is a great achievement considering the meagre or non-existent reward it provides people like Ron Edwards.

There is no real alternative to The Forge because what they are doing takes a lot of time, work and professional expertise. And the only real reward these people can get for all that right now is the dubious distinction of getting to feel smarter than other gamers. I don't think we can really afford to begrudge them that.

 

[hong]

GNS came about when Robert E. Heinlein (you know, creator of Conan, Red Sonja and Lazarus Long) made a bet with L. Ron Edwards that he couldn't found his own religion.

 

[diaglo]

i.e A website that discusses game theory and design in an intelligent manner.

ENWurld???