GNS Theory
Encyclopedia : G : GN : GNS : GNS Theory
The GNS Theory, as originally developed by Ron Edwards, holds that participants in role-playing games make decisions which can be divided into three categories:
- Gamist decisions concern competition and challenge
- Narrativist decisions concern story and theme
- Simulationist decisions concern experience and celebration of source material
G,N,S: Gamist, Narrativist, Simulationist
Gamist
Gamist refers to decisions based on what will make the most effective solution to the problem posed. These decisions are most common in games which pits characters against successively tougher challenges and opponents and may not spend much time explaining why the characters are facing them.For example, to resolve combat (a common event in many role-playing games) a gamist approach might be to compare a variety of scores that each involved character has, including character strength (and other attributes), skill, luck, weapon damage, armor durability, and the like. These scores are often translated into dice to provide a gamble and allow players to risk more for higher stakes.
Dungeons and Dragons is often considered a Gamist role-playing game, as are Computer RPGs. Detractors of gamist play often accuse players of trying to "win" a game whose purpose is to be enjoyed.[GNS and Other Matters of Role-Playing Theory, Chapter 2]
Narrativist
Narrativist refers to a decisions based on what would further a dramatic story, an address of a central theme, or a game which encourages this style of play.To resolve combat, a narrativist approach might be to consider the thematic implications of the fight, why the fight is important to the characters involved in it (beyond the obvious risk of harm), and what the story would look like if one side or the other won out. All of these considerations may be done aloud, mediated by dice, or simply resolved by GM discretion.
Many indie role-playing games are designed as Narrativist games, e.g. Dogs in the Vineyard.
Simulationist
Simulationist refers to decisions based on what would be most realistic within the game's setting, or to a game where the rules try to simulate the way that things work in that world, or at least the way that they could be thought of working.To resolve combat, a simulationist approach might be to see if the character hits, then if the victim can parry, then how much 'damage' the weapon does, then how much of this the armour stops, then determine what part of the victim is hit, then see how much harm the remaining damage does. The benefit of this method is that it is simple for the players to interpret the results and understand what must have happened. The drawback is that the process can take a long time to perform and the process does not always produce plausible results.
However, the agenda is not necessarily bound to complex game mechanics. GURPS, which is very complex, is often classified as a simulationist role-playing system, but Call of Cthulhu, which is lighter, can also be considered a Simulationist game with a strong focus on Situation.
Other terms
The GNS theory incorporates Jonathan Tweet's three forms of task resolution that determine the outcome of an event. Edwards said that an RPG should use a task resolution system or combination of systems that is most appropriate for game's GNS perspective. The three task resolution forms are:- Drama, the participants decide the results, the requirements of the plot being the determining factor
- Fortune, chance decides the results (e.g., by using dice)
- Karma, a fixed value decides the results (e.g., by comparing stats)
The GNS Theory identifies five elements of role-playing that all players recognize:
- Character, a fictional person
- Color, details that provide atmosphere
- Setting, location (in space and time)
- Situation, the dilemma
- System, determines how in-game events unfold
- Actor, decides based on what their character would know
- Author, decides based on what they as a player want for their character and then retroactively explains why their character made that decision
- Director, makes decisions that affect the environment rather than the character (usually represented by a game master in an RPG)
- Pawn, decides based on what they as a player want for their character without bothering to explain why their character would make that decision
History
The theory developed out of the Threefold Model that defined Drama, Simulation, and Game as three paradigms of role-playing. The concept first appeared in the rec.games.frp.advocacy newsgroup, and the name "Threefold Model" was coined in a post made by Mary Kuhner in 1997 which outlined the principles of the theory. [The Threefold Model]In his article "System Does Matter"["System Does Matter"] by Ron Edwards, Edwards said that all participants in RPGs hold one of three mutually exclusive perspectives or aims. He wrote that enjoyable RPGs focus on only one of these perspectives and that it is a common mistake in RPG design to try to satisfy all three types. It is for this reason that the article could be seen as a warning against generic role-playing game systems made by larger developers["Does System Matter?"], a reply to System Does Matter.
Ron Edwards has since further refined his understanding of RPGs, discarding GNS Theory in favor of The Big Model, which redefines and recontextualizes problematic aspects of GNS.
On December 2, 2005, Edwards closed the forums on The Forge regarding GNS theory, explaining that the forums supporting the GNS theoretical framework had outlived their usefulness.[Farewell to the forum, but not to theory].
References
External links
- ["GNS and Other Matters of Role-playing Theory"] by Ron Edwards
- ["A Look at Gamist-Narrativist-Simulationist Theory"] by Nathan Jennings
From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Original article here. Support Wikipedia by contributing or donating.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License See Wikipedia Copyrights for details.