Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rogue Agent" data-source="post: 5790323" data-attributes="member: 6673496">I think that's just repeating Edwards mistake at a slightly smaller scale.The argument can certainly be made that storytelling railroads are a dysfunctional form of dramatist play. But I don't think that means it's not dramatist play.In similar fashion, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, you can see arguably dysfunctional gamist play ("I win" munchkinism or killer GMs, for example) and arguably dysfunctional simulationist play (2 hour sessions resolving 10 seconds of game time in minute detail).While I think there's very valuable discussion to be had in looking at subsets of each agenda, I think the impulse to say "this is slightly different approach to achieving dramatism, so let's push it out of dramatism altogether" is a mistake.  You're mistaking technique with agenda and then claiming that the agenda is somehow a "kludge" because it can be pursued with different techniques.It's like claiming that Discworld isn't fantasy because it's funny. Or that Shakespeare isn't theater because it's written in English.Fair enough. I guess we'll just have to agree that GNS is too deeply flawed to be fixed.That's the guy I was thinking of above... but apparently not the post (since this looks like it was just posted).</blockquote>