Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Synergies Between Game Styles: Simulationist - Gamist - Storytelling
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 5600929" data-attributes="member: 27160"><p>If the particular 'flavour' of gamism was focussed on player riddle solving, and not use of the game systems, sure, this would fit.</p><p></p><p>But, generally, I think care is needed in this context. The earlier (late 1990s) discussions of "Gamism", "Simulationism" and "Dramatism" were centred around general gestalts; each a feeling or an 'atmosphere' connected with a specific aspect of the game. In this sense, certainly, encouraging as much as possible of each is beneficial.</p><p></p><p>The Forge usage, though, is rather more specific, arguably more technical and in some people's eyes more anal <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> What defines the three "agendas" for the Forge definitions is the focus of social interaction besed on the events in play. If a group are giving kudos, going "woo hoo!" and maybe even high fiving at particularly good tactics, particularly nasty "gotchas" set up on bad guys and particularly good (or bad) die rolls, then, in Forge terms, the play is "Gamist". If the same is going on for particularly thematically resonant actions - actions that plumb the nature of a moral quandry, say - then that is "Narrativist" play. Likewise for adding aesthetically matched and flavoursome objects or events to "Simulationist" play.</p><p></p><p>This "Forge" usage is specifically where the comments about "exclusivity" come from. In these terms, it really makes no sense to describe a set of RPG rules, or an RPG player, as any specific one of the three "agendas". The agendas relate to instances of play, not to game systems or even groups.</p><p></p><p>That said, however, it <em>does</em> make sense to consider how well sets of game rules <u>support</u> play that is focussed on one or another of these agendas - and that is what is meant on the Forge by "Gamist supporting rules", or "Simulationist supporting rules" or "Narrativist supporting rules". Making a ruleset that supports more than one agenda is not impossible, but it is very difficult to do well. The very idea of "supporting all three to the maximum extent possible" doesn't really fly - a game where the players were genuinely trying to gain and give kudos for all three at all times would be pretty unfocussed and confused, basically.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 5600929, member: 27160"] If the particular 'flavour' of gamism was focussed on player riddle solving, and not use of the game systems, sure, this would fit. But, generally, I think care is needed in this context. The earlier (late 1990s) discussions of "Gamism", "Simulationism" and "Dramatism" were centred around general gestalts; each a feeling or an 'atmosphere' connected with a specific aspect of the game. In this sense, certainly, encouraging as much as possible of each is beneficial. The Forge usage, though, is rather more specific, arguably more technical and in some people's eyes more anal ;) What defines the three "agendas" for the Forge definitions is the focus of social interaction besed on the events in play. If a group are giving kudos, going "woo hoo!" and maybe even high fiving at particularly good tactics, particularly nasty "gotchas" set up on bad guys and particularly good (or bad) die rolls, then, in Forge terms, the play is "Gamist". If the same is going on for particularly thematically resonant actions - actions that plumb the nature of a moral quandry, say - then that is "Narrativist" play. Likewise for adding aesthetically matched and flavoursome objects or events to "Simulationist" play. This "Forge" usage is specifically where the comments about "exclusivity" come from. In these terms, it really makes no sense to describe a set of RPG rules, or an RPG player, as any specific one of the three "agendas". The agendas relate to instances of play, not to game systems or even groups. That said, however, it [I]does[/I] make sense to consider how well sets of game rules [U]support[/U] play that is focussed on one or another of these agendas - and that is what is meant on the Forge by "Gamist supporting rules", or "Simulationist supporting rules" or "Narrativist supporting rules". Making a ruleset that supports more than one agenda is not impossible, but it is very difficult to do well. The very idea of "supporting all three to the maximum extent possible" doesn't really fly - a game where the players were genuinely trying to gain and give kudos for all three at all times would be pretty unfocussed and confused, basically. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Synergies Between Game Styles: Simulationist - Gamist - Storytelling
Top