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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 8627834" data-attributes="member: 7025508">But isn't this a rather huge problem though? Like if all discussion of human psychology was framed in the terms of Myers–Briggs personality model and anyone who wouldn't buy into that would be discouraged from participating or had to create their own bubbles?Right. But this is frankly bizarre. Does the gamism care about the timing of the creation of the game elements? Does simulationism? Why only narrativism does? It is super unsymmetrical. Why does preplanning dramatic elements instead of improvising them turn narrativism into simulationism, but preplanning or improvising challenges has no impact on whether something is gamism. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f635.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt="o_O" title="Er... what?    o_O"  data-smilie="12"data-shortname="o_O" /> And of course the timing is practically never all or nothing. Some elements are created before (even on Story Now, like we discussed regarding characters) some are created during the play. The ratios may change, but both are always there. Furthermore, I don't think 'story after' is a particularly useful concept. Sure, it is a thing and it always is a thing whether you care about it or a not. You can always look back at the events after the game and think about the story they formed. Even after the most hard core purist Story Now session. But as this happens after the game, whether you do this or not has really no impact to the play.</blockquote>

Verification