Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="chaochou" data-source="post: 5609322" data-attributes="member: 99817">I was writing from my experiences, but I don't claim that those are definitive. My experience is that meeting the challenge and introducing premise or theme is very rarely discouraged. Protecting the integrity of the sim is constant and ongoing. Not a dig at sims. Played with a sim agenda a lot and done my fair share of protecting.This response is more concise than anything I could come up with.Hmmm. I don't want to try and guess at what you mean. Could you post some examples?Again, I'm not playing stupid - I genuinely don't understand this. Meaningfullness to who? External to what? I'm confused.I'm not sure about that. The essays are long and detailed. It's one thing to cherry-pick excerpts or just assume things from the G, N & S titles and say 'I do that and that and that so my game is all of GNS'.But, for example, a clear and continuous narrative does not make a game narratavist. My character buying and drinking a beer and then killing a goblin pickpocket produces a clear and continuous narrative but it doesn't say anything about the creative agenda which produced those events.Similarly, the OP says 'Storytelling is my main interest.' Which is great. But storytelling isn't narratavism. Narratavism is the process of letting players create and then address premise. The Story Now essay explains it in far greater detail - and that's what counts, not my one-line paraphrase. Maybe the OP does everything in the essay. Maybe not. The post didn't say. But there's no counter to the claim 'that's what I do' - nor any reason to want to counter it.GNS theory is (in my mind) a great read and an interesting stance to use for reflection on your own gaming. But probably a source of unnecessary antagonism if you start using it to label other people, games or rules without consent.</blockquote>

Verification