Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 5609244" data-attributes="member: 27160">I agree that there is a historical tendency to regard GM framing as directive, rather than permissive, but I don't think that is a function of Simulationism per se - it's just a symptom of some rather unsavoury fashions for GM-driven stories being told with players present only to play bit-parts and act as an appreciative audience.&nbsp; I think Sim in its full sense can be just as open a field for player-driven action, with the GM simply representing the world in as neutral a manner as possible.That said, of course, pickpocketing the King will likely end badly in most Sim games - but if that fits the characters and the situation, then so it should be.I wasn't aware this was an opening scene - I just read it as &quot;a scene that happens along&quot;.&nbsp; With this backdrop, it seems quite possible - likely, even - that the themes so far developed have nothing to do with class envy or enrichment at the expense of nobility.&nbsp; Basically, the character acting outside the developing &quot;genre&quot; of the game - in all three cases - is what I see as the likely cause of a big &quot;Huh?!?&quot; from the rest of the group.With some of the players I have encountered in my time - very likely!Yes, this is kind of where I am, too.&nbsp; I don't think it has anything to do with agenda, but has everything to do with the proposed or collectively assumed &quot;style&quot; of the game world.&nbsp; Are the characters uber-L337 dudes who can get away with crazy stuff, or are they &quot;average joes&quot;?&nbsp; That is a matter of game setting style, not agenda.The &quot;meaningfulness of (in-game-world) actions&quot; for its own sake is one of the things prioritised in Simulationist play.&nbsp; The motivator for every agenda must, in the end, be &quot;external&quot; since, as you say yourself, the world and all in it are imaginary.&nbsp; But Sim attempts to de-emphasise those external factors as much as possible and detatch the game world from the &quot;real&quot; world - to &quot;dream the dream&quot;.&nbsp; Hence 'immersionist' play is generally thought of as an (extreme?) type of Sim.All types of play will have a narrative, of course - so what?&nbsp; That's not what Narrativism is - nor Simulationism, even though both of those will also have a narrative.&nbsp; I think you're just drifting away from how the GNS (as opposed to the threefold) elements are defined, here.&nbsp; All three types will have game world continuity/consistency concerns, too - but that doesn't make them all Simulationist, either.Exactly what is included in Simulationism is hard to pin down, sure, but that doesn't mean &quot;everything is Sim&quot;.&nbsp; From just Edwards' original essays it's pretty clear to me what Sim isn't - and I can identify with some of what it is.&nbsp; Just because every roleplaying game involves an imaginary world that is being explored as play proceeds doesn't mean that all roleplaying sessions address a Simulationist agenda in an analogous way to that in which not everyone who owns a computer is a Java programmer.&nbsp; It's possible to program in Java (as far as I know - I'm no coder) on most computers, but many folk don't know how to and quite a few (perhaps most) have no interest in doing so.&nbsp; They will likely still use Java applications if they do what they want to do, though...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 5609244, member: 27160"] I agree that there is a historical tendency to regard GM framing as directive, rather than permissive, but I don't think that is a function of Simulationism [I]per se[/I] - it's just a symptom of some rather unsavoury fashions for GM-driven stories being told with players present only to play bit-parts and act as an appreciative audience. I think Sim in its full sense can be just as open a field for player-driven action, with the GM simply representing the world in as neutral a manner as possible. That said, of course, pickpocketing the King will likely end badly in most Sim games - but if that fits the characters and the situation, then so it should be. I wasn't aware this was an opening scene - I just read it as "a scene that happens along". With this backdrop, it seems quite possible - likely, even - that the themes so far developed have nothing to do with class envy or enrichment at the expense of nobility. Basically, the character acting outside the developing "genre" of the game - in all three cases - is what I see as the likely cause of a big "Huh?!?" from the rest of the group. With some of the players I have encountered in my time - very likely! Yes, this is kind of where I am, too. I don't think it has anything to do with agenda, but has everything to do with the proposed or collectively assumed "style" of the game world. Are the characters uber-L337 dudes who can get away with crazy stuff, or are they "average joes"? That is a matter of game setting style, not agenda. The "meaningfulness of (in-game-world) actions" for its own sake is one of the things prioritised in Simulationist play. The motivator for every agenda must, in the end, be "external" since, as you say yourself, the world and all in it are imaginary. But Sim attempts to de-emphasise those external factors as much as possible and detatch the game world from the "real" world - to "dream the dream". Hence 'immersionist' play is generally thought of as an (extreme?) type of Sim. All types of play will have [B]a[/B] narrative, of course - so what? That's not what Narrativism is - nor Simulationism, even though both of those will also have [B]a[/B] narrative. I think you're just drifting away from how the GNS (as opposed to the threefold) elements are defined, here. All three types will have game world continuity/consistency concerns, too - but that doesn't make them all Simulationist, either. Exactly what is included in Simulationism is hard to pin down, sure, but that doesn't mean "everything is Sim". From just Edwards' original essays it's pretty clear to me what Sim [B]isn't[/B] - and I can identify with some of what it [B]is[/B]. Just because every roleplaying game involves an imaginary world that is being explored as play proceeds doesn't mean that all roleplaying sessions address a Simulationist agenda in an analogous way to that in which not everyone who owns a computer is a Java programmer. It's possible to program in Java (as far as I know - I'm no coder) on most computers, but many folk don't know how to and quite a few (perhaps most) have no interest in doing so. They will likely still use Java applications if they do what they want to do, though... [/QUOTE]

Verification