Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Dealing with agency and retcon (in semi sandbox)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ZebraDruid" data-source="post: 9065755" data-attributes="member: 7041885"><p>I think 'Ifs' are important, are they not? They do not interfere with agency.</p><p></p><p>An easy example. You as a person have agency <em>(I hope but ignore the deeper pondering)</em></p><p>You can choose to drive somewhere, work, school, store etc.</p><p></p><p>You can reasonably expect that on the way to that location you have a non 0 chance to have car trouble, or to get hit in traffic etc, you might get your vehicle/bike damaged. You might be killed, but you as a person are largely not in control of these outcomes. You may be able to act to mitigate these outcomes, by perceiving a threat and attempting to avoid it, but you are not in absolute authority to the outcome.</p><p></p><p>Whether or not these outcomes were pre-determined to you as a person is unknown, but you feel you have agency all the same.</p><p></p><p>Now suppose you were given omnipotent knowledge of the days outcomes, or perhaps even their chance, would that affect the way you proceed with the day, and would that remove something from the feeling of agency? Or would it feel more satisfying?</p><p></p><p>Stay home - 1% chance of death</p><p>Bike to work - 2% of breaking leg in accident.</p><p>Drive to work - 6% chance of wreck</p><p>Go jogging - 3% chance of death.</p><p></p><p>Would this table help make you feel like your choice was more meaningful? What if you knew the outcomes 'for sure' ahead of time?</p><p></p><p>Stay home - Nothing happens.</p><p>Bike to work - Nothing happens.</p><p>Drive to work - Car stalls and you run into a friend who helps.</p><p>Go jogging - Find a quarter.</p><p></p><p>Now you've established outcome, without risk. There are no 'ifs', so there can be no risk. And most of all there is no mystery.</p><p></p><p>I somewhat agree with what you're saying. I appreciate the theoretical approach. But as from my above comment I don't think knowing the specific odds and outcomes at all times creates a more interesting experience. It leaves nothing to explore and discover, and instead one might feel like they're left with a series of doors to choose, instead of a room to explore. </p><p></p><p></p><p>This I think brings up an interesting concept of DM approach, with the below quote.</p><p></p><p>I think these are two fundamentally different approaches, that as a DM you need to recognize in your players. I don't believe either of these are 'wrong'. </p><p></p><p>Are the characters actions and players empowerment more important than story telling and perhaps tactical gameplay?</p><p>Then you might prefer to ignore story over player success.</p><p></p><p>Do you wish to challenge your players, and engage them in a story that does not need to end in success, but the journey may be satisfying all the same? </p><p></p><p>Then story and mechanics are probably more important than success.</p><p></p><p>However, I <strong>don't think agency</strong> is being <strong>violated </strong>when a player does <strong>not succeed.</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>You're not wrong, my party loved my linear curated dungeon, and no one complained, even the bard who jumped into a death pit.</p><p>I don't see how I can't have semi multi directional railroads in a sandbox that the party can choose to ride on or not though.</p><p></p><p>My cleric said the same thing regarding serious RP. We went from a silly dungeon, to a serious one immediately, and we've talked about dialing it back a bit until people are more comfortable with these kinds of stories.</p><p></p><p>I agree, I am capable of presenting spontaneous situations on the spot. A 'whose line is it anyway' approach is ehh... In my opinion more suited to drunken nights where people just wanna have fun with 1 off characters. There is <strong>nothing wrong</strong> with that. The game is about fun after all.</p><p></p><p>I just don't think it is very engaging, and I'm not so sure the mechanics/rolls even matter in that kind of environment. In that environment I think it would be much better to just roll a d20 to determine success, and let people laugh at the whimsy of chance.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I think using my above point. This is more or less illustrates a game to be played and a story to be told.</p><p></p><p>Where as random events are I think perhaps? more about empowerment? And less about actual details or challenge.</p><p></p><p><em>Oh you guys are all wounded with no spell slots left? Well there was a mini boss in the next room, but I guess they're asleep and there is a healing fountain nearby...</em></p><p></p><p></p><p><em>Thank you.</em></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think getting too specific on the system bogs down the actual essence of discovering what is agency or not, because if agency is dependent on the game system, then agency is really an intangible and subjective thing.</p><p></p><p>Are we as people exercising agency right now? It's too much if you get specific like that.