clearstream
(He, Him)
It took a while to really get started untangling the threads, but here is a further step in the direction I am thinking. First some groundworkSo: What does "immersion in world" mean? What do you do to have it, which is distinct from articulating a world with such smooth, natural presentation that one cannot help but forget about the material world for a time?
- As we know, GDS through to GNS identified three purposes of play. Gamist, Dramatist/Narrativist*, and Simulationist. Uniquely, GNS claims these purposes conflict. Intriguingly, GNS has another category of play - Zilchplay, or play without a creative purpose - which potentially applies to the vast majority of actual roleplayers. (*I'm aware that these aren't quite the same thing.)
- GEN took a different approach: positing a bottom tier of mechanics and techiques scaffolding a top tier of intent, style of play and limitations, in all combinations.
- You identified a fourfold, expressed in pairs. Score|Achievement, Groundedness|Simulation, Conceit|Emulation, and Values|Issues.
- A quite influential blogpost categorised play into six cultures. Classic. Trad. Nordic Larp. Story Games. OSR. Neo-trad.
- A few elements have been claimed more or less by all sides. Exploration. Immersion. Story (whether in the telling or the creating.) To the extent that TTRPGs are games, one can feasibly add Game.
- I've observed other purposes. Such as the Construction|Perfection that I advocated should be added to your fourfold.
Tuovinen also writes thatSimulationist play attempts to experience a subject matter in a way that results in elevated appreciation and understanding. The Shared Imagined Space is utilized for intensely detailed perspectives that sometimes surpass the means of traditional, non-interactive mediums.
In a recent exchange, a poster here on Enworld characterised simulationism in the following ways - setting tourism, touring, leisurely, breezy free play.the psychological basis for Narrativism is artistic self-realization, right? I think that the best argument for the CA modes not being distinct modes all around is probably in this territory: the distinction between Narrativist self-realization and Simulationistic elevated understanding is sort of subtle; it’d be credible to argue that they in fact can cohere creatively in the right circumstances. (This would be distinct from technical Hybrid design; this is saying that Nar and Sim overlap as CA categories rather than there being some technical trick to make creative needs align in play.) The modes can be much more distinct if you specifically contrast subject matters, but a Simulationistic game about human psychology and a Narrativist game about human psychology can seem awfully similar. I think that the distinction lies solely in whether you’re pursuing an understanding of the subject or a personal artistic pronouncement; that is, if you’re looking to learn, or to transform yourself.
I think the utility of GNS is that it offers purchase on an otherwise impossibly diverse and nuanced subject. If your fourfold was more widely shared, it would serve equally well. Speaking in terms of norms, I can see at least a fivefold at this point (this is where immersionism comes in.)
- Gamism, nearest your S|A and Classic, OSR wants in, too
- Dramatism, nearest your V|I and Story Games, and from its own unique angle Nordic Larp.
- Simulationism (per Tuovinen) nearest elements of your G|S and C|E.
- Immersionism, which I will now label "Tourism", nearest other elements of your G|S and C|E.
- Storytelling, nearest Trad and Neo-Trad
So! To put it provocatively, 1. is where we started, and 4. and 5. are what the vast majority of actual RPG play has been to date. Zilchplay. Exploring worlds and stories. Dramatism has been busily breaking things and making discoveries that benefit everyone. Simulationism has been hiding its light under a bushel. And notice that everyone is still going to want a slice of exploration, immersion, story, and game... they can't easily do without those things.
Using this fivefold for purchase, I've observed satisfying play in all of the following cases
- Purism - drive one so hard that there isn't space for the others.
- Diversity over time - move between purposes as fits your exploration.
- Hybridisation - reconstruct your play around your purposes
- Casual tolerance - make space for each participant to focus on purposes that satisfy them
- Differential emphasis - some purposes are muted, such as my C|P, while others are emphasised
discussion of a game text’s creative agenda is a discussion of the perceived utility of the text; the agenda is not in the text, strictly speaking, so much as it is in how you understand it.
Last edited: