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
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is player agency to you?
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="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9071975" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>For me, as a player, I feel I have agency when:</p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">I get a chance to learn about the world (even if I don't take it),</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">I can attempt a reasonable action based on what I should already know and what I have just learned,</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">I experience consequences which follow from the choice itself and the rules/structures/mechanics, <strong><em><u>not</u></em></strong> from invisible intrusions,</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">I get a chance to factor those consequences into future choices.</li> </ol><p>Or, as I have said in more pithy (but jargon-y) terms before: Agency requires (a) meaningful, informed choices which (b) <em>directly</em> produce the consequences observed, and which then (c) can be factored back into <em>subsequent</em> meaningful, informed choices.</p><p></p><p>This is why I cannot stand any form of illusionism. Illusionism doesn't <em>just</em> disconnect choice from consequence. If that were it, I'd be annoyed at open GM metagaming, but I could tolerate it. I can't tolerate illusionism because it does so concealed, and is meant to be so <em>forever</em>. When that happens, I am no longer playing a game, which is why I play roleplaying <strong>games</strong>. I can get roleplay <em>without</em> game easily; I did years of near-freeform forum RP. Lose the game, and I see no reason to constrain myself to the limits of D&D. (Again, <em>both</em> are critical; I'm not neglecting the RP side, it's just not relevant to the thread IMO.)</p><p></p><p>With illusionism, I cannot learn about the world because there is nothing to learn; the world can and will change, <em>specifically</em> without any possibility of me knowing, and I cannot in any way attempt to get better at play as a result. I cannot know what a "reasonable action" should be, because from one breath to the next, reasonableness can mean completely different things and I will never be allowed to know that that changed. I cannot learn from the consequences (good or bad) of my actions, because in a very real sense there <em>aren't</em> any; I provide input, and then the <em>GM</em> makes choices which have consequences, and then I am given an output. My "choices" are merely set dressing for the GM's choices, which are where actual agency occurs--and the GM will act in whatever ways are necessary to prevent me from discovering this. </p><p></p><p>There are a lot of things GMs do that are invisible. That something is "behind the scenes" or never meant to be known by players is not, in and of itself, objectionable. (As an example, all of the devils in my <em>Jewel of the Desert</em> game, which evokes an Arabic/Arabian Nights style, are faux-Arabized versions of devils from Dante's <em>Inferno</em>.) Likewise, there are various forms of GM intrusion. Some of them are more acceptable than others; in general, the more the player is cognizant that these things occur and are a vital part of play, the better, though I would prefer diegetic solutions, which are essentially always possible. It is very specifically the problem of being both an intrusion <em>and</em> being not just invisible, but meant to be eternally so.</p><p></p><p>But! I quite well understand that, due to dice being <em>random</em> and mechanics being unfeeling, unthinking, unbending rules, it is possible for stuff to go wrong. I don't mean that in the sense of "the players' plans didn't work out," but rather in the sense of "one or more players is <em>genuinely</em> going to have a bad time or already having one." Such events should already be rare, because GMs should prepare for them and (for example) frame situations so as to forestall rolled consequences that are not worthy of the players' time. Being "rare" does not mean "nonexistent," however, so you still need <em>something</em> to address those rare times.</p><p></p><p>Fortunately, there is a solution: diegetic intrusion. Instead of making the intrusion totally invisible and blocking any and all attempts for players to learn that the intrusion occurred...embrace it! Let the players <em>know</em> that someone...or someTHING...has intruded to prevent a Bad Fate from occurring, or to power up a boss they obliterated before it even got its turn, or whatever else. It is, of course, ideal for GMs to already have some prepared answers for what this intrusion could be, but it's always <em>possible</em> to get caught with your pants down. In which case, it's a mystery even to you, and that is okay. The GM does not have to know everything all the time.</p><p></p><p>By having such diegetic intrusions, what would otherwise be an oopsie-boo-boo moment, covered up to preserve the illusion of GM perfection, will instead become a fresh new question to answer or even quest to undertake. Who or what empowered the Goblin Warlock-Lord when he <em>should</em> have fallen to the Barbarian's axe? Does the party have a benefactor that saved them from certain death, or a manipulator trying to trap them in a deal they can't refuse, or something else entirely? Etc. Unlike an invisible intrusion, which ends a particular play-sequence and replaces it with an invisible nothing, a diegetic intrusion creates <em>new</em> play.</p><p></p><p>I have yet to see even a single example of a problem solved by illusionism that cannot be solved just as well, with better side-effects, with this method instead. Hence, I oppose any and all forms of illusionism, and I absolutely think GMs <em>should</em> avoid it.