</p><p></p><p>I'm agnostic on the outcome of the story. I only want my players to be entertained, and engaged. They were both of those things. But at the same time a couple of them felt a bit cheated, and I want to recognize if that is a failing on my part, or a growning pain/misunderstanding as roleplayers/DM. </p><p></p><p>As I've said, I'm far from perfect <em>(why would I even ask advice then?) </em> </p><p></p><p>The thing is, the players explored story <strong>'I had not preplanned'</strong>. It something they discovered. It's a bit like if they walked out into the forest and said "Is there a wolf den here?" And I responded...Ahh well yes there are wolves in the forest typically, so...ahh <em>Rolls 1d20, gets 15</em> Yes there's a wolf den here. Oh, you ran in alone and were eaten by wolves? Well...</p><p></p><p>Just as, they gave the body to a necromancer, and asked <strong>"Can I watch the resurrection?"</strong> <strong>"...Ahh well, yes technically you 'could'..."</strong></p><p></p><p>They weren't upset about their decision to see the ritual, only the outcome that they observed by doing so. In this case, the players had knowledge of a resurrection, and that it was going to happen. The details were left to be investigated.</p><p></p><p>Right, yes. I did not tell him not to go in <strong>OOC</strong>, and in <strong>OOC</strong> I asked if he 'wanted' to go in. He said he didn't (I still don't get it) The wizard did go in with the cleric, but only the cleric took part in the ritual, the wizard was just curious.</p><p></p><p>This has been my <strong>point</strong> about <strong>agency</strong>. I couldn't<strong> 'force'</strong> him to do the thing that would give him the<strong> outcome he 'wanted'</strong>. I <strong>didn't have</strong> the<strong> power</strong> to give him the <strong>good ending</strong>.</p><p></p><p>Even though this is actually what I as a DM wanted to see. <em>(Mostly because it was more interesting.)</em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think anyone decided the stakes, besides the paladin ratting, but I'm not sure that is the same as setting the outcome.</p><p></p><p>The information on the entire story was available if they searched for it, but even partial information was given by doing the quest itself. </p><p>Necomantic stuff was found in the crypt, at least tipping them off that something wasn't right about the family. At that point they had went to rob the house, but only for money, not information. (There was a study with papers, and another desk upstairs with more papers/journals/info on it)</p><p></p><p>Yeah, pretty much what I said above, it's kind of a preference.</p><p></p><p>Wait, so you're saying PC agency is separate from real life player agency? I don't understand. Then if I killed the cleric with a lightning bolt from Sarenrae for taking part in a ritual of Asmodeus when he stepped out the crypt...I'm only violating the agency of the imaginary character?</p><p></p><p>I don't understand what you're talking about.</p><p></p><p>So, if a player decided to wait outside the dungeon instead of going in, their agency would have been violated when inside the dungeon the rest of their party was trapped by some evil monster who succeeded in his plot?</p><p></p><p>I guess I really should force my players to go into the 'boo!' haunted house next time so they can shoot arrows at the pop up bed sheet ghosts. It's Gygaxian at it's finest, creator of Tomb of Horrors. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite11" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes :rolleyes:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /></p><p></p><p>Right, and they had the chance to find out more about the story through exploration/diplomacy/sneaking. Paying respect to the individual players skill sets and trying to give them all opportunities to be useful.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I think that illustrates what someone said way earlier.</p><p></p><p>[USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] The quest is much like a dungeon. They can choose not to enter the dungeon, that's up to them. But saying they've lost agency because they enter the dungeon because it was presented is a bit of a reach. Remember I'm trying to entertain them. Not play Saturday night charades.</p><p></p><p>They had 'fun' with what I prepared.</p><p></p><p>If they choose not to go on the quest, then I'd probably let them separate or explore the town in some abstract fashion. I'm not a wizard.</p><p></p><p>Your approach seems to suggest that I should prepare/offer nothing, and instead come to the session with a few abstract ideas that would probably amount to them walking the town and randomly 'getting mugged' and then 'a person is in distress' or a 'cat is lodged up a tree, but it's actually a baby dweomeor cat and roll a check or it scratches you.'</p><p></p><p>That isn't what they <strong>asked</strong> of me. They <strong>'wanted'</strong> a <strong>quest </strong>with a <strong>dungeon</strong>. I gave them one.</p><p></p><p>If they said no to it. That would be like you going to a <strong>restaurant</strong>, <strong>ordering</strong> the chicken and rice, and when it gets there. "Ahh my agency to choose my dinner has been SULLIED!"