GNS a sign of sophistication and maturity...

[Mike Holmes]

Now, Jared...let's not beat up on the new guy.

Mike

[TrizzlWizzl]

I don't feel really all that beat upon at this point but I appreciate you sticking up for me. :smile:

Um... as far as whatizname's post goes about the GM not being so 'high and mighty' any more: I would totally agree.  In fact, I feel that the GM should be more concerned with the players' stories than the other way around.  I wasn't playing back in '83, so I don't really have a lot of 'high and mighty' GM baggage to carry around.  My opinion is simply that the GM should concern himself with providing the players with the raw material neccesary for them to have fun in his game.

[Laurel]

My opinion is simply that the GM should concern himself with providing the players with the raw material neccesary for them to have fun in his game.

I think the two primary goals of a GM should be to personally have fun, and help players have fun.  I think GNS is a tool that can be used to determine if I, as a GM, will have fun running a game using -this- system, for -these- players.  Because the GNS made me really think about what, in RPGs, did I find "fun".  Creating/Solving puzzles?  No.  Adhering to a packaged setting/NPCs and resolving combat through specific prescribed steps?  No.  Creating these  stories based off the PCs backgrounds rather than vice verse.  Yes.  Games where players might actually start to cry when their characters do, where players shout and slam their fists when their characters were angry without pre-planning it?  Yes.

Aha!  With the help of GNS, I now realize that in order to really have fun, I need to work with games and players that correspond with my own mode of play (strongly Narrative with heavy Immersion), and that if my players or the game system we were playing have different objectives and fall elsewhere in the GNS model, I've got lots of useful information about what adaptations in my GM style I should probably make for the game session.

Laurel

[Ron Edwards]

TW,

When I see any evidence that you have understood anything I've presented, I'll be happy to respond in detail. Right now, I have seen numerous things in your posts that bear NO - absolutely no - relationship to any claim I've ever made.

Here are my claims.

Thing #1: GNS theory is about having fun, and nothing more. Everything else about it is directed only toward the role of having fun.

Thing #2: if role-playing is not fun, something's wrong. You say, "It's the GM!" I say, it's the people, all right - one of them, some of them, all of them. Who knows if, in this case, it's the GM? Might be.

Again, I don't have time to deal with people who ascribe bizarre notions to me that don't correspond to these. That's what the essay is for.

Best,
Ron

[ This Message was edited by: Ron Edwards on 2001-10-18 12:22 ]