Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6680994" data-attributes="member: 996">Games and agendas are not the same thing.&nbsp; You can't have one player at the table playing RQ and another playing D&amp;D.&nbsp; That's the analogy you just drew.&nbsp; You can have a player who wants to emphasize offense (one agenda) and another who wants personal glory (another agenda) on the same team, and, with a little work, they'll both contribute to the team's success.&nbsp;I'm guessing that's a central Forge/GNS principle, and I think that's a key problem I have with the whole convoluted thing.&nbsp; Back in the 90s when the Roll vs Role debate was growing into the GNS monster, what bothered me was the false dichotomy pushed by that debate.&nbsp; Nothing about choosing a game with workable systems (roll) keeps you from RPing with it (role).&nbsp; It's a false dilemma, you can have both.The same goes for GNS.&nbsp; RPGs are very flexible games by their very nature. They're necessarily games, unavoidable produce a narrative as you go along, and can't help but simulate something (if only their tautological self-simulating milieu).&nbsp; GNS is fine as a way of looking at how people play games and how various games interact with various forms of play.&nbsp; As a trio of warring camps, though, it's counter-productive, at best.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6680994, member: 996"] Games and agendas are not the same thing. You can't have one player at the table playing RQ and another playing D&D. That's the analogy you just drew. You can have a player who wants to emphasize offense (one agenda) and another who wants personal glory (another agenda) on the same team, and, with a little work, they'll both contribute to the team's success. I'm guessing that's a central Forge/GNS principle, and I think that's a key problem I have with the whole convoluted thing. Back in the 90s when the Roll vs Role debate was growing into the GNS monster, what bothered me was the false dichotomy pushed by that debate. Nothing about choosing a game with workable systems (roll) keeps you from RPing with it (role). It's a false dilemma, you can have both. The same goes for GNS. RPGs are very flexible games by their very nature. They're necessarily games, unavoidable produce a narrative as you go along, and can't help but simulate something (if only their tautological self-simulating milieu). GNS is fine as a way of looking at how people play games and how various games interact with various forms of play. As a trio of warring camps, though, it's counter-productive, at best. [/QUOTE]

Verification