![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Reframing Narrativism
Aug. 11th, 2017 09:16 amI had already come to the conclusion that role-playing gaming genres like narrativism consist of more than just rules, but what if the rules aren't a part of the genre at all?
That proposal is pretty bold. Of course the rules will be part of the genre, but which type of rule is different for each game. What they all share, however, is that they put the player at the centre of the story.
I'd like to differentiate players from gamemasters (GMs), because narrativist games tend to either disempower the GM or place the responsibilities of GMs in the hands of the players. In contrast, traditional RPGs tend to treat the rules as a weapon for the GM to use.
But what does this mean for a community of designers that supports the idea that the rules matter? The key is to think of the designer's voice being the rules. Choosing a particular narrativist game is similar to proposing the topic of a conversation. The players are then encouraged to give their own viewpoints on that topic. Those viewpoints are then run by the GM, or whoever holds that responsibility at that moment, who interprets it for the rules.
And viola, you get the narrativist genre, where rules matter, but it doesn't rely on any specific rule. That's why it's so hard to explain narrativism to a die hard fan of Dungeons & Dragons. Narrativism is about exploring different viewpoints.
If that's true for narrativism, how do I apply these principles to the other role-playing game genres?
That proposal is pretty bold. Of course the rules will be part of the genre, but which type of rule is different for each game. What they all share, however, is that they put the player at the centre of the story.
I'd like to differentiate players from gamemasters (GMs), because narrativist games tend to either disempower the GM or place the responsibilities of GMs in the hands of the players. In contrast, traditional RPGs tend to treat the rules as a weapon for the GM to use.
But what does this mean for a community of designers that supports the idea that the rules matter? The key is to think of the designer's voice being the rules. Choosing a particular narrativist game is similar to proposing the topic of a conversation. The players are then encouraged to give their own viewpoints on that topic. Those viewpoints are then run by the GM, or whoever holds that responsibility at that moment, who interprets it for the rules.
And viola, you get the narrativist genre, where rules matter, but it doesn't rely on any specific rule. That's why it's so hard to explain narrativism to a die hard fan of Dungeons & Dragons. Narrativism is about exploring different viewpoints.
If that's true for narrativism, how do I apply these principles to the other role-playing game genres?