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: 9115381" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>That it is "out in the open" in the first place is part and parcel of why it is tolerable</p><p></p><p></p><p>Do you then believe that perception dictates reality? That if you <em>believe</em> something to be true, that's all that matters?</p><p></p><p>Because that's literally, exactly what the issue is for me. I don't like being lied to. In fact, I absolutely despise it. If I find out that a video game really is <em>secretly</em> using false, dodgy math, I dislike that--a lot. I generally hold games to a lower standard than live persons, because (a) games are not moral agents, and (b) I understand that coding games is <em>very difficult</em> and thus allow some leeway for technical limitations that are not present when it's two humans discussing things with one another.</p><p></p><p>And yes, before you say anything, I DO actually look up some of this stuff. And if I find out a game is playing sillybuggers with its random number generation <em>and pretending that it is not doing so</em>, yeah, that tends to ruin my experience of that game.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You have the statistical data to back up this assertion, yes? Unless "a lot" is simply a squishy "some amount bigger than zero," at which point the claim adds nothing to the conversation.</p><p></p><p></p><p>It worked for you--but you cheated the players by doing so. Something so many illusionism-favoring DMs tell me, when I say that I dislike (random, irrevocable, permanent) death in my game, is that this must imply there are no stakes. But surely this illusionism you describe is far, far worse than that. You have <em>genuinely</em> removed all stakes--because the players <em>cannot fail</em> unless you feel like it. Whatever they think, whatever they do, turns out correct. You will ensure it. You will rewrite the world to suit them.</p><p></p><p>For effort to have meaning, it must be possible to fail. You have explicitly described illusionism used to prevent the possibility of failure. How is that not a serious blow to the validity of the method? Disappointment is one of the necessary parts of having a <em>genuinely</em> fulfilling experience--because if you can never guess wrong, then what value is there in guessing "right"?</p><p></p><p></p><p>It absolutely is passive and imagined. No player <em>created</em> anything here. They made a suggestion (without knowing, of course.) <em>You</em> decided, "hey, that idea is better than what I had. I will <em>rewrite the world</em> to make that idea true, and the players will never be able to find out that it wasn't true before, no matter what conflicts that might cause." It is purely passive, as they have no influence here. Only you do. You just happened to take a shine to what they said.</p><p></p><p>Like...this is the equivalent of a dictator saying that, because he heard someone complain about something on the street and thus said dictator passed laws addressing that problem, it was <em>really</em> the person on the street who exercised agency in dealing with the problem. No! Not in the slightest! It was, and would always be, the dictator doing so. The person on the street had <em>no</em> ability to influence what occurred. They simply (without knowing) provided a suggestion, which the dictator chose (agency!) to act upon.</p><p></p><p></p><p>And here I thought bending reality was the utterly unacceptable thing. Now it's part and parcel of illusionism!</p><p></p><p></p><p>These players do not, at any point, exercise agency. They exist in the GM's world. The GM just happens to include some of the things the players opine about as things which alter the contents of that world. It is, and will always be, the GM exercising influence and/or control over the fictional space.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9115381, member: 6790260"] That it is "out in the open" in the first place is part and parcel of why it is tolerable Do you then believe that perception dictates reality? That if you [I]believe[/I] something to be true, that's all that matters? Because that's literally, exactly what the issue is for me. I don't like being lied to. In fact, I absolutely despise it. If I find out that a video game really is [I]secretly[/I] using false, dodgy math, I dislike that--a lot. I generally hold games to a lower standard than live persons, because (a) games are not moral agents, and (b) I understand that coding games is [I]very difficult[/I] and thus allow some leeway for technical limitations that are not present when it's two humans discussing things with one another. And yes, before you say anything, I DO actually look up some of this stuff. And if I find out a game is playing sillybuggers with its random number generation [I]and pretending that it is not doing so[/I], yeah, that tends to ruin my experience of that game. You have the statistical data to back up this assertion, yes? Unless "a lot" is simply a squishy "some amount bigger than zero," at which point the claim adds nothing to the conversation. It worked for you--but you cheated the players by doing so. Something so many illusionism-favoring DMs tell me, when I say that I dislike (random, irrevocable, permanent) death in my game, is that this must imply there are no stakes. But surely this illusionism you describe is far, far worse than that. You have [I]genuinely[/I] removed all stakes--because the players [I]cannot fail[/I] unless you feel like it. Whatever they think, whatever they do, turns out correct. You will ensure it. You will rewrite the world to suit them. For effort to have meaning, it must be possible to fail. You have explicitly described illusionism used to prevent the possibility of failure. How is that not a serious blow to the validity of the method? Disappointment is one of the necessary parts of having a [I]genuinely[/I] fulfilling experience--because if you can never guess wrong, then what value is there in guessing "right"? It absolutely is passive and imagined. No player [I]created[/I] anything here. They made a suggestion (without knowing, of course.) [I]You[/I] decided, "hey, that idea is better than what I had. I will [I]rewrite the world[/I] to make that idea true, and the players will never be able to find out that it wasn't true before, no matter what conflicts that might cause." It is purely passive, as they have no influence here. Only you do. You just happened to take a shine to what they said. Like...this is the equivalent of a dictator saying that, because he heard someone complain about something on the street and thus said dictator passed laws addressing that problem, it was [I]really[/I] the person on the street who exercised agency in dealing with the problem. No! Not in the slightest! It was, and would always be, the dictator doing so. The person on the street had [I]no[/I] ability to influence what occurred. They simply (without knowing) provided a suggestion, which the dictator chose (agency!) to act upon. And here I thought bending reality was the utterly unacceptable thing. Now it's part and parcel of illusionism! These players do not, at any point, exercise agency. They exist in the GM's world. The GM just happens to include some of the things the players opine about as things which alter the contents of that world. It is, and will always be, the GM exercising influence and/or control over the fictional space. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is player agency to you?
Top