Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by lumpley, June 30, 2004, 10:34:31 AM
QuoteJesse (IIRC) hits the exact question without using terms like 'address' or even 'premise' and you tell him explicitly that Situation with human interest stuff that is resolved by play is Nar play.
QuoteWhen you ask if the other people are doing the "addressing" do you mean the "resolving the situation"? I'd think so. Mostly all the players are involved in resolving the situation.
QuoteJesse: I'm just still a little confused between Narrativism and Simulationism where the Situation has a lot of ethical/moral problems embedded in it and the GM uses no Force techniques to produce a specific outcome. I don't understand how Premise-expressing elements can be included and players not be considered addressing a Premise when they can't resolve the Situation without doing so. Me: There is no such Simulationism. You're confused between Narrativism and Narrativism, looking for a difference when there isn't any.
QuoteRalph: Oh jeez do I not think so. If my initial, private conception of my character has her locked into a moral conflict with fit opposition, I don't have to reconsider, refigure, adjust or fiddle with her behind the scenes at all. I don't have to be willing to do so. I can absolutely to-the-fucking-wall refuse to do so, and still play Narrativist. Because it's the locked into a moral conflict with fit opposition part that matters to Narrativism. When I happened to come up with my ideas doesn't figure.
Quote from: ValamirIn fact, this seems to me to be a crucial Instance of Play defining moment. At this moment its all about what you prioritize. Are you prioritizing addressing Premise by being willing to fiddle. Or are you not willing to fiddle in which case you're saying that addressing the premise isn't as important as not fiddling.
Quote from: YouPremise might be entirely unidentifiable to the participants or observers... every deep feeling RFGA Simulationist is (likely) doing Nar play and few of their games would be story-structured.
Quote from: lumpleyPremise won't be entirely unidentifiable, or else how would the players engage with it? Just because they or you or I don't happen to spot the Premise, don't happen to articulate it, doesn't mean there isn't one. Similarly, a group of RGFA Simulationists, while playing Narr right along, might be intentionally ignoring the story structure under their noses. That's ouija board play.If this were a real conversation with actual RGFA Simmists, here's where we'd take the discussion to Actual Play. Maybe we'd get somewhere and maybe we wouldn't. Meanwhile, there's no use arguing theoretical cases: you end up where Jesse ended up. "But what if they're fully engaged with Premise, collaborating like fiends, and still playing Sim?"
Quote from: John KimWhat Chris was responding to was my point about Virtuality. If there is no conflict between these two, then where is the trade-off between Virtuality and Narrativism? Don't just spout platitudes -- address the examples of my Water-Uphill-World game and Chris' HeroQuest game. Was my game both Narrativist and Virtualist? Conversely, what was Chris doing when he perceived a trade-off?
QuoteThere were most certainly moral issues within Water-Uphill-World. How would you decide if it was Narrativist? To my eye, the transcript lacked story structure and was very meandering, but there were many moral questions
Quote from: YouIf the player wants to make his input in a way that violates situation ("I now grow wings and fly illustrating my address of premise as XYZ") when that's not feasible is that a violation of Nar play?
QuoteOr would that be 'unreasonable' (this is an extreme example--the real cases would be far closer to the line).
QuoteIf the GM says "no" to the wings does that constitute Force?
Quote from: I(Notice, per the topic of the thread, that "making a fit character" is not at all the same thing as "sacrificing a character's integrity." Refusing to make a fit character screws Narrativism. If you've got a fit character, sacrificing his integrity screws Narrativism.)
QuoteYes, the GM squashed the player's input, my-way-or-the-highway style, and thereby screwed Narrativist play.