Setting aside the technical details of the Big Model, it seems to me that each of the basic ideas about what is going on in an rpg is potentially player-empowering. That is, we can ask, for each of them, "what can the player appeal to to get the GM to change his mind?"
In a game, the player can say, "the rules say, on p. X, column n, that you do such and such in this situation."
In a narrative, the player can say, "we've established that my character is motivated by P, and not by Q; so it's not plausible for them to do A in this situation."
In a simulation, the player can say, "the laws of nature in this setting include such and such; so if my character can do X, they ought to be able to do Y and Z."
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2008-04-11 01:29 pm (UTC)In a game, the player can say, "the rules say, on p. X, column n, that you do such and such in this situation."
In a narrative, the player can say, "we've established that my character is motivated by P, and not by Q; so it's not plausible for them to do A in this situation."
In a simulation, the player can say, "the laws of nature in this setting include such and such; so if my character can do X, they ought to be able to do Y and Z."