With school going at full blast I haven’t had too much time to devote to any kind of RPG stuff, apart from playing in my group’s weekly Truth & Justice campaign (I’m not sure I would be able to keep up if I were running a game right now…). For that matter I haven’t really been keeping up on RPG blogs much either, just doing my usual lurking on RPG.net and occasionally having some RPG ideas percolate in my brain. I’d really like to get some more stuff done for Tokyo Heroes and Thrash 2.0 once I have a better handle on school stuff, especially since I’m starting to get more ideas together for the aforementioned Ether Star and its own custom flavor of Fudge.
Anyway, what prompted me to post was this thread on RPG.net. Levi Kornelsen has basically laid out a new (still evolving) set of terms for discussing RPG theory, based on the idea that the terms used should be as intuitive as possible, and created partly in reaction to GNS and The Big Model. Right now it’s primarily new terms for Forge theory, but the ‘little model’ (as one poster called it) has already started to evolve some on its own. Of particular interest to me is how in addition to Challenge, Theme, and Simulation-Focused games, it has “Open Focus” and “Multi-Focus,” stemming from the idea that an RPG that doesn’t concentrate on a particular focus/mode isn’t inherently flawed. To the extent that I’ve found Forge theory useful, I think moving away from “crazy moon language” is a step in the right direction. Where it’ll go from here is anyone’s guess though.