What do we really mean by GNS? May 7, 2008

This is a continuation of a discussion that started on a friend's LiveJournal, in the comments thread.  For the background, go here.

Over the course of the thread, it became increasingly clear to me that l_the_fangirl and I weren't talking about the same things when we said "Gamist," "Narrativist," or "Simulationist."  Well, ok, I think we mostly mean the same thing by "Gamist," but not the other two.  Now, of course, I don't think GNS is the "one true model" of roleplaying, but I've found it to be useful in the past.  I do, however, agree with the "big model" theory that gamism, narrativism, and simulationism are only three of the possible universe of creative agendas, and there are really a lot more of them than just those.

Anyway, I've come to think that I myself may not have a 100% conventional view of GNS, and so I'm going to follow l_the_fangirl's lead and rename the three points of the model I use to more accurately reflect the way I think of them:

• Goal-oriented (formerly "Gamist"): Primarily playing in order to accomplish character goals, or "win."
• Event-oriented (formerly "Narrativist"): Primarily playing in order to participate in an interesting series of events.
• Character-oriented (formerly "Simulationist"): Primarily playing in order to explore an interesting character.

Now, l_the_fangirl renames her three points differently, and I'm going to quote from her comments about them here:

• Challenging (formerly "Gamist"): LTF didn't elaborate on this one in the comments thread, but I assume from the name she gives it that it's primarily about encountering and surmounting challenges.
• Thematic (formerly "Narrativist"): "...entirely about themes - if you define a theme as 'What happens when you choose one of two good things at the expense of the other?'"
• Genre (formerly "Simulationist"): "...the game is entirely about simulating a living, breathing situation and setting in a particular genre. If you wanted to run a game that was Just Like Tolkien, it would be simulationist/genre."

(l_the_fangirl, I'm sorry if I'm misrepresenting your point of view here; I'm restating it as best I understand it, but if I'm wrong, please comment on this post and say so.)

I should also mention here that I'm coming almost entirely at this from a background of theatre-style LARP.  I don't know what LTF's background is, but her latest comments lead me to believe she plays at least some tabletop RPGs, so that may account at least somewhat for the difference in our perspectives.

Anyway, I thought this was an interesting discussion and that ryuutchi probably didn't want it happening in a comment thread on her unrelated post, so I'm reposting it here in the hopes of continuing it.