D&D General What is player agency to you?

[EzekielRaiden]

Yes. By that definition, what I want will allow for narrative, but story is not a goal.

Okay.

So...don't you as DM put things into the world to make a more interesting narrative? Don't you write character backstories so that their narrative will be engaging and interesting rather than formlessly generic or dull?

Because people raise this Boogeyman of "players just summon entire plotlines and end entire arcs with a waive of a hand" and it is honestly incredibly tedious because I've never seen a single person actually play that way, and in the vast majority of cases, it isn't even possible to play that way in the kinds of games people discuss.

Hence, I still don't see the difference between Conan having a backstory that includes Thulsa Doom and Thulsa Doom reappearing later as an opponent without Conan specifically seeking him out and a DM adding spice to the ongoing situation by developing a connection between a current threat the party has taken interest in and the bad things that have happened to one or more characters in their past. It is, from Conan's perspective, pure coincidence that Thulsa has chosen to become a priest of Set; it makes for a more gripping experience, because the two have an emotional connection that would not be present if the Priest of Set were some random dude. And it is quite clear that the reason it's Thulsa and not Random Set Priest #6 is that it is more interesting for that connection to appear. In an improvisational form like TTRPGs, there is no need to have a fixed, planned, set, unalterable, unbending, unyielding "story" (since apparently that is what people think "story" means now...) The discovery that the warlock amassing a strange and subversive cult outside the city is none other than Pulsa Boom, Priest of Beats, who enslaved Gonad's tribe many long years ago, does not suddenly lock everything into a single, inexorable, hyperspecific chain of events. It may, of course, amp up the party's desire to fight the warlock and his cult! But perhaps they also find out that the cult is keeping something nasty imprisoned, and just killing them would be Very Bad. There is no clearly right or wrong choice here. There are just things which exist in the world, and which will bring consequences if the players succeed at changing them. Which, importantly, is not the same as "always getting everything you want forever." You can succeed at something only to find out that that success has consequences you really wish you had known about or predicted before they happened.

What consequences are the players willing to accept? What risks are they willing to take, should their efforts fail, or get derailed? What costs are they willing to pay for success? What will they do if they discover new things later which make them reevaluate? I have no idea. That's what we play to find out. That's the narrative of the game, which doesn't have this ridiculously rigid....scripting that people seem so fearful of they would actively rather play a less interesting game just to make sure it never rears its fictitious head.

 

[FrogReaver]

But it would be legitimate, if a player makes a successful roll to Spout Lore, for the GM to ask what they were expecting or what they think might be the case. This would be particular application of the general technique of asking questions and building on the answers.

If that happened, the player would be providing their PC's memory, consistent with the move trigger when you consult your accumulated knowledge. So it wouldn't be "altering the game reality" in some fashion "outside of their PC".

If the player is given authorial power to establish a prior event or detail for the purpose of gaining an advantage in the games present - (whether that's via PC memory or other means), then that is very much what it meant by 'altering the games reality'. Further, while 'PC memory' can be argued to be part of the PC, the details in the memory are very much outside the PC - making the addition of those details a change outside the PC.

 

[FrogReaver]

Perhaps a better example of a PbtA game mechanic that grants the player some authorial power in the present scene are flashbacks in Blades in the Dark. Flashbacks allow a player within the current scene to spend a character resource and establish that the PC had done something beneficial prior to the current scene but beneficial to it (maybe bribing the rival gang's henchmen to conveniently not be around, or planting a bomb, etc). If I recall there's the basic Blades in the Dark resolution to achieve the action, but provided you roll high and have a high enough level of effect then what you proposed is now established in the fiction.

 

[pemerton]

If the player is given authorial power to establish a prior event or detail for the purpose of gaining an advantage in the games present - (whether that's via PC memory or other means), then that is very much what it meant by 'altering the games reality'. Further, while 'PC memory' can be argued to be part of the PC, the details in the memory are very much outside the PC - making the addition of those details a change outside the PC.

