Goals and G/N and S

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Jay,

That's a big "Houston, we have a positive on that orbit trajectory!" I think you nailed it.

However, I'm not sure I'd adopt your uses of concept and meaning, because I'm skeptical that anyone wants to concede these words to any one particular CA. For instance, most Narrativist-preferring role-players I know would tend, themselves, to peg Sim play as distinctively lacking in meaning, and most Sim-preferring role-players I know have resisted that fiercely. So I figure we're all better off letting such terms be assigned informally and locally.

Again, though, I do agree with your points and consider them a fair paraphrase of my above post, with some good clarifying additions.

Gordon, with respect, I have never seen any trend in posting so damaging as attention to this idea:

I was just worried about making that mean too much - and Nate's comment didn't seem at all Nar to me, so I was worried folks were tending in that "take it too far" direction . . .

"Even though I realize there's no real X and Y controversy, since what he said sounds a little like Y, I'll say X because it'll keep people less enlightened than me from getting excited about X vs. Y."

The usual result of such posting is a ferocious revival of X vs. Y.

Best,
Ron

[Bill Cook]

Can anyone name a game in which the biggest focus is on Being There?

Burning Wheel. Everything about it is pervaded with a quality of being your guy and doing things the way he would do them. The Monster Burner is a cyclopedia of lists for structuring the perfect vehicle to experience in play. Race transcends being a powers kit; you actually are an Elf.

Advancement occurs as a consequence of repeated failure. Skills are qualified by a series of experiencial milestones, which suggest routes of vocation to enact in play. Artha (award points) generally apply to taking anything off the character sheet and bringing it into play, i.e. being your character.

Combat concerns itself with capturing the experience, blocking each move and resolving each condition in its own stage. It just goes on and on, trying to consider everything in play: training, bleeding to death, armor failure, shield bash, hit location, combat distance, etc.

[Andrew Cooper]

Can anyone name a game in which the biggest focus is on Being There?

The old RuneQuest games seem like this to me.

[Ron Edwards]

Hey guys,

Since "Be there" is variably interpretable, I think we'll have a problem if we pursue this as a topic without backing up a little.

Some folks are inevitably going to interpret the phrase as "imagining my character and being interested in what happens to/with him." This is basic old Exploration using all five components and can be expected to occur in any role-playing.

Some folks are going to take a more CA-type approach and interpret it as "visualizing/imagining is sufficient and primary," and so will make no sense to the folks above and vice versa.

Still others are going to take either of these views to an extreme and focus on deeply identifying with the character and pseudo-experiencing his emotions. And therefore that creates two more confounding interpretations with the added difficulty that they resemble one another in terms of personal experience/sensation.

So I'm not real happy about suddenly latching onto the "Be there" term and getting a whole bunch of gas-jets going about it. I suggest that Bob found it a useful term for saying it himself, and that the rest of us should cut him the usual slack and recognize the "it" rather than fighting for him to say it your way (a serious problem in this forum).

I also, emphatically suggest that this particular thread has a topic, and that we should stick to it.

Best,
Ron

[Gordon C. Landis]

Ron,

OK, I see the danger you're pointing to.  In this case, I thought it actually looked exactly like Y, and Y seemed to me, um, bad.  While I'm now certain (and always suspected) that YOU don't mean Y, I'm still not sure about Nate and Andrew, so . . .

Hi guys.  Any problem with the added clarifications?  That while there are some important details that make Sim different here, that doesn't mean we're talking about a vastly different kind of beast?  Appologies if this seems like a trivial or distracting point, but I've apparently been traumatized by too many "vastly different kind of beast"-style conversations,

Gordon

[Andrew Cooper]

Gordon,

I don't have a problem, no.  I don't think Sim is *vastly* different and I don't think it's bad either.  I was just ruminating about one of the primary differences as I saw it and there does have to be differences or it wouldn't be its own Agenda.

[Silmenume]

Hi Jay,

That's a big "Houston, we have a positive on that orbit trajectory!" I think you nailed it.

...

Again, though, I do agree with your points and consider them a fair paraphrase of my above post, with some good clarifying additions.

Woo Hoo!!!  Here's to tag-teaming idea development on bulletin boards!!

However, I'm not sure I'd adopt your uses of concept and meaning, because I'm skeptical that anyone wants to concede these words to any one particular CA. For instance, most Narrativist-preferring role-players I know would tend, themselves, to peg Sim play as distinctively lacking in meaning, and most Sim-preferring role-players I know have resisted that fiercely. So I figure we're all better off letting such terms be assigned informally and locally.

I see the wisdom in this, but I do have a question or two on this.  I'll just PM with you on them and let this thread do whatever is has left do.