</p><p></p><p>Players are a separate subject I will touch on in a different post. Because being a good player is just as important as being a good GM!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9071975, member: 6790260"] For me, as a player, I feel I have agency when: [LIST=1] [*]I get a chance to learn about the world (even if I don't take it), [*]I can attempt a reasonable action based on what I should already know and what I have just learned, [*]I experience consequences which follow from the choice itself and the rules/structures/mechanics, [B][I][U]not[/U][/I][/B] from invisible intrusions, [*]I get a chance to factor those consequences into future choices. [/LIST] Or, as I have said in more pithy (but jargon-y) terms before: Agency requires (a) meaningful, informed choices which (b) [I]directly[/I] produce the consequences observed, and which then (c) can be factored back into [I]subsequent[/I] meaningful, informed choices. This is why I cannot stand any form of illusionism. Illusionism doesn't [I]just[/I] disconnect choice from consequence. If that were it, I'd be annoyed at open GM metagaming, but I could tolerate it. I can't tolerate illusionism because it does so concealed, and is meant to be so [I]forever[/I]. When that happens, I am no longer playing a game, which is why I play roleplaying [B]games[/B]. I can get roleplay [I]without[/I] game easily; I did years of near-freeform forum RP. Lose the game, and I see no reason to constrain myself to the limits of D&D. (Again, [I]both[/I] are critical; I'm not neglecting the RP side, it's just not relevant to the thread IMO.) With illusionism, I cannot learn about the world because there is nothing to learn; the world can and will change, [I]specifically[/I] without any possibility of me knowing, and I cannot in any way attempt to get better at play as a result. I cannot know what a "reasonable action" should be, because from one breath to the next, reasonableness can mean completely different things and I will never be allowed to know that that changed. I cannot learn from the consequences (good or bad) of my actions, because in a very real sense there [I]aren't[/I] any; I provide input, and then the [I]GM[/I] makes choices which have consequences, and then I am given an output. My "choices" are merely set dressing for the GM's choices, which are where actual agency occurs--and the GM will act in whatever ways are necessary to prevent me from discovering this. There are a lot of things GMs do that are invisible. That something is "behind the scenes" or never meant to be known by players is not, in and of itself, objectionable. (As an example, all of the devils in my [I]Jewel of the Desert[/I] game, which evokes an Arabic/Arabian Nights style, are faux-Arabized versions of devils from Dante's [I]Inferno[/I].) Likewise, there are various forms of GM intrusion. Some of them are more acceptable than others; in general, the more the player is cognizant that these things occur and are a vital part of play, the better, though I would prefer diegetic solutions, which are essentially always possible. It is very specifically the problem of being both an intrusion [I]and[/I] being not just invisible, but meant to be eternally so. But! I quite well understand that, due to dice being [I]random[/I] and mechanics being unfeeling, unthinking, unbending rules, it is possible for stuff to go wrong. I don't mean that in the sense of "the players' plans didn't work out," but rather in the sense of "one or more players is [I]genuinely[/I] going to have a bad time or already having one." Such events should already be rare, because GMs should prepare for them and (for example) frame situations so as to forestall rolled consequences that are not worthy of the players' time. Being "rare" does not mean "nonexistent," however, so you still need [I]something[/I] to address those rare times. Fortunately, there is a solution: diegetic intrusion. Instead of making the intrusion totally invisible and blocking any and all attempts for players to learn that the intrusion occurred...embrace it! Let the players [I]know[/I] that someone...or someTHING...has intruded to prevent a Bad Fate from occurring, or to power up a boss they obliterated before it even got its turn, or whatever else. It is, of course, ideal for GMs to already have some prepared answers for what this intrusion could be, but it's always [I]possible[/I] to get caught with your pants down. In which case, it's a mystery even to you, and that is okay. The GM does not have to know everything all the time. By having such diegetic intrusions, what would otherwise be an oopsie-boo-boo moment, covered up to preserve the illusion of GM perfection, will instead become a fresh new question to answer or even quest to undertake. Who or what empowered the Goblin Warlock-Lord when he [I]should[/I] have fallen to the Barbarian's axe? Does the party have a benefactor that saved them from certain death, or a manipulator trying to trap them in a deal they can't refuse, or something else entirely? Etc. Unlike an invisible intrusion, which ends a particular play-sequence and replaces it with an invisible nothing, a diegetic intrusion creates [I]new[/I] play. I have yet to see even a single example of a problem solved by illusionism that cannot be solved just as well, with better side-effects, with this method instead. Hence, I oppose any and all forms of illusionism, and I absolutely think GMs [I]should[/I] avoid it. Players are a separate subject I will touch on in a different post. Because being a good player is just as important as being a good GM! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is player agency to you?
Top