Editing RPG (section)

==GNS==

A similar distribution has been proposed by the '''GNS''' (Gamist, Narrativist, Simulationist) '''Theory''' which is not applied to gamers but the games themselves.  GNS as a whole has been recently dismissed as '''bullshit''' [[skub|by pretty much everyone]]; however, its individual categories can still be useful for explaining some concepts.

*'''Gamist RPGs''' focus on the "game" aspect. They are closer to wargaming and boardgaming in the sense that the rules or mechanics themselves take the spotlight. Like you don't play Monopoly to pretend that you're capitalist shit, gamist RPGs don't care about "getting in character" or playing in a "believable world" and so on. There is no real "reason" why a knight in chess moves in an L-pattern, except that it makes for a tactical strength or viability, horses don't really move that way. Gamism in RPGs is best suited for beer and pretzels games and simple hack and slash slaughterfests. 
::Example: The way Powers work in [[D&D 4e]].

*'''Narrativist''' games try to be quite the opposite. The storytelling and narration is the focus of the game and the mechanics are mostly or completely subdued to it. In Narrativism, you don't use a mechanical effect to perform an action, your action and its success tries to grow directly from your narration, while the rules just support this. Narrativist games usually don't ask themselves what would be the most realistic outcome or the most tactically viable, but what would be the most dramatic, story-propelling effect. If chess were narrativist, the knight's piece would move depending on your descriptions of his actions and implication for the story, and not in a pre-set L motion. 
::Example: The conflict resolution in [[Dogs in the Vineyard]]. Pretty much everything in [[Mystic Empyrean]].

*'''Simulationist''' games try to "simulate" the workings and mechanics of a believable world, depending on the setting and genre conventions. Simulationism usually takes an emphasis on realism, but since most RPGs take place in fantasy or sci-fi worlds, "believable" is the more correct expression - a simulation of a superhero world is something different than a simulation of a real WW2 battlefield. Simulationism takes pain in attempting to resolve actions and events in a way that would be expected "in real life"; this is usually accomplished by numerous tables and random rolls. If chess were simulationist, the knight piece would move in a manner and direction decided by the player, but the end result (speed, direction, etc) would be determined by various factors such as abstract averages, circumstances (weight, size, terrain, exhaustion), randomizers (dice) and so on, seeking to evoke a "what would really happen" result. 
::Example: The [[GURPS]] system, combat in the [[Riddle of Steel]] RPG.

In reality most games feature a inseparable mixture of all these elements.
::Example: Play [[Spirit of the Century]], you'll see what we're talking about.