Gamist / Narrativist / Simulationist?

[Jeph]

First off, if your reaction to this thread is, "what the heck is Jeph talking about?", I suggest that you read this article by Ron Edwards, designer of the Sorcerer RPG.. Or at least part of it. It can get pretty tedious, after a while.

So, which style of play do you lean towards?

 

[Victim]

I'm mostly gamist. I thought I'd be Gamist/Simulationist, because I'm interested the world building simulation aspects - with X ground rules, what is a plausible setting? But I guess I'm too lazy to be fully simulationist since I often don't bother with minor details.

 

[Jeph]

I myself am pretty Gamist, but am undergoing a Narrativist transformation. I'm breaking away from DnD a bit, and getting more into indie rpgs, designing my own game, and, of course, Feng Shui.

I'm designing a gamist/narrativist system here . . .

 

[Henry]

N/S, myself. I enjoy the crunchy bits, and making sure those crunchy bits make sense in a given framework, but past that I enjoy creating a framework in which the characters like to tell their own story.

 

[Geoff Watson]

I would have chosen Gamist, but after reading Ron's definitions (for him, Gamist means 'competitive against the other players'), I don't feel that any of them directly fit.

Geoff.

 

[Tonguez]

N/S/G myself sometimes S/N/G - its why I like Worldbuilding and being DM.

btw my rl initials are GNS

 

[Jeph]

I would have chosen Gamist, but after reading Ron's definitions (for him, Gamist means 'competitive against the other players'), I don't feel that any of them directly fit.

Geoff.

You sure? It seemed to me, more like he felt that a Gamist reveled in competition, no matter if it's pc/pc or pc/npc; or liked games where you could amass some form of 'points', or 'win'. For instance, the system I'm designing is mainly narrativist, but the concept of amassing Spin and the strategies that go along with it give it a gamist facet.

 

[Tom Cashel]

I'm not voting. I refuse to label myself or the others in my group with this system. In fact, the article states outright

Much torment has arisen from people perceiving GNS as a labelling device. Used properly, the terms apply only to decisions, not to whole persons nor to whole games.

So stop it. Just stop it right now.

I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, labeled, briefed, debriefed, or numbered!

 

[Jeph]

Ah, then you probably haven't checked out the forums on that site, or read the sections of the article on shorthand. When someone says, "I'm a gamist," he's really saying "I principally enjoy plaing in games with settings, systems, players, and/or GMs that promote Gamist role-playing". When I say, "I'm designing a game that's mainly Narrativist, with a bit of Gamism thrown in," I'm really saying "The game that I'm designing strongly promotes Narrativism, but also has aspects that might be enjoyed by those who prefer Gamist play." You might want to check out this forum, which discusses this subject to death.

 

[John Smallberries]

Happy, enthusiastic and successful Gamist

(formerly a sad, wretched and frustrated Narrativist)