Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 7021445" data-attributes="member: 6688937">I don't think I actually disagree too awful much with most of the other things you said. However, I will quibble with the "winning" not being "success" on the grounds of "What constitutes success?" I think that's actually one of the core differences between traditional rpgs and Narrative rpgs. Traditional rpgs define success at either the point of game design or the point of adventure design (leaving it in the GM's hands), whereas narrative rpgs almost universally can't define success outside of a player or character. That ends up divorcing (to some extent or another) character and player success. However, success and winning are (or can be) factors in play. Capes, for example, is imminently competitive at the player level, even while two characters are working the same side, their players can be in hot competition for control of the narrative.I do agree that most of the power gamer types I have seen seem to have difficulty with narrative games and mechanics. I'm sometimes actually confused as to exactly how it is that they are having so much difficulty, but there it is nonetheless.I tend to feel like its more a facet of game design and assumptions of the designers. Games that avoid those assumptions seem to avoid that effect, IME.</blockquote>