"The term 'GNS' is moronic and annoying" – well this should be an interesting interview

[Umbran]

I don't think you understand the terms you're using.

Making it personal doesn't add value to the conversation. This form of direct and personal accusation engages the ego instead of the rational mind - so you generally make it harder to enlighten them after you've done this. So, you know, maybe avoid using this rhetorical approach.

 

[FrogReaver]

Or D&D, frankly. Collaborative storytelling is not necessarily the primary purpose of roleplaying for every group. Mechanical engagement, socialization, exploring the setting, and simply roleplaying a PC are just a few examples. I really dislike the assumption some have that collaborative storytelling is what RPGs are all about.

taking a step back. I think the ‘improv game’ that @Emberashh talks about is a form of collaborative storytelling.

Playing your character and the dm playing the others is collaborative storytelling, but it’s not just that. One can collaboratively storytell without any roleplaying at all.

Resolution mechanics just add some structure to that improv - roleplaying - collaborative storytelling that’s occurring. All these are games in their own right even with no mechanics (or only social contract mechanics). But rpg mechanics do more than structure the improv, roleplaying and collaborative storytelling, they combine into a game that’s greater than the sum of those parts.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

But that's just a question of how much research you as a designer want to put in to make your simulation the best it can be. More effort, better sim. Moderate as necessary for practical play and personal taste. Assuming the numbers are just "made up" and no better than what any given DM can improv as needed is unfair.

I feel like there's a fundamental difference between 'have a mechanic' and accurate presentation of realistic outcomes. Like if the later, even accounting for playability, is the goal, won't games tend to build on one another/themselves towards a higher degree of authenticity/accuracy. Yet I don't detect any such trend. It's almost like there's only a nominal bar that you have to exceed beyond which there's no further value at all.

 

[Umbran]

I feel like there's a fundamental difference between 'have a mechanic' and accurate presentation of realistic outcomes.

...It's almost like there's only a nominal bar that you have to exceed beyond which there's no further value at all.

I think that for many (maybe most) of us, realism suffers from diminishing returns - added effort to be realistic doesn't improve the play experience sufficiently to justify the effort.

To first approximation, well, folks, we live in realism. Aiming for greater realism is asking for direct comparison to everyday life, which may not really be what most of us are looking for at the game table.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I feel like there's a fundamental difference between 'have a mechanic' and accurate presentation of realistic outcomes. Like if the later, even accounting for playability, is the goal, won't games tend to build on one another/themselves towards a higher degree of authenticity/accuracy. Yet I don't detect any such trend. It's almost like there's only a nominal bar that you have to exceed beyond which there's no further value at all.

Are you talking trends and popularity in design? Do not care about that.

 

[hawkeyefan]

It's always odd to see people who have different feelings about different types of games... and strong feelings at that... try to make a case that there's little difference between games.

 

[FrogReaver]

It's always odd to see people who have different feelings about different types of games... and strong feelings at that... try to make a case that there's little difference between games.

I’d suggest what’s actually happening is they are asserting the difference to be in a different place - not that there isn’t a big difference

(though maybe there’s also a bit of - not quite as big of a difference as some claim would also - in there as well)

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I’d suggest what’s actually happening is they are asserting the difference to be in a different place - not that there isn’t a big difference

(though maybe there’s also a bit of - not quite as big of a difference as some claim would also - in there as well)

As a lived experience they're quite distinct, and when clear and obvious differences that I have experienced, like the nature of player authority in different styles of play, are described as being irrelevant, non-existent, or trivial, then I know as an observed fact that said description is fatally flawed, right?

 

[FrogReaver]

As a lived experience they're quite distinct, and when clear and obvious differences that I have experienced, like the nature of player authority in different styles of play, are described as being irrelevant, non-existent, or trivial, then I know as an observed fact that said description is fatally flawed, right?

You mean like happens to me when I share my lived experiences with other games, where others are dismissive of my lived experience when my lived experience doesn’t match theirs or their theories?

 

[soviet]

It's always odd to see people who have different feelings about different types of games... and strong feelings at that... try to make a case that there's little difference between games.

'System doesn't matter but the games you like are vastly inferior for mechanical reasons'.