Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9088253" data-attributes="member: 7023840">I think that the issue is that there are multiple competing strands now within the big umbrella. The easiest way to understand this is realizing that there isn't even a single-agreed upon definition of what &quot;FKR&quot; as an acronym even means at this point. As I stated in the OP-To start with, there isn't a single answer to even the most basic of questions. The &quot;FK&quot; part is easy- Free Kriegsspiel. As for the R? Well, it is usually used to refer to Revolution, although it's also Revival as well as Roleplaying. Of course, I missed Renaissance! When I look at what people have done with this, what I keep seeing is the emphasis on fewer rules, and playing to the fiction- to me, FKR is, and has always been about, the subordination of rules to the fiction (and keeping the rules as minimal as possible). I think that it is true that originally, people were trying to capture a neo-Arnesonian flavor with the DM (GM/referee/keeper) as the arbiter of a &quot;constant&quot; fiction; but as this spread and became more common ... um ... well, for a generous definition of common .... within the independent game community, the issue of GM authority became orthogonal to FKR. In other words, groups quickly realized that the strengths inherent in FKR (rules-lite, playing to the fiction) could be used regardless of how authority for the fiction was portioned out. To me, the issue of authority within FKR is much less interesting than the question of how FKR treats written rules. That is the salient difference.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 9088253, member: 7023840"] I think that the issue is that there are multiple competing strands now within the big umbrella. The easiest way to understand this is realizing that there isn't even a single-agreed upon definition of what "FKR" as an acronym even means at this point. As I stated in the OP- [I]To start with, there isn't a single answer to even the most basic of questions. The "FK" part is easy- [B]F[/B]ree [B]K[/B]riegsspiel. As for the R? Well, it is usually used to refer to [B]R[/B]evolution, although it's also [B]R[/B]evival as well as [B]R[/B]oleplaying. [/I] Of course, I missed [B]R[/B]enaissance! When I look at what people have done with this, what I keep seeing is the emphasis on fewer rules, and playing to the fiction- to me, FKR is, and has always been about, the subordination of rules to the fiction (and keeping the rules as minimal as possible). I think that it is true that originally, people were trying to capture a neo-Arnesonian flavor with the DM (GM/referee/keeper) as the arbiter of a "constant" fiction; but as this spread and became more common ... um ... well, for a generous definition of common .... within the independent game community, the issue of GM authority became orthogonal to FKR. In other words, groups quickly realized that the strengths inherent in FKR (rules-lite, playing to the fiction) could be used regardless of how authority for the fiction was portioned out. To me, the issue of authority within FKR is much less interesting than the question of how FKR treats written rules. That is the salient difference. [/QUOTE]

Verification