GNS

>>53202386
Instead of bothering yourself with making up shit you make players make up shit.

>>53202386
Get some friends together and play Fiasco. I think there's a lot of fun to be had in a very tight narrative experience that thrives off of intense improv and collaboration.

>>53202386
>le huh man
>redpill me
>RPG theory general
kill yourself

File: homer-someone-else.png (217KB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 512x384px

>>53202412
...and that... works? sounds a lot like homer simpson style of GMing

>>53202466
once saw a bit of wheaton playing it on tabletop. looked like fun but it was entirely without stats?? that don't work for campaign play.

>>53202527
T R I G G E R E D

>>53202614
looked like fun but it was entirely without stats?? that don't work for campaign play
Kind of true, but not entirely. I usually do "narrative" games when running one-shots and it works pretty great. It's just common sense really, whenever there is a need to roll for something I tell the players to roll, the higher they roll, the better the result. Modify their chances depending on who are their characters and it's pretty much it. Works and saves time you would waste on making character sheets and perhaps even learning a system for purpose of a single game only.

For campaigns I agree that some sense of progression is usually needed, an therefore it requires stats that an be upgraded. However, it doesn't mean you cannot make a campaign without stats, you just need players who are ok with that and a campaing style that doesn't rely on mechanics.

>>53202763
Damn, meant to quote
>looked like fun but it was entirely without stats?? that don't work for campaign play

>>53202763
but narrativism isn't tied to rules-light, no? would you rate FATE narrativist?

>>53202614
It does and it doesn't.

You could totally play Fiasco as a campaign, but it requires the players to think like television writers more than players. There are rules to adapt the game into a campaign format in an expansion, but I've never read them.

Fiasco thrives when you really trust the people you're with and you are all looking to act in service of the story rather than your characters. I think its rules do a good job in incentivizing the players to create really basic conflicts that propels the story, but only with a group that is disciplined in roleplaying.

>>53202781
I haven't got an occasion to try or read FATE yet, so I don't really know.
>narrativism isn't tied to rules-light, no?
I mean, depends what you really mean by narrativism, because narrativism is pretty much what makes RPG an RPG, without narration it's just a tabletop strategy game. Therefore from my experience when people talk about "narrativistic RPGs" they usually mean ones that throw away all the rules, stats, mechanics, etc and focus just on roleplaying and telling a story, Some even get rid of rolling, but for me this just turns the game into GM telling a story.

>>53202882
well, if i read ron edwards right, narrativism is story emerging during play, at the hands of the players, instead of preconceived by a GM or dictated by genre

Narrative systems usually go by the belief that the story trumps the rules. If the mechanics are getting in the way of the narrative, the system advises, and sometimes encourages, that you ignore the rules. They also tend to have rather light and flexible rulesets to facilitate this belief.

File: 1494363038099.jpg (323KB, 480x953px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 480x953px

>>53202386
>redpill me on narrativism
It's a zionist conspiracy to steal your shekels, obviously.
ffs.

File: Doubt.jpg (41KB, 476x470px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 476x470px

The problem with narrative systems is that there is no consistency, no threats of dying, and just the GM saying yes or no and railroading the shit out of the players because of "muh story".