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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 8640537" data-attributes="member: 5142">This helps clarify, but I would still disagree somewhat, though it may help backtrack a bit. Earlier Campbell wrote, I agree with this, but I also pointed out how fiction first tends to be incredibly common among these sort of games, but also games like Cortex, Fate, and others. It's often a guiding principle of weight on the level of the oft-cited Rule 0. Despite their differences, these games are commonly lumped together as "story" or "narrativist" games on this principle. I agree that separating by "fiction first" alone is superficial. However, I don't think that it's entirely meaningless that they are. Let's call this a subconscious awareness of difference or otherness. This is why I point out how it's telling about the presumed norm that these games would be lumped together on this basis. This is to say that there seems to be some awareness that "fiction first" (and other overlapping principles) makes them distinct from games that operate more along the lines of D&D (5e). Admittedly, my point is less about hidden backstory vs. fictional positioning not mattering, and more how many games that are less wedded to hidden backstory are nevertheless inextricably rooted in the fiction, often via the guiding game principle of Fiction First. However, the fiction that most concerns "Fiction First games" is immediate and palpable for the characters. It doesn't sit waiting, hidden off-stage to make its grand entrance to the audience or, in some cases, never showing up in the play at all. "Fiction First games," IME, tend to dispense with "Crouching Setting, Hidden Backstory."</blockquote>

Verification