GNS理论

Ron Edwards 提出的桌面角色扮演游戏分类方法，即：

• Gamism 游戏主义
• Narrativism 叙事主义
• Simulationism 模拟主义

Three player aims or outlooks have been suggested, in that a given player approaches a role-playing situation pretty much from one of them, with some, but not much, crossover possible.

Gamist. This player is satisfied if the system includes a contest which he or she has a chance to win. Usually this means the character vs. NPC opponents, but Gamists also include the System Breaker and the dominator-type roleplayer. RPGs well suited to Gamists include Rifts and Shadowrun.

Narrativist. This player is satisfied if a roleplaying session results in a good story. RPGs for Narrativists include Over the Edge, Prince Valiant, The Whispering Vault, and Everway.

Simulationist. This player is satisfied if the system “creates” a little pocket universe without fudging. Simulationists include the well-known subtype of the Realist. Good games for Simulationists include GURPS and Pendragon. The Forge :: System Does Matter

按照 Ron 的理论，三种模式是互斥的关系，游戏的顺利进行依赖于玩家的期望能被归结到同一种模式下。

Here I suggest that RPG system design cannot meet all three outlooks at once.

…

One of the biggest problems I observe in RPG systems is that they often try to satisfy all three outlooks at once. The result, sadly, is a guarantee that almost any player will be irritated by some aspect of the system during play. GMs’ time is then devoted, as in the Herbie example, to throwing out the aspects that don’t accord for a particular group. A “good” GM becomes defined as someone who can do this well - but why not eliminate this laborious step and permit a (for example) Gamist GM to use a Gamist game, getting straight to the point? I suggest that building the system specifically to accord with one of these outlooks is the first priority of RPG design.

该理论在 The Forge 圈子有较大的影响力，关于更详细的介绍，参见¹。但是理论本身虽然知名，但存在较大的漏洞，今日通常被认为已经过时。

Related

• 【译文】重审GNS 中Vincent Baker认为只有叙事主义是有意义的（作为一种动态），其他两者是当时的观点（叙事主义是一种 rpg 类型，rpg 类型间不兼容）下从别处被挪用的概念。

“旧”模拟主义实际上根本不存在——它只是一个在forge论坛的讨论里被构造出的对象，包含了很多一股脑塞进去的东西，它没有真正的支持、没有明确的理念、没有社群的拥护、更没有游戏设计的实践。而在后来的日子里随着越来越广泛的误用和流变，它基本上已经失去了任何有意义的内涵。（游戏主义同理，所谓GNS中，实际上只有叙事主义游戏运动是真实存在的，其他两个则是被构造出来用以对比叙事主义游戏理念的。用戏谑一点的说法，这俩玩意就是两顶帽子，看见一个扣一个。）

• 【译文】新模拟主义：一个宣言 强调虚构优先
• A Manifesto In Defense of Simulationism 自然，时至今日还是有很多人会用GNS的这套术语，尤其是“模拟主义”的说法。

Footnotes

1. W. J. White, Tabletop RPG Design in Theory and Practice at the Forge, 2001–2012: Designs and Discussions. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-52819-5. ↩