Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 2211525" data-attributes="member: 7240">I'm inclined to agree here. While there are things I can take away from the GNS model that I find useful, ultimately, it's too deeply flawed a theory for me to buy into its categorization system. For instance, the idea that games cannot be "narrativist" unless they engage theme in a particular way makes the definitions absurd. I went onto indie-rpgs.com a couple of years ago, described the game I ran and asked the people on the site to categorize my gaming into one of these three. I answered every question they asked. But in the end, they split 33/33/33 over whether my game was G, N or S; Edwards himself stated that he couldn't possibly categorize my game unless he personally observed it. I won't bore people with all my problems with the categorization system but I will just mention one example: even if you have a game mechanic that acts directly on story like Buffy, apparently it's not narrativist unless the players use the system to engage questions of theme/morality (e.g. is it right for one person to sacrifice his life for another?). In my view, any good game should be able to accommodate players with all three orientations simultaneously and one has a weak/inflexible GM and players if accommodating different styles within a group becomes difficult to the point of dysfunctional. Ultimately, the agenda of The Forge is to try and de-centre/distribute the role of GM; they label this "narrativist" play which they describe in glowing terms compared to the two other types of player they identify. I really disagree with games that try to do this; they are not fun for me.All this stated, I understand that Edwards' original version of the theory was a lot better and conceptualized a tripartite division amongst people who were mechanics-focused, character-focused and story-focused. I think this is a basic observable general truth about play styles but I disagree with (a) the silly direction The Forge has taken this fairly self-evident truth in further theorizing and (b) the idea that these foci/agendas need to be in conflict. A good story/world/system should be able to accommodate all these play styles without significant conflict.</blockquote>

Verification