My break with GNS

[Henri]

Brendon: This is very true.  I'm a fairly new poster to the forge, but before I posted anything, I read all of the articles and a lot of old threads, and then lurked a while on the current threads.  Getting into the discourse on the Forge is definately not easy.  In the Site Discussion Forum, there has been talk of an Introduction to the Forge page for newbies, but it would be a lot of somewhat boring work, so no one wants to do it.  

When I first started reading GNS and other matters of RPG theory, I was skeptical.  I've been a died-in-the-wool White Wolf fan for years.  Over the years, I've heard a lot of "White Wolf sucks" arguments, since there are a lot of people who don't like White Wolf.  But I always found these arguments fairly lame, and showed that the gamers just didn't get it, not that there was a problem with the games themselves.  And I've had a lot of fun playing White Wolf games.  Throughout the essay, Ron tracks an imaginary group of people who are setting out to play Vampire and uses his theory to explain all the things that go wrong.  Eventually, I was convinced.  With Ron's theory as a lense, it is easy to see the flaws in White Wolf's games.  But I had to understand the theory first, and I was at first somewhat skeptical due to brand-loyalty.  Ron's essays overturned so many of the ideas that I had about RPGs that it was really disorienting.  Once I bought the theory, my immediate reaction was to try to put myself into one of the GNS bins, until I realized how antithetical to the whole GNS approach this is.  Even then, I had a really hard time understanding Simulationism.  I think this is the least intuitive to understand, especially since it focuses on Exploration, but all the CAs involve exploration.  Also, the Simulation essay comes first, so I didn't understand it as well the first time I read it, whereas by the time I got to the Narativism essay I was in better shape.  But then I put it aside for a while and then reread the Simulation essay and, as they say at the Forge, *Boink* I understood.  

Like a lot of things, until you understand it, the GNS theory looks really complicated and confusing.  Then you hit the *Boink* moment, and you kind of wonder how you failed to understand it.  I definately agree, however, that our difficulty in understanding is caused primarily by strongly ingrained habitual thinking about rpgs.  Like most things, once you understand it, its simple.  ;)

[BPetroff93]

Seth, I agree completely.

Henri, I really understand your experience.  I played mostly White Wolf before my Forge descovery but I always found an aspect of the game unsatisfying.  I really liked the essays because they didn't say "White Wolf sucks" but rather "White Wolf doesn't work and HERE'S WHY.  Also, while the group is imaginary I have had those exact same experiences in playing WW games.

This thread seems to be one of the many "flavor breaks" that people have with GNS.  They spawn over an incomplete reading of the theory and are reactionary responses based on uncomfortable feelings.  In other words they react to the "flavor", or perhaps color ;), of the theory and not it's actual content.

[greyorm]

Hey folks, lots of material here for Storn to digest. I suggest we back off on posting any more until he has a chance to read through and respond. His thread, after all.

[Storn]

Hey folks, lots of material here for Storn to digest. I suggest we back off on posting any more until he has a chance to read through and respond. His thread, after all.

I've said what I wanted to say.  I'm content with this thread being closed.

I've learned a bit more.

I still have concerns.

I do think that the Forge, in terms of the "Theory" needs to start thinking about moving its focus.  From arguement/debate, to a teaching mode.  So it is debate that we have, not argument.  There is another thread that asked for a "tightening up" of terminology and such that parallels some of my concerns.  So, I'm not the only one.

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=10714

As for living with GNS, or the larger theory awhile... I have.  I do not feel further need to decipher huge amounts of threads & links,  or    large essaysin order to get one definition.  Especially when each subsequent reading confuses and pulls me in different directions.

Right now, I feel that the Forge is in the Scientific stage.  As a touchy-feely big-picture problem solving artist... this is at odds with the way I go about problem solving.  I think the Forge needs to move to the Engineer stage, for the Theory is the Engine, but the real gaming/ real world use is the Road.  And the Engineer makes the wheel rubber driven by the Engine to meet the road.