Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9025340" data-attributes="member: 71699">The skeptical viewpoint here is interesting. It makes me wonder if one reaches a point where the conversation is the content and it becomes unnecessary - even implausible - to be motivated by facts external to it.Neither is at odds with world simulation. Possibly what is at odds is the direction of justification, and (depending on what you have in mind) forcing the situation for the sake of the dramatic.It's not really a matter of entertaining or not entertaining their needs and desires. Reading one of the posts above, there are nexuses of conflict, absolute imperatives, cuts to the action, relentlessness... these are all character-narrative concerns. It's right to want the partner to call at the moment of tension in that mode. Whereas in immersionist play, because the world is as it is and the character is who they are, they develop needs and desires. There's guaranteed purchase between those and the world because they were developed within the world.Above you offer a direction of process, and make the assumption that it would be right to simply invert that to describe immersionist play. That's mistaken: the world isn't first and the character second. They're not ordered one and then the other. The idea is that the world exists and the character lives within it. What is experienced is about the character (or troupe). The nature of the mistake is to describe immersionism using narrativist laguage. To then complain of shortfalls is a commentary on that mismatch: it says nothing about immersionist play, other than that it is not narrativist play.On terminology, just as much as I don't take narrativist to imply that only modes of play that accept that label include narrative, I don't take immersionist to exclude forms of immersion in other modes. Simulationist could be right. I have concerns around its wargamey implications, and that it can imply rules-heavy while immersionism works just as successfully with rules-light. Simulationist has the additional problem that it comes loaded with the GNS assumptions."Immersionist" is hardly exceptional in being applied ambiguously! One pragmatic way to resolve that could be to accept the label those who identify with would apply to themselves, and invest effort in helping to disambiguate.</blockquote>

Verification