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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 9617664" data-attributes="member: 6696971">So a couple thoughts on this that I hope clarifies my position as it pertains to Narrativism.* When we talk about unilateral fiat being the beating heart of Narrativism, I have the following questions:Are we talking about GM having unilateral fiat over situation-framing or is their situation-framing constrained by overt and binding agenda and principles? Or are we also referring to GM having unilateral fiat over consequences of action resolution (put another way, "the GM is the system which mediates action resolution")? Are we talking about players having unilateral fiat over their character's dramatic needs/relations only at the outset of play with the collision of system + other participants' similar unilateral fiat over their own characters & responsibilities having their own system-directed say as play unfolds?* The answer to those three questions are paramount here.  Because I would say the following:1) GM's cannot have unchecked, unilateral fiat over situation-framing and play be functionally Narrativist.  If systemitized and clear constraints aren't in play (which by definition should center premise and questions around protagonism), then the GM is afforded the right to drift play, anchoring it to interests alternative to premise and protagonism.  Further, the lack of overtness in the (lacking) constraint puts enormous pressure on play due to its impacts on "the great bag-of-breadcrumbs paradigm" which robustly systemitized Story Now engines solve with intentional design.  This is because that lack of overt constraint subverts (in part or in whole) the dynamics of (a) players understanding what is entailed within the bag of breadcrumbs because system tells them plainly and (b) the players being afforded at least equal rights over the bag of breadcrumbs (contravening the traditional model where GMs exclusively have rights over the breadcrumbs and keep some/all of what that bag entails as their own secret to reveal during play).Now significant latitude in situation-framing within overt constraints?  Yes.  But that isn't the same as unilateral fiat.2)  The problem of unilateral fiat over consequences is similar to (1) above.  Further, I would say that if there isn't a "robust system's say" when it comes to action resolution, then the GM is locked out from "playing to find out."  Without being beholden to the dynamism-infusing, play-trajectory perturbing factor of well-systemitized procedures around action resolution and fallout, then the GM already knows and is therefore effectively engaged in a version of Story Before (even if muted in contrast with the alternative model of Hickmanesque metaplot and Golden Rule GM Storytime).Further, if you combine (1) with (2), things only become amplified.  GM having unilateral fiat over situation-framing + GM being the unilateral mediator of action resolution?  That is defacto Story Before (and some kind of version of GM Storytime) even if it isn't prepped and prefabricated metaplot that is mainlined onto play.3)  Finally, that "only" in my last question does essential work.  If play removes that constraint and players are expected to be afforded unilateral control over the conception and realization of character as play unfolds (with a GM obliging this conception and realization via framing & consequence control and/or with an intentionally limp/impotent system that ensures it), then players similarly aren't engaged in "play to find out."  Like the GM in the above, "they already know."  This is a form of OC/Neotrad play that is anathema to Story Now play.[HR][/HR]Hopefully those questions are clear and my elaborations all makes sense (whether you agree with them or not)!EDIT - [USER=6925338]@soviet[/USER] , thanks!  Glad those words worked for you!  [USER=7025508]@Crimson Longinus[/USER] , my sense of your play is that it is very much <a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/15/" target="_blank">High Concept/Genre Simulationism</a> (in Forge parlance...about halfway down on that link if you have any interest whatsoever...likely not I suspect!). OC/Neotrad play is a form of that sort of play, but not the only form. My sense is that does not at all describe your play and you are much more typical of the apex priorities being theme/genre simulationism meets some level of process simulationism (which is basically genre sim) with players having some rights to "anchor play" with a session 0.</blockquote>

Verification