NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9241769" data-attributes="member: 71699">I'll need to back up a bit and check our levels of agreement to speak to this. I claim play to find out is fundamental to what counts as a game. If we don't play to find out our moves in chess, we're not playing a game. Thus I understand GNS as dividing along the lines of play to find out what. G wants to find out if they can master the challenge. S wants to find out their elevated appreciation. N wants to find out how they will address a problematic feature of human existence.If it's a game at all, we're playing to find out. This basic claim leads to two obvious dissatisfactions those with narrativist ambitions may have with trad. Firstly, we're prioritising story but we're not playing to find out story. Secondly, the best kind of story is felt to be that resolved by dramatic protagonism: we're not playing to find out how dramatic protagonists resolve problematic features of human existence if all the authoring is done in advance by someone else.So I claim that the problems cited are similar to those that incited rifts for a time between ludologists and narratologists. It's basic to games to play to find out. And the problem was that habitual precanned linear storytelling was infecting games with narrative that was not play to find out. In defense of that, not much was known about the techniques to do otherwise, and it was satisfying immersing in bubbles of play to find out who my character is and what they might do within the story I'm enjoying being told.With that in place,Your questions and [USER=82106]@AbdulAlhazred[/USER]'s comments here and elsewhere have led me to adjust my thinkingStorynow differs from other sub-modes of neotrad, because the former is focused on N. It wants rising tension, the crucible, all that. [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] already described this.Assuming agreement that playing to find out and the lusory-duality is fundamental to game qua game, the design space for neotrad may be illuminated as followslusory-duality + sim = neosim, where emotional and noetic satisfaction is found in achieving an elevated appreciation lusory-duality + skilled play = neoOSR lusory-duality + freeform = neoFKR lusory-duality + sandbox = neosandbox If storytelling is definitional to trad, then I wind up in agreement with your intuitionlusory-duality + trad = storynow, where satisfaction is found in achieving ludonarrative lusory-duality + lyric = neolyricism, where satisfaction is found in achieving the ludonarrative comparatives of wider narrative forms (beyond dramatic protagonism) For all modes, neotrad ampifies the author facet of the player lusory-duality; playing to find out in earnest. Strong-version neotrad is differentiated from weak-version by degree of renegotiation with GM. Implying that there are weak-versions of storygames, for instance.</blockquote>

Verification