Narrativist games attend to staying in the moment, preoccupied with resolving the blow-by continuously until the game is over.
Do they? The rub with that is that having to drop out of what these games call "the fiction" to then argue, negotiate, and debate over what happens next is intended as part of the game.
When stuff like that happens in, say, DND, it's usually because of badly written or inconsistent rules than it is anything intentional. If you had a game of DND that just ran as smoothly as possible (eg nobody got hung up on a rule or a ruling), that's going to be more accurately described as blow by blow than any narrative game I've ever played, seen played, or read.
And emergent narrative is a recognized phrase. It specifically refers to the ability of a game to convey a conventional narrative as we'd recognize it purely through the interaction of game mechanics, and without any preauthoring.
Eg, Romeo and Juliet spawns as the organic interaction between this, that, and the other thing, and at no point was any element of that narrative prescribed in any way.
The improv game is an example of a game that does this (so every RPG ever is capable of it to some degree, even if you reduce it down to FKR), and with systemic design you can push it farther.