Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9000312" data-attributes="member: 71699">I really don't see different modes of RPG being in any necessary conflict like this. There's no need for a narrativist crowd versus FKR crowd mentality. We can celebrate our diversity in approaches to play. Generally, I would say that a less diverse ecosystem is a less healthy one.Modern FKR came about with the benefit of a far greater exploration of the TTRPG design-space than that which DA and GG had access to. Very experienced gamers realised they could achieve the play they wanted more successfully with fewer rules. This poses no threat to narrativists that must be resisted by denigrating FKR. Up thread folk listed some affordances that they desired: many of those are easily met with fewer rules. Want to split the party? I can do that in FKR without a pause. Want to toggle the zoom? There are no rules to get in the way of that. Want to change genre? I can do it in a heartbeat. This doesn't show that FKR is better than other modes. As I've said above, to me what it shows is that debate about flexibility has no particular value. As a player (counting GM among them) it's not a goal of my RPG game text choices that they can do anything. It's my goal to achieve the distinctive experiences latent in each game text. When I choose Ars Magica, it's not because it offers any special flexibility, it's because I want to play a magi with my loyal companions and servants.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9000312, member: 71699"] I really don't see different modes of RPG being in any necessary conflict like this. There's no need for a narrativist crowd versus FKR crowd mentality. We can celebrate our diversity in approaches to play. Generally, I would say that a less diverse ecosystem is a less healthy one. Modern FKR came about with the benefit of a far greater exploration of the TTRPG design-space than that which DA and GG had access to. Very experienced gamers realised they could achieve the play they wanted more successfully with fewer rules. This poses no threat to narrativists that must be resisted by denigrating FKR. Up thread folk listed some affordances that they desired: many of those are easily met with fewer rules. Want to split the party? I can do that in FKR without a pause. Want to toggle the zoom? There are no rules to get in the way of that. Want to change genre? I can do it in a heartbeat. This doesn't show that FKR is better than other modes. As I've said above, to me what it shows is that debate about flexibility has no particular value. As a [I]player[/I] (counting GM among them) it's not a goal of my RPG game text choices that they can do [I]anything[/I]. It's my goal to achieve the distinctive experiences latent in each game text. When I choose Ars Magica, it's not because it offers any special flexibility, it's because I want to play a magi with my loyal companions and servants. [/QUOTE]

Verification