</p><p></p><p></p><p>They had a chance to discover this knowledge multiple times, in multiple ways, legal and not. They had suspicion OOC and IC as to the motives of the noble <strong>from the start</strong>. Because they didn't know the exact consequences they refused to look into, doesn't mean they had no agency.</p><p></p><p>Again. <strong>Trapped hall metaphor</strong>.</p><p></p><p>Agency and automony. Thanks. That's an interesting contrast. Probably the word I've been searching for.</p><p></p><p> I think what some people are describing here with 'knowing/deciding the contents of the box before hand' are practicing complete character autonomy. The self-determination to decide their own fate/destiny.</p><p></p><p>Not very interesting outside of self indulgent fan-ficton. <em>In my <strong>opinion</strong>.</em></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ZebraDruid, post: 9065755, member: 7041885"] I think 'Ifs' are important, are they not? They do not interfere with agency. An easy example. You as a person have agency [I](I hope but ignore the deeper pondering)[/I] You can choose to drive somewhere, work, school, store etc. You can reasonably expect that on the way to that location you have a non 0 chance to have car trouble, or to get hit in traffic etc, you might get your vehicle/bike damaged. You might be killed, but you as a person are largely not in control of these outcomes. You may be able to act to mitigate these outcomes, by perceiving a threat and attempting to avoid it, but you are not in absolute authority to the outcome. Whether or not these outcomes were pre-determined to you as a person is unknown, but you feel you have agency all the same. Now suppose you were given omnipotent knowledge of the days outcomes, or perhaps even their chance, would that affect the way you proceed with the day, and would that remove something from the feeling of agency? Or would it feel more satisfying? Stay home - 1% chance of death Bike to work - 2% of breaking leg in accident. Drive to work - 6% chance of wreck Go jogging - 3% chance of death. Would this table help make you feel like your choice was more meaningful? What if you knew the outcomes 'for sure' ahead of time? Stay home - Nothing happens. Bike to work - Nothing happens. Drive to work - Car stalls and you run into a friend who helps. Go jogging - Find a quarter. Now you've established outcome, without risk. There are no 'ifs', so there can be no risk. And most of all there is no mystery. I somewhat agree with what you're saying. I appreciate the theoretical approach. But as from my above comment I don't think knowing the specific odds and outcomes at all times creates a more interesting experience. It leaves nothing to explore and discover, and instead one might feel like they're left with a series of doors to choose, instead of a room to explore. This I think brings up an interesting concept of DM approach, with the below quote. I think these are two fundamentally different approaches, that as a DM you need to recognize in your players. I don't believe either of these are 'wrong'. Are the characters actions and players empowerment more important than story telling and perhaps tactical gameplay? Then you might prefer to ignore story over player success. Do you wish to challenge your players, and engage them in a story that does not need to end in success, but the journey may be satisfying all the same? Then story and mechanics are probably more important than success. However, I [B]don't think agency[/B] is being [B]violated [/B]when a player does [B]not succeed.[/B] You're not wrong, my party loved my linear curated dungeon, and no one complained, even the bard who jumped into a death pit. I don't see how I can't have semi multi directional railroads in a sandbox that the party can choose to ride on or not though. My cleric said the same thing regarding serious RP. We went from a silly dungeon, to a serious one immediately, and we've talked about dialing it back a bit until people are more comfortable with these kinds of stories. I agree, I am capable of presenting spontaneous situations on the spot. A 'whose line is it anyway' approach is ehh... In my opinion more suited to drunken nights where people just wanna have fun with 1 off characters. There is [B]nothing wrong[/B] with that. The game is about fun after all. I just don't think it is very engaging, and I'm not so sure the mechanics/rolls even matter in that kind of environment. In that environment I think it would be much better to just roll a d20 to determine success, and let people laugh at the whimsy of chance. I think using my above point. This is more or less illustrates a game to be played and a story to be told. Where as random events are I think perhaps? more about empowerment? And less about actual details or challenge. [I]Oh you guys are all wounded with no spell slots left? Well there was a mini boss in the next room, but I guess they're asleep and there is a healing fountain nearby...[/I] [I]Thank you.