Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9220787" data-attributes="member: 71699">As you said thatit sounds like one in which GM has ownership of the interpretation of rules. That sounds like what we've often labelled a &quot;trad&quot; mode of play to me. I observe that rule sets targeting that sort of mode often encourage participants to resolve negotiation on rules outside of play. I've observed groups counting attempts to negotiate what rules entail during play as disruptive.I made the assumption that Manbearcat's is storynow, due to the choice of a PbtA rule set and based on his descriptions of play. But obviously I could be mistaken: it would be better to ask them.I mean approaches to play that we've been able to label, such as storynow, trad, neo-trad, sim, neo-sim, OSR, FKR. Each mode comes with a set of normative lusory goals and attitudes. In fact I don't see the modes as having hard boundaries. My picture is more one of there being a number of instrumental lusory goals, attitudes, and means, which are commonly found in certain arrangements, but that can be arranged in an unlimited number of ways. That said, it appears that some arrangements offer better affordance to play - or perhaps just fit what we've been interested in attempting so far - than others.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9220787, member: 71699"] As you said that it sounds like one in which GM has ownership of the interpretation of rules. That sounds like what we've often labelled a "trad" mode of play to me. I observe that rule sets targeting that sort of mode often encourage participants to resolve negotiation on rules outside of play. I've observed groups counting attempts to negotiate what rules entail during play as disruptive. I made the assumption that Manbearcat's is storynow, due to the choice of a PbtA rule set and based on his descriptions of play. But obviously I could be mistaken: it would be better to ask them. I mean approaches to play that we've been able to label, such as storynow, trad, neo-trad, sim, neo-sim, OSR, FKR. Each mode comes with a set of normative lusory goals and attitudes. In fact I don't see the modes as having hard boundaries. My picture is more one of there being a number of instrumental lusory goals, attitudes, and means, which are commonly found in certain arrangements, but that can be arranged in an unlimited number of ways. That said, it appears that some arrangements offer better affordance to play - or perhaps just fit what we've been interested in attempting so far - than others. [/QUOTE]

Verification