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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5135263" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think that the Forge's Big Model (which includes an analysis of GNS as creative agendas) is more useful for gaming than are Tarot cards for life-coaching. (But then, maybe I'm being a little bit hard on the cards - I've got less experience of them than of the Forge.)Useful things that I have got from Edwards's GNS essays, and associated Forge threads/blogs:*A better understanding of the aesthetics, rationale and limitations of Rolemaster (my RPG system of choice for many years); *A better understanding of my dislike of AD&D 2nd ed play, and similar 90s playstyles, and how I can avoid my game turning into that sort of play (this is the subject matter of Edwards's notorious "brain damage" comments); *A better understanding of the significance of character creation, and the missing elements of character creation (especially relationships) in many traditional fantasy RPGs - it was not until reading Edwards that I consciously appreciated that party integration and the interaction of PC goals with the gameworld and with one another are a huge part of traditional fantasy RPG play - far more important, in my own play experience, than hiring torchbearers or buying songbirds - and yet the typical traditional rulebook has nothing to say about it for either the GM or the players; *A better understanding of the difference between "simulationist" (physics of the gameworld) and metagame action resolution mechanics, and the way they work in various situations; *An intelligent introduction to modern fantasy RPGs like The Dying Earth, The Riddle of Steel, HeroWars and Burning Wheel; *Better understanding of the rationale and play of games that I've only read the rules of and will probably never play, like Nicotine Girls and The World, the Flesh and the Devil - even though I've not played these games, understanding what they do and how they do it has helped me in GMing more traditional games; *If it was not for the Forge, I probably couldn't have made the transition from GMing Rolemaster to GMing D&D 4e - it was the Forge that gave me the necessary conceptual tools for understanding what 4e is about, and the rationale of its various metagame mechanics (hit points, action points, encounters/dailies, etc).As for the model/theory/prediction thing, I think importing analytical notions from the natural sciences into the humanities is not all that helpful. As an example: the apparatus of Weberian social theory, or the later critical theory that incorporates Weberian ideas, is not predictive. Nor is it descriptive, in any straightforward sense. It is interpretive, in the sense that it illuminates aspects of our history and our social formations, drawing connections between them that hitherto we had missed, and in so doing helps us better understand contemporary social phenomena and trends. The Big Model for RPGs is similar - it offers an interpretation, and therefore a deepened understanding, of our RPGing practices.</blockquote>

Verification