[/I] I think getting too specific on the system bogs down the actual essence of discovering what is agency or not, because if agency is dependent on the game system, then agency is really an intangible and subjective thing. Are we as people exercising agency right now? It's too much if you get specific like that. I'm agnostic on the outcome of the story. I only want my players to be entertained, and engaged. They were both of those things. But at the same time a couple of them felt a bit cheated, and I want to recognize if that is a failing on my part, or a growning pain/misunderstanding as roleplayers/DM. As I've said, I'm far from perfect [I](why would I even ask advice then?) [/I] The thing is, the players explored story [B]'I had not preplanned'[/B]. It something they discovered. It's a bit like if they walked out into the forest and said "Is there a wolf den here?" And I responded...Ahh well yes there are wolves in the forest typically, so...ahh [I]Rolls 1d20, gets 15[/I] Yes there's a wolf den here. Oh, you ran in alone and were eaten by wolves? Well... Just as, they gave the body to a necromancer, and asked [B]"Can I watch the resurrection?"[/B] [B]"...Ahh well, yes technically you 'could'..."[/B] They weren't upset about their decision to see the ritual, only the outcome that they observed by doing so. In this case, the players had knowledge of a resurrection, and that it was going to happen. The details were left to be investigated. Right, yes. I did not tell him not to go in [B]OOC[/B], and in [B]OOC[/B] I asked if he 'wanted' to go in. He said he didn't (I still don't get it) The wizard did go in with the cleric, but only the cleric took part in the ritual, the wizard was just curious. This has been my [B]point[/B] about [B]agency[/B]. I couldn't[B] 'force'[/B] him to do the thing that would give him the[B] outcome he 'wanted'[/B]. I [B]didn't have[/B] the[B] power[/B] to give him the [B]good ending[/B]. Even though this is actually what I as a DM wanted to see. [I](Mostly because it was more interesting.)[/I] I don't think anyone decided the stakes, besides the paladin ratting, but I'm not sure that is the same as setting the outcome. The information on the entire story was available if they searched for it, but even partial information was given by doing the quest itself. Necomantic stuff was found in the crypt, at least tipping them off that something wasn't right about the family. At that point they had went to rob the house, but only for money, not information. (There was a study with papers, and another desk upstairs with more papers/journals/info on it) Yeah, pretty much what I said above, it's kind of a preference. Wait, so you're saying PC agency is separate from real life player agency? I don't understand. Then if I killed the cleric with a lightning bolt from Sarenrae for taking part in a ritual of Asmodeus when he stepped out the crypt...I'm only violating the agency of the imaginary character? I don't understand what you're talking about. So, if a player decided to wait outside the dungeon instead of going in, their agency would have been violated when inside the dungeon the rest of their party was trapped by some evil monster who succeeded in his plot? I guess I really should force my players to go into the 'boo!' haunted house next time so they can shoot arrows at the pop up bed sheet ghosts. It's Gygaxian at it's finest, creator of Tomb of Horrors. :rolleyes: Right, and they had the chance to find out more about the story through exploration/diplomacy/sneaking. Paying respect to the individual players skill sets and trying to give them all opportunities to be useful. I think that illustrates what someone said way earlier. [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] The quest is much like a dungeon. They can choose not to enter the dungeon, that's up to them. But saying they've lost agency because they enter the dungeon because it was presented is a bit of a reach. Remember I'm trying to entertain them. Not play Saturday night charades. They had 'fun' with what I prepared. If they choose not to go on the quest, then I'd probably let them separate or explore the town in some abstract fashion. I'm not a wizard. Your approach seems to suggest that I should prepare/offer nothing, and instead come to the session with a few abstract ideas that would probably amount to them walking the town and randomly 'getting mugged' and then 'a person is in distress' or a 'cat is lodged up a tree, but it's actually a baby dweomeor cat and roll a check or it scratches you.' That isn't what they [B]asked[/B] of me. They [B]'wanted'[/B] a [B]quest [/B]with a [B]dungeon[/B]. I gave them one. If they said no to it. That would be like you going to a [B]restaurant[/B], [B]ordering[/B] the chicken and rice, and when it gets there. "Ahh my agency to choose my dinner has been SULLIED!" They had a chance to discover this knowledge multiple times, in multiple ways, legal and not. They had suspicion OOC and IC as to the motives of the noble [B]from the start[/B]. Because they didn't know the exact consequences they refused to look into, doesn't mean they had no agency. Again. [B]Trapped hall metaphor[/B]. Agency and automony. Thanks. That's an interesting contrast. Probably the word I've been searching for. I think what some people are describing here with 'knowing/deciding the contents of the box before hand' are practicing complete character autonomy. The self-determination to decide their own fate/destiny. Not very interesting outside of self indulgent fan-ficton. [I]In my [B]opinion[/B].[/I] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Dealing with agency and retcon (in semi sandbox)
Top