Premise in actual play

[Ron Edwards]

Hi John,

For the record, all of those descriptions of play, to me, sounded and still sound fully compatible with Narrativist play as I've defined it.

The blacksmith character and Idelle represent character-based Narrativist play, in my model, with no if's or qualifications necessary. Such play is not at all consistent with Simulationism in my model, although I understand how it's consistent with Threefold Simulationism.

Is it possible that you have been thinking of Narrativism as being story-directed (more like Threefold Dramatism; I'm thinking of Theatrix) rather than being merely especially good at story-creating? If I'm reading you right, you would rip an Illusionist GM (or better, a Typhoid Mary) to shreds in play. Just for my peace of mind, can you see that what you're saying exhibits absolutely no point of dissention from Narrativism in my essay?

As a related side note, it seems to me that, as a GM, you play bass just as I've described it (counter to your reactions to that piece) ... relying mainly on Pink Floyd like sustained notes, long and humming, a platform from which all the "speaking" instruments operate but without prodding them beat by beat. And like all bass-playing GMing, absolutely not dictating what they do.

Best,
Ron

[John Kim]

The blacksmith character and Idelle represent character-based Narrativist play, in my model, with no if's or qualifications necessary. Such play is not at all consistent with Simulationism in my model, although I understand how it's consistent with Threefold Simulationism.

Is it possible that you have been thinking of Narrativism as being story-directed (more like Threefold Dramatism; I'm thinking of Theatrix) rather than being merely especially good at story-creating?

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that.  Yes, the problems with Idelle could be represented as lack of Narrativism as well.  Ars Magica 767 was non-Narrativist (by definition because Idelle's issues were not addressed) and also non-Threefold-Simulationist (by definition because the GM worked with a plot in mind).  The two definitions are not identical, but they are (I think) compatible and related -- especially in the rejection of GM-planned plot.  

There are definitely differences in what I see as the center of the styles, but there is definitely overlap.  As explained, Narrativism places emphasis on the GM presenting and driving Bangs, for example.  It also places importance on relation to other forms of fiction.  I'll be interested to probe more about differences, but that should be for another thread.

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

Narrativism places emphasis on the GM presenting and driving Bangs, for example

Ah, no it doesn't. Sorcerer does that; what you are describing are techniques, which happen to serve the purposes of the particular confluence of variables within Narrativist play as encouraged by that game's rules ("to encourage" is all rules can do).

But yes, another thread, I think.

Best,
Ron