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="1Mac" data-source="post: 5128406" data-attributes="member: 48998">I'm only skimming, so it's possible someone has already said this.But to the OP, yes, you can have a game or player that is both Gamist and Narrativist, or Narrativist and Simulationist, or even all three. Crucially, it doesn't even contradict GNS theory to say so, and the belief that it does is the cause of a lot of misplaced heat surrounding discussion of GNS issues.From the  <a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/3/" target="_blank">horse's mouth</a>:So all those folks who are saying they don't like GNS because it assumes a player or game is of one aspect or goal to the exclusion of others; those folks are not accurately describing GNS theory.Someone upthread already quoted the next paragraph in the linked essay. This might suggest that it really is all of one or the other, but I don't see it that way. If you read "instance" as "decision," as the term is used in the first block quote above, it is clearer what Edwards means*. So if you can identify an individual decision as Gamist, or Narrativist, or Simulationist, it is possible for the other goals to be subsumed into the main goal, without compromising the main goal.It's like when you order at a restaurant. Do you pick the best tasting food? The best value? The best food for your health? Obviously these goals can be combined ("I'm ordering the best steak under $30."), but your final decision will depend on which decision you prize most.Although now that I put it that way, it seems perfectly possible to say, "I'm going to do everything I can to come out on top, within the conventions of the world I'm roleplaying in," which doesn't obviously favor either Gamist or Simulationist decision-making.Regardless, it's clear that Ron Edwards means to cast both games and players as a series of decisions, and that while he imagines that any one decision has one dominant goal, any game or player may shift between goals when he makes different decisions. See the next paragraph of the essay.*I an happy to criticize Ron Edwards for sometimes speaking in riddles.</blockquote>

Verification