Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="apoptosis" data-source="post: 4019271" data-attributes="member: 3226">I think some of the limitation of GDS were the reason they developed GNS. One BIG difference is in the drama idea.Drama was about how can the DM craft a story around PCs. It is rules uncaring. Narrativism is about rules that allow the players the narrative power to craft a story around their characters.The problem was that Drama part of GDS didnt really mean much excpet by how the DM acted. This put everything in the hands of the DM. GNS is about how the rules empower each of the participants (the third participant being the rules themselves).You mention that the DM runs the game. To what extent is the big question.Some people believe it is DM creates and environment and the players just adventure their way through it.Some believe that the DM creates it and adjusts it to the players (sometimes thought of as GM fiat)Others believe rules should allow the PCs to have a huge say in what happens in the world.They all can employ different designs that can influence how a game and in turn a campaign plays itself out.BTW..i am not saying GNS is the end-all be-all of design and play theory. I am sure better ones can be developed. This was just some differences between GDS and GNS.I don't really care which model is used as long as it can facilitate better understanding of gaming, playing games and game design and the social contract between players.</blockquote>