What is being altered or changed?

 

[FrogReaver]

What is being altered or changed?

I thought I clearly stated that… The games reality.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I thought I clearly stated that… The games reality.

No, that's not clear at all. What, actually, changes?

Something is revealed, yes. DMs reveal things constantly. Players reveal things constantly--every time they speak about backstory, in fact. Which is why I keep mentioning that. If revealing things qualifies as "changing the game's reality," then the vast majority of roleplay should be verboten.

Unless, of course, you're willing to get more specific, which is why we're asking.

 

[FrogReaver]

No, that's not clear at all. What, actually, changes?

Something is revealed, yes. DMs reveal things constantly. Players reveal things constantly--every time they speak about backstory, in fact. Which is why I keep mentioning that. If revealing things qualifies as "changing the game's reality," then the vast majority of roleplay should be verboten.

Unless, of course, you're willing to get more specific, which is why we're asking.

I think I was very specific. The definition I gave wasn’t dependent on a thing being revealed.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I may be incorrect on this, but I think Flashback doesn't change/alter what has been roleplayed ("reality") but rather insert something right? For example, I brought x gear along or I anticipated x issue and so did y for preparation....

 

[FrogReaver]

I may be incorrect on this, but I think Flashback doesn't change/alter what has been roleplayed ("reality") but rather insert something right? For example, I brought x gear along or I anticipated x issue and so did y for preparation....

Right. But what I and others are referring to as game reality isn’t just what’s been roleplayed.

The gear load out is already had waived apart from flashbacks. You get so many slots and then during the scene you get to say what you brought as the need arises. No flashback required.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I think I was very specific. The definition I gave wasn’t dependent on a thing being revealed.

Okay. You may think that. I still do not understand what you mean by something being changed. And yes, the example you gave absolutely did depend on that.

If the player is given authorial power to establish a prior event or detail for the purpose of gaining an advantage in the games present - (whether that's via PC memory or other means), then that is very much what it meant by 'altering the games reality'. Further, while 'PC memory' can be argued to be part of the PC, the details in the memory are very much outside the PC - making the addition of those details a change outside the PC.

Memory, backstory, and other things. Of course backstory involves things that aren't literally the character's physical body or actions they've personally taken. That's literally what memories are. If we aren't allowed to have memories that reference things physically separate from the character personally, we aren't allowed to have character memories. That's critical here!

Perhaps a better example of a PbtA game mechanic that grants the player some authorial power in the present scene are flashbacks in Blades in the Dark. Flashbacks allow a player within the current scene to spend a character resource and establish that the PC had done something beneficial prior to the current scene but beneficial to it (maybe bribing the rival gang's henchmen to conveniently not be around, or planting a bomb, etc). If I recall there's the basic Blades in the Dark resolution to achieve the action, but provided you roll high and have a high enough level of effect then what you proposed is now established in the fiction.

I have never played BitD, so I can't speak on it, but AIUI it isn't actually a PbtA game. It's related, but distinct; "descended" or the like is what I've seen people call it. I have no experience with Flashbacks as a result, so I literally cannot comment on them. This isn't the first time, by the way, that I've heard that Blades differs--sometimes rather strongly--from other such games.

There is no Flashback-type mechanic in any PbtA game I've played--as I said. Literally nothing. Zero. In fact, no PbtA game I've ever played even permits such things. The example someone else gave above was a Spout Lore, but that's something where it is the DM telling the player something "interesting and useful" (assuming it's a full success), and then the DM may, if they like, ask the player where the character got that information. Absolutely NOT like this inventing whole plotlines, declaring the world just works out nicely, etc., etc. boogeyman people keep bringing up.

I stand by what I said: I've never played such a game. It is absolutely not an inherent and automatic part of this sort of thing.

Right. But what I and others are referring to as game reality isn’t just what’s been roleplayed.

Then what IS it?

Seriously! What is it? What is this reality that is somehow totally disconnected from the experience of play, and yet utterly vital?