Narrativists: Competitive Wusses?

[Dav]

Ron:

Point conceded.

But I still think I have a point.  For me, GNS is not as much in the mechanics, but more in the manner in which the players and GM utilize those mechanics to create the game.

Dav

[Poxface]

I have to agree with you Mike.  I like to try untried strategies because they are more interesting than the tried and true.  I often will take an underdog position just to see how well I can do with it.  Why ?  Because it is more interesting than playing from a position in which everything is already stacked you way.  
   I enjoy competitive games, but only when the darker side of winning at all costs does not rear its ugly head.  
   It is this explorative goal which defines what I look for in a game – whether its an RPG or a board game; whether it's the setting, the character, or the story.  Competition in an RPG rarely works to make the game better – it under the right setting, but that usually requires buy in from everyone involved up front.

[Ian O'Rourke]

On 2001-05-24 13:58, Dav wrote:
Ron:

Point conceded.

But I still think I have a point.  For me, GNS is not as much in the mechanics, but more in the manner in which the players and GM utilize those mechanics to create the game.

But the use of GNS to see how players interact with the game strikes me to be like 'audience tests' for movies. Pointless.

[Mike Holmes]

Disagree. Audience tests for movies may be irrelevant because theaudience does not interact with the movie. Unlike RPGs, where they will interact with the game. It is ultimately important to peoples enjoyment whether or not they will like or dislike the style that a particular game is played in. And to the extent that a system promotes a certain style it will therefore be more likely to be satisfactory to the players. You can force them to play a particular style, but that may alienate them and potentially makes for an awful game.

IMHO,
Mike Holmes

[Doc Midnight]

I do not compete in RPG's because most RPG's have a system by which XP's are earned. The award is pretty arbitrary. D&D has always rewarded you for killing in mass quantities or selling the crap you find.

Most modern games have award systems based on roleplay so why compete.

There is no fun in killing in mass quantities UNLESS the story is so good that it must be done.

I will compete in any other activity (athletic) I take part in.

I like method *N* because I do want some return for my investment. If I spend 3 hours of my life in character creation, I will get the most out of it.

Are there ways of competeing that I'm missing here?

Enlighten a brotha please.

[Jared A. Sorensen]

"Yo yo yo...wassup wassup, gimme the rock..."

Check out Pantheon & Other Games.  You win by having the most points.  You get points by being the last to die...or sometimes the first to do.  Or sometimes by doing or saying a specific thing during the game...

It's a lot of fun.  In the "Destroy All Buildings" game, I lost...big-time.  -54 points.  Yowch.