NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ourph" data-source="post: 5124322" data-attributes="member: 20239">There are a few nods to cinematic style in the 4e combat system (minions), but most of the design choices are clearly gamist; e.g. - giving all characters something useful to do every round, eliminating "instant win buttons" that circumvent the standard HP-depletion mode of overcoming combat challenges, institutionalizing team synergy as a method for success. All of those are clearly involved with shaping the challenge aspect of the game, which puts them clearly in the camp of gamist priorities.I think the skill challenge system is even further removed from simulationist sensibilities than the combat system. The idea of formalizing the process of overcoming an out-of-combat challenge into a combat-like, systematized procedure (where system elements level the playing field and make it more likely that all players have something to contribute each round) is much more a gamist priority than a simulationist one.Gamism isn't necessarily about balancing as much as it is about having strictly defined win/lose conditions. With narrativism the goal is some kind of emotionally appealing resolution to a situation (subjective), with simulationism the goal is exploring and fiddling around in a situation for the sake of exploring and fiddling around (somewhat subjective), whereas with gamism the goal is to definitively win or overcome a challenge with predefined criteria for doing so (totally objective).@ the OP: There are a lot of games that are what the Forge people call "incoherent" where no one particular agenda is prioritized. In most cases, the unfocused nature of an "incoherent" game just means that it is open to being used for any of the creative agendas with a little tweaking by the players.I also think it's possible for a game to have individual systems that are focused on different creative agendas (like a heavily gamist combat system and a heavily narrativist skill system). However, the prevailing thinking at the Forge seems to be that such a game would have a very limited appeal because people who liked the combat system would tend to be frustrated by the skill system and vice versa.IMO, the strength of the GNS model isn't necessarily in the conclusions that people draw from it, but just the fact that it's a decent jumping off point for people to think about whether the mechanics that they are using are actually serving their gaming needs (and if not, what mechanics might be more appropriate). The simple act of reminding designers that all mechanics won't necessarily serve all agendas equally well is a large part of the GNS model's value, IMO.</blockquote>

Verification