So something seems to be missing for me in the picture of how games are classified GNS-wise. Traditional cause-to-effect mechanics tend to be called simulationist, but I think that simulationist goals as defined (i.e. prioritized Exploration) can be supported just as well by storytelling/narration mechanics.

It seems to be generally accepted that Pantheon (and its siblings) is a Gamist storytelling game -- where here "storytelling" means that narration rights are given to the players. There are also Narrativist storytelling games, like Dust Devils and many others. But I don't seem to hear about games which involve distributed narration rights which support Simulationist goals.

Yet it seems to me that this is a natural combination. By giving narration over to the players, you allow a much wider range of Exploration. I'm picturing a game where the players implicitly (or perhaps even explicitly) agree on a theme -- and then everyone uses their narration bits to explore plot twists, setting, character, and so forth in service of that theme.

So I guess my question is: Which games with shared narration are Simulationist? If there aren't any good examples, how would you change existing system (like The Pool, maybe) to better support Simulationism?

Actually I've long held (with many others) that various metagame focused mechanics (like Fortune in the Middle or Director Stance) can fulfill Sim goals for exactly the reasons you describe.

I think any game system that supports narrativism can be played simulationist simply by focusing on the creative agenda of exploration over that story now.

Games that would be well suited for this should have mechanics that focus on items of Exploration directly and / or have mechanics that provide parameters for what is acceptable (i.e. to stay on target of that theme).

In the former category I think the mechanics of Inspectres do a very good job of focusing on situation. The mechanics of Otherkind are extremely "narrative based" but are dripping with setting and color. I can easily conceive of a game of Otherkind played strictly from a sim perspective where the players use those mechanics purely to focus on Exploration.

In the latter category I'd submit Universalis as a game which meets the idea of

a game where the players implicitly (or perhaps even explicitly) agree on a theme -- and then everyone uses their narration bits to explore plot twists, setting, character, and so forth in service of that theme.

Consider that the only thing that's really Narrativist about The Pool is that it suggests Narrativist sorts of issues for Motifs for the character in the text. Outside of that, I'd call it Simulationist. If, for example, you just had as Motifs things like Strength (which people do take in play), etc, you'd get very Sim play, IMO. Very PC centric sim play (resolution is only about the motifs), but defintely sim play.

TQB takes The Pool even further into Narrativist grounds by really suggesting that the motifs are issues with all the examples, and how you build your character. But still that's just suggestive, and not really directive to play (you don't have to make characters that way by the rules).

Note that it would be a very non-detail oriented, and output oriented sort of Sim (you just don't see this sort of play often). But sim of a sort.

Mike

Didn't Ron flag octaNe as having sim - exploration of colour support and doesn't octaNe have narration mechanics?

Valamir wrote: In the former category I think the mechanics of Inspectres do a very good job of focusing on situation. The mechanics of Otherkind are extremely "narrative based" but are dripping with setting and color. I can easily conceive of a game of Otherkind played strictly from a sim perspective where the players use those mechanics purely to focus on Exploration.

Hello,

Yup. Primarily-Simulationist game design has been marred for a long time by the apparent need to "look like a role-playing game," and the pace for that was set by Traveller, GURPS, Champions 4th edition, AD&D2, and Call of Cthulhu in mid-late 1980s. The result has been an unnecessary cluster of design efforts all trying to occupy the same space.

Most of my points about Simulationist game design, both in the big GNS essay and in Simulationism: the Right to Dream, are qualified by the phrase historically speaking.

Best,
Ron

Mike Holmes wrote: Consider that the only thing that's really Narrativist about The Pool is that it suggests Narrativist sorts of issues for Motifs for the character in the text. Outside of that, I'd call it Simulationist. If, for example, you just had as Motifs things like Strength (which people do take in play), etc, you'd get very Sim play, IMO. Very PC centric sim play (resolution is only about the motifs), but defintely sim play.