Any implementation in rules is going to be a Gamist implementation in that case and that seems too sweeping to me.
Mind you, what I'm talking about is a contiuum between the three points, not either/or. But if you decide to enforce the way the group forms a narrative by instituting rules for conflict resolution then you are leaning Gamist. To my mind this is a GOOD thing, and will likely improve the narrative (and the simulation, because there will be a more consistent set of outcomes). The group may still be getting together with the goal of crafting an interesting story, but they've changed the way they're leaning in how they resolve it.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2008-04-12 08:21 am (UTC)Mind you, what I'm talking about is a contiuum between the three points, not either/or. But if you decide to enforce the way the group forms a narrative by instituting rules for conflict resolution then you are leaning Gamist. To my mind this is a GOOD thing, and will likely improve the narrative (and the simulation, because there will be a more consistent set of outcomes). The group may still be getting together with the goal of crafting an interesting story, but they've changed the way they're leaning in how they resolve it.