D&D 5E [+] Explain RPG theory without using jargon

[kenada]

For this reader’s edification, is this the “brain damage” quote that’s being discussed? While I think the choice of terminology is needlessly inflammatory, I don’t get the impression he’s being flippant or making a trivial comparison.

Now for the discussion of brain damage. I'll begin with a closer analogy. Consider that there's a reason I and most other people call an adult having sex with a, say, twelve-year-old, to be abusive. Never mind if it's, technically speaking, consensual. It's still abuse. Why? Because the younger person's mind is currently developing - these experiences are going to be formative in ways that experiences ten years later will not be. I'm not sure if you are familiar with the characteristic behaviors of someone with this history, but I am very familiar with them - and they are not constructive or happiness-oriented behaviors at all. The person's mind has been damaged while it was forming, and it takes a hell of a lot of re-orientation even for functional repairs (which is not the same as undoing the damage).

 

[Celebrim]

I mean, yes, but the question is "what brings you to the game?"
GNS theory says the answer to that question will fit into 3 categories. So where does "I just came for the free pretzels" fit in to GNS theory?

You're suggestion is intended to be ridiculous, but there is a non-ridiculous version of this criticism and that is that it is perfectly possible to design and play a solo RPG. And in fact, certain people have done so. So then if Sociality is not an aesthetic of play that drives a group to play together, you'd think that they'd be equally happy and derive equal enjoyment from choosing to play a solo RPG. But that's clearly not the case. So I don't think you can dismiss that a RPG tends to be a social experience that drives a group to meet together for a long period on a regular basis from the reasons that an RPG is fun, because you certainly could have an RPG that doesn't do that.

More subtly, you could have an RPG where the mechanics didn't drive group collaboration on problem solving or story creation or shared experience. You could have an RPG where players typically set and watched each other play each taking a turn doing their own thing, something that tends to happen for example when parties become heavily split. So it isn't really tangential to the experience of enjoying D&D that splitting the party is such a bad idea there are memes about how bad it is. Having mechanics that drive the party to work collaboratively or risk failure upholds the desires of the player that enjoys the game because it is Social in a way that each of the three pillars of GNS just don't. So to claim that Social enjoyment is tangential to the game is to so far misunderstand RPGs that you don't even notice how it can be baked into the mechanics and processes of play (or not).

 

[Charlaquin]

Yup. That it's impossible to both have the GM be in control of the story and the Players be in control of the main characters, and then how to make this work. This latter part, which is critical to the idea -- how do you reconcile the impossible thing? -- is just left off in the mockery of Edwards as a dumb person that doesn't get Alice in Wonderland. Haha, let's all laugh at how stupid Edwards is, isn't he just deplorable?

Doesn’t the whole “instability is required for narrativism” thing kind of put paid to the idea that the GM is controlling the story there? It seems like Narrativism offers an alternative to trying to have the GM control the story and the players control the characters, rather than a way to make it actually happen.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Is it? I don’t remember that part. Are you sure it’s not in Through the Looking Glass, cause I haven’t read that one.

Oh, I'm not sure at all! But it is original Lewis Carrol text.

After googling, turns out you're right, it indeed is from Through the Looking Glass.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

he didn’t dislike it and give reasons. That would have been fine. He disliked it and tried to explain why anyone else would like it, and he did so in a condescending manor, disguised by an air of intellectual neutrality. Then he accidentally said the quiet part out loud.

I play D&D because I like to play fantasy make believe.
I play Rifts because I am dumb and like to play fantasy make believe.
I play Vampire because I like to play fantasy make believe.
I play Mutants and Masterminds because I like to play fantasy make believe.

at the end of the day I don't think you NEED deep reasons... now I really dislike some systems and can show you why... but again I spend hours here and on other boards... most people most likely can't tell you what they do and don't like about systems...

 

[Charlaquin]

is there not a way to discuss the theory from other people? I mean are ALL people who put this forward toxic? (If so that may be an issue) if not why not just get different sources?

I think discussing GNS without discussing edwards is a bit like discussing RPGs without discussing D&D. He’s the 800 lbs gorilla in the room.

 

[Manbearcat]

How is this post not a complete violation of the rules the Original Poster put forth for this thread?

How is the original post not a violation of the original post (paragraph 2 meets +)?

And dozens of posts thereafter?

Yet you ignore all that and come in here and punch up the ticket of this post 40 jillion posts later?

This post is very on brand for “How to Fight a Forgist(?)”-ey!

Just report it dude. Report this post as well. Do not care. I will be very glad to exit.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Thought better of it. Not playing into the playbook.

 

[Charlaquin]

It is.

“I ca’n’t believe that!” said Alice.

“Ca’n’t you?” the Queen said in a pitying tone. “Try again: draw a long breath, and shut your eyes.”

Alice laughed. “There’s no use trying,” she said, “one ca’n’t believe impossible things.”

“I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast. There goes the shawl again!”

That’s the Queen of Hearts saying that? I don’t remember that, but I guess it’s been a while.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I think discussing GNS without discussing edwards is a bit like discussing RPGs without discussing D&D. He’s the 800 lbs gorilla in the room.

There it is! @Malmuria