This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Is theory "talk" geared towards GMs rather than players

Started by David R, October 29, 2006, 06:43:57 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions

Blackleaf

#45
January 02, 2007, 09:12:40 PM
Quote from: maddmanThere's a couple of different things that get conflated when people talk about theory. GNS is not really a theory for game master or players, it's meant as a theory for game designers.

I think RPG theory is generally of most use to game designers.  That's certainly my interest.  If I wasn't working on a game, I wouldn't bother with it at all.

Quote from: beejazzI don't see much reason to get rid of/revise the traditional GM. I mean, if it ain't broke...

 Although, maybe if there was a *competitive* RPG.

Yes, I agree that a competitive game is one reason to consider this.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions