Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6067116" data-attributes="member: 42582">Ron Edwards <a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/_articles/narr_essay.html" target="_blank">commented</a> on this being a problem in pioneering narrativist games:All of these texts demonstrate an internal struggle to articulate means of addressing Premise, littered with trip-ups based on assumptions of GM-power and the utter lack of precedent in explaining the whole idea. Some of them slammed toward Simulationist texts upon second-edition revision and via supplements, probably to make it "more like an RPG." . . . Pitfalls of Narrativist game design 1. The Timid Virgin. The reasonably successful Narrativist-leaning GM is writing a game, and suddenly experiences a loss of nerve - he visualizes all those other players out there who obviously don't play in this fashion. One result is a kind of "but-but" motorboat effect scattered through the generally Simulationist-reading text: admonishments to keep non-GM participants from screwing up the apparently-Narrativist goals, usually by pleading, scolding, or imposing sudden and apparently out-of-place limits on the players' authority to provide input. . .  Another sort of Timid Virgin effect is a full spin toward Force Techniques in isolated spots, which is less schizoid in terms of the reading experience, but perhaps more confusing in the long run. . . [this] characterizes many early-to-mid-90s game texts.It's a little odd that WotC had the same problem 10 years later - Mearls, at least, is familiar with the Forge, and presumably has read Edwards's essays!Also, good to call out LostSoul. If you look at early 4e threads (second half of 2008) his posts are really standout ones. (And continue to be.)</blockquote>

Verification