The GNS Theory, as originally developed by Ron Edwards, holds that participants in role-playing games make decisions which can be divided into three categories:
Strictly, GNS theory is concerned with gamers' decisions, but it has been extrapolated to direct game design, both in and out of the world of RPGs. A game can be referred to as Gamist, Narrativist or Simulationist if it encourages players to make Gamist, Narrativist or Simulationist decisions. Game designers find it useful because it can be used to explain why players play certain games. Critics of the theory have argued that it doesn't really explain anything regarding player behavior, and only serves to shoehorn game design down limited paths.
For example, to resolve combat (a common event in many role-playing games) a gamist approach might be to compare a variety of scores that each involved character has, including character strength (and other attributes), skill, luck, weapon damage, armor durability, and the like. These scores are often translated into dice to provide a gamble and allow players to risk more for higher stakes.
Dungeons and Dragons is often considered a Gamist role-playing game, as are Computer RPGs. Detractors of gamist play often accuse players of trying to "win" a game whose purpose is to be enjoyed.GNS and Other Matters of Role-Playing Theory, Chapter 2
To resolve combat, a narrativist approach might be to consider the thematic implications of the fight, why the fight is important to the characters involved in it (beyond the obvious risk of harm), and what the story would look like if one side or the other won out. All of these considerations may be done aloud, mediated by dice, or simply resolved by GM discretion.
Many indie role-playing games are designed as Narrativist games, e.g. Dogs in the Vineyard.
To resolve combat, a simulationist approach might be to see if the character hits, then if the victim can parry, then how much 'damage' the weapon does, then how much of this the armour stops, then determine what part of the victim is hit, then see how much harm the remaining damage does. The benefit of this method is that it is simple for the players to interpret the results and understand what must have happened. The drawback is that the process can take a long time to perform and the process does not always produce plausible results.
However, the agenda is not necessarily bound to complex game mechanics. GURPS, which is very complex, is often classified as a simulationist role-playing system, but Call of Cthulhu, which is lighter, can also be considered a Simulationist game with a strong focus on Situation.
The GNS Theory identifies five elements of role-playing that all players recognize:
It also explains four Stances the player can have in making decisions for their character:
In his article "System Does Matter""System Does Matter" by Ron Edwards, Edwards said that all participants in RPGs hold one of three mutually exclusive perspectives or aims. He wrote that enjoyable RPGs focus on only one of these perspectives and that it is a common mistake in RPG design to try to satisfy all three types. It is for this reason that the article could be seen as a warning against generic role-playing game systems made by larger developers"Does System Matter?", a reply to System Does Matter.
Ron Edwards has since further refined his understanding of RPGs, discarding GNS Theory in favor of The Big Model, which redefines and recontextualizes problematic aspects of GNS.
On December 2, 2005, Edwards closed the forums on The Forge regarding GNS theory, explaining that the forums supporting the GNS theoretical framework had outlived their usefulness. Farewell to the forum, but not to theory.
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
It uses material from the
"GNS Theory".
Home Page • arts • business • computers • games • health • hospitals • home • kids & teens • news • physicians • recreation• reference • regional • science • shopping • society • sports • world