Wouldn't it be nice if we could judge RPG's on equal grounds?

It lacks a GNS scale. ANd to have a GNS scale we first need consensus on what G, N and S mean.

t. burger

>GNS

GNS is a fucking sham user. The concepts are symbiotic not competing.

Actually, it had a GNS scale when I first posted it on Veeky Forums for feedback. The most consistent feedback I got was "drop the GNS scale, nobody clearly understands what it means."
So you make a moot point there.

That's why you have 'aim of the system' instead. You'll notice with Dread I deliberately put in "to create a narrative", which is a close as you can get to the intent of GNS without putting others off.

that would be shit. We couldn't do as much pointless arguing and shittrowing

You underestimate yourselves user. Even if we had an entire database of useful and unbiased information, there still would be plenty pointless arguing an shitthrowing. The one doesn't exclude the other.

>Wouldn't it be nice if I could attempt to pass off my opinions as facts by presenting them in the form of an infographic?

but it won't be the same anymore

Do people not 'get' GNS? Its the simplest fucking thing.

Guranteed no show? Motherfuckers need to stop making reservations amd then not showing up. Then have the gall to complain about getting charged when i held your room all night.

That's why I put two sides of the story on the sheet and ask others to fill in the sheets collaboratively. The whole purpose is to have a quick but nuanced overview.
You insult me.

>People misunderstand the individual G, N and S
>People don't agree about how these principles are related to eachother. See:
>There is no understandable order of magnitude on the principles to put them on a meaningful chart
>People misunderstand whether GNS should be attributed to the RPG, the GM or the players. It's clearly the former
>People insert their own anecdotal evidence to question GNS. Ie: "you need a good gamist system to create a good narrative. That's why enjoy the depth and realism of game X"

There is plenty to misunderstand, and having a board of contrarians doesn't help.

WOULDNT IT BE NICER IF WE PLAYED RPGS INSTEAD OF FUCKING JUDGING THEM YOU HUMONGOUS HOMOLORD FAGGOT?

>don't think about what you're consuming, and whether you could be consuming better
>just consume

>That, and in all-caps, with homophobic slurs.

It's not going to encapsule everything people want to say, and so it is more or less useless.

>complaining about homophobic slurs
Go back to tumblr, fag.

The goal is for people who are unfamiliar with the game to see what they need to know without having to ask in a thread and getting tons of 'it's shit'/'It's the best game ever' to get through.

NO because then nobody would buy narrativist games.

>implying people don't like narrativist games

>All this banter
>No contribution

Shut up, you idiot.

Well, yeah, it would be useful as soon as you arrive at a consensual definition of the basic terms.

That's basically all Veeky Forums amounts to nowadays. People are too busy making short, wannabe snappy comments to actually sit back, think a little, and post something that genuinely contributes to a topic.

But wait! Wouldn't it be nice if we could judge Veeky Forums comments on equal grounds?

If you keep the thread alive, I'll do some stuff for a few after work.

What do you expect, most people on Veeky Forums don't play tabletop and/or get their tabletop info from 1d4chan and twitch streams.

sad but very true.

>nowadays
>implying

Don't see why we shouldn't but i understand why we can't. People on the internet tend to get hyper autistic about people liking things they don't and hating them for that reason and that reason alone.
Just to name a few systems i've played/run games in; Star Wars D6, 3.5/4/5e DnD, Dark Heresy, etc. They are all enjoyable, they aren't designed the same way but all produce some kind of feeling that i spent my time well in playing them with people who also enjoyed their time spent.