Does theory really matter?

[Kester Pelagius]

Greetings,

Final posting, with annotations and bibliography.

Kind Regards,

Kester Pelagius
#


The Alchemy of Role-Playing

Copyright © 2002, 2003 by C. Demetrius Morgan

Part 3 of 3

Part One of this Article may be found >>>HERE<<<

Part Two of this Article may be found >>>HERE<<<

Of Stratagems and Theorems Maligned

Think about what you're reading, even these words.  We are all individuals and thus wont see things in the same light, quite literally, I've got a 60 Watt bulb above my head right now as I type these words!  However, in the room you are sitting in, it may be daylight shining in through your window.  To say nothing of where you might be when you read something, the mood you are in, or whether you happen to like an author's writing style.  Differences and shades of similarity, that is life, it is what we have to deal with everyday.

For instance you may have asked yourself what the GNS Theory of which people speak with such fervor here at The Forge is.   More to the point you may have wondered why anyone should care about this "GNS" phenomenon.  Or why wonder if a game is a Fantasy Heartbreaker.  After all a game is meant to be played, right, so why not just play?

Because some are interested to know why it is that some players do what they do and how, as Game Masters and Game Developers, they can better understand the dynamic of the role-playing interactions amongst players to build the better mousetrap, er, game.

To oversimplify GNS is an incarnation of the "roll vs. role gaming" debate from the beginning of our hobby, yet it is also much more.  It is a model of Role-Playing Game Theory, at least as outlined in the essay: "GNS and Other Matters of Role-Playing Theory"(2)- where the GNS model is essentially summed up as the underlying premise native to basic role-playing methodology that refers specifically to the styles of actual play.  A basic premise otherwise known as the "Threefold Model"(3).  In order to better understand the GNS Theory one has to understand the basic model, or rather the styles of play as defined by it, then we can worry about the why's and what fore's.  Even ask ourselves whether such 'theories' aren't just so much fodder for mental masturbation.

Visitors to The Forge will probably be aware of Mr. Edwards essay on the matter in which this method of play is described as being "expressed by the creation, via role-playing, of a story with a recognizable theme"(2) (and) as set within one of the classic milieus of the literary genre.  These being easily typified by classic "Genre Labels" such as: Horror, Science Fiction, Fantasy, Romance, and etcetera.  But it is the styles of play that cause debate.  These styles of play were commonly outlined as being:


Gamism (Gamist):  That style of role-playing which stresses direct competition amongst players.  Such games center upon a central "Strategy Profile" for game premise, usually defined by games in which goals or predefined victory conditions are part of the rules.  In the early days of FRPG games this premise was archaically referred to as "roll playing" and typified by a style of play stressing the strict adherence to, and use of, strictly established game mechanics over wandering narrative.


Simulationism (Simulationist):  Where gamism relies upon the "Strategy Profile" to define a game simulationism relies more upon the interplay of "decision makers" in situational conflicts where "determined objectives" in relation to "Genre Labels", these being the categories which games may be sorted by, are the primary stakes.  Thus simulationism is that style of game play typified by the assumption of predefined roles for the purposes of in-game exploration of roles which sometimes, though not always directly, fall within the pursuit of set objectives.  Thus making this style of play, in part, typical of the sort of role-play that is closest to the methods used in LARP gaming.


Narrativism (Narrativist/Dramatist): That style of role-playing in which story telling, or rather the underlying narrative of the game, takes precedence over all other aspects of game play.  At it's extreme Narrativism relies purely upon the interplay of decision making and chance in the form of choices depending from direct player narrative to provide structure and direction within the role-playing environment.  While this method of role-playing has been variously described and defined over the years it must be noted that this method of play holds much in common with early parlor games of the "Murder Mystery" category.  Also very close in nature to this style of gaming, though not directly related to it, are the improvisational exercises used by theatre troupes.

Those familiar with the terms above will immediately notice that I have melded concepts together.  Many will decry this can not be done.  I disagree.

Why?

Where theories are concerned they are mutable, which means they are subject to change, reinterpretation, and outright redefinition by others.  To argue the point would be to fall into the mire of fallacious construal of the concepts as being something other than what they are, namely theories.  If a concept is deemed to be immutable then it is no longer a theory, even if it can not be proved.  And we all know about things that can not be proved which are nevertheless believed, such is the crux of the debate between Creationism and Evolution.  Some could call this debate a fallacious argument between two opposing philosophical schools, schools who have forgotten that their philosophy is but a theory.

What?  You can't say that!  Blasphemy?  Cur!

Well of course I'd never suggest such a thing.  Yet, if anyone had that knee jerk reaction to the preceding paragraph then you have stepped one foot into the very mire of which I spoke.  Theories are not practical.  What they are are general propositions, outlines of ideas, expressions of probability of design as related to estimated explanations of the working of a thing, substance, action, what have you.  The seeking of understanding through development of theories and hypothesis is the very process of debate, it is the selective adaptation of traits and ideas to fit a paradigm, or rather the attempt to develop a paradigm based upon perceived traits and ideas that have been adapted from observational fact.  Yet approach with caution.  Theory is not a substitute for the actual phenomenon, thing, or idea being discussed.  So, in the end, what we have to really ask ourselves is whether such distinctions as outlined above are applicable.  Are they?  If so, how?  Can such theories apply to any single game?  Can the answer ever be as simple or easy as yes or no?

One might just as well ask: What is the point?

Consider the following quote: "To define alchemy without being irreverent or pompous is well nigh impossible."(6)  Yet how can one approach a subject for the first time without reading someone else's definition of what that subject is supposedly about?

Allegory and simile is what most approaching role-playing for the first time will be exposed to, and for very good reason.  Role-playing games are alchemy of ideas and gaming forms, and the Game Masters' explorers setting out upon an eternal quest for the philosopher's stone of entertainment.  And theorists?  Theorists are ghost hunters out to capture elusive quicksilver phantoms, hold them up to the light, see what mysteries they might reveal.  The rest of us are just along for the ride.  So we might as well enjoy the scenery, roll up a few characters, and maybe rescue a dragon or two from evil princesses.

#


1.  From the introduction to "Fantasy Wargamming", page ix.

2.  Mr. Edwards original article may be accessed in full here.

3.  Related articles pertaining to this trefold model of role-playing can also be found at "Styles of Roleplaying" and may also may be found here "Role-Playing Games: Theory and Practice".

4.   pg 20, "The Fantasy Roleplaying Gamer's Bible".

5.  Pg 25, "The Fantasy Roleplaying Gamer's Bible".

6. Pg. 9, "Alchemy: An Illustrated A to Z"


Bibliography

"Alchemy: An Illustrated A to Z"; Diana Fernando, Blandford, 1998; ISBN 0-7137-2668-7

"The Encyclopedia of Games"; ed. Brian Burns, Barnes & Noble, 1998; ISBN 0-7607-1025-2

"The Fantasy Roleplaying Gamer's Bible"; Sean Patrick Fannon, Game Codex, 1997.  ISBN 0-9674429-0-7

"Fantasy Wargaming"; ed. Bruce Galloway, Stein and Day, 1982. ISBN 0-8128-2862-3

"Hoyle's Games"; Lawrence H. Dawson, Wordsworth, 1994; ISBN 1-85326-316-8

"The Illustrated History of Divination"; Stephen Karcher, Barnes & Noble, 1997; ISBN 0-7607-0528-3

"The World Atlas of Divination"; ed. John Matthews, Tiger, 1998; ISBN 1-84056-049-5


Copyright © 2002 C. Demetrius Morgan