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 LIVE! 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="clearstream" data-source="post: 9122766" data-attributes="member: 71699"><p><h2><span style="font-size: 18px">The Paradox of Player Agency</span></h2><p>First to (re)sketch out agency to save reviewing my earlier post</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 40px">“…a being has the capacity to exercise agency just in case it has the capacity to act intentionally, and the exercise of agency consists in the performance of intentional actions and, in many cases, in the performance of unintentional actions (that derive from the performance of intentional actions”</p> <p style="margin-left: 40px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 40px">“…to act for a reason [i.e. intentionally] is to act in a way that can be rationalized by the premises of a sound practical syllogism, which consists, typically, of a major premise that corresponds to the agent’s goal and a minor premise that corresponds to the agent’s take on how to attain the goal”</p><p></p><p>As Suits put it, to play a game is to accept “unnecessary obstacles”</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 40px">To describe rules as operating more or less permissively with respect to means seems to conform to the ways in which we invent or revise games. But it does not seem to make sense at all to say that in games there are always means available for attaining one's end over and above the means permitted by the rules. Consider chess. The end sought by chess players, it would seem, is to win, which involves getting chess pieces onto certain squares in accordance with the rules of chess. But since to break a rule is to fail to attain that end, what other means are available? It was for just this reason that our very first proposal about the nature. of games was rejected: using a golf club in order to play golf is not a less efficient, and therefore an alternative, means for seeking the end in question. It is a logically indispensable means.</p><p></p><p>To list then the normal goals of an agent when playing a game</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">To play the game</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">To achieve some game states</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">To follow or work within the defined processes</li> </ul><p>In most cases, overall, an agent has the goal of experiencing play of the game (including experiencing the processes.) They may have the goal of excelling in play of the game, and they might have extrinsic rewards (or penalties) riding on the result. The “paradox” alluded to in the title is that players obtain greatest agency to play a game by constructively surrendering agency. Some modes of TTRPG play introduce further goals</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">To change the game parameters, processes, or contents</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">To achieve some ideal game states</li> </ul><p>By "ideal", I mean to refer to forms translated into the game based upon external ideas of what its states ought to be like. For example, the ideal of driving a dramatic narrative arc, or genuine protagonist dilemmas. This has historically been the province of game designers, but increasingly sophisticated designers / players are blurring the boundaries of the magic circle: finding routes to exerting metagame agency that don’t “shatter the play-world itself” as Huizinga might have feared. It’s no surprise though to read reactions along the lines levelled at spoilsports, e.g. that they would step outside what has been predefined, to help themselves to outcomes.</p><p></p><p>Above I wrote that moment-to-moment agency is seen "<em>wherever <strong>player</strong> is turned to for the direction or outcome of play"</em>, but that cuts it too short. I should have said<em> wherever <strong>player</strong> is turned to for the contents, direction or outcome of play</em>. A statement roughly aligned with actor, author, director stance distinctions. Again, the paradox of agency is that it must be constructively surrendered, which I have dealt with in my earlier post by dividing agency focused upon moment-to-moment ("minor premise") influencing (such as toward creating a shared narrative) from agency focused upon the higher-order ("major premise") outcome (the experience of distinct game play). Thus I dissolve my "paradox" by saying that player agency is multi-faceted, and each facet needs its own treatment.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9122766, member: 71699"] [HEADING=1][SIZE=5]The Paradox of Player Agency[/SIZE][/HEADING] First to (re)sketch out agency to save reviewing my earlier post [INDENT=2]“…a being has the capacity to exercise agency just in case it has the capacity to act intentionally, and the exercise of agency consists in the performance of intentional actions and, in many cases, in the performance of unintentional actions (that derive from the performance of intentional actions”[/INDENT] [INDENT=2][/INDENT] [INDENT=2]“…to act for a reason [i.e. intentionally] is to act in a way that can be rationalized by the premises of a sound practical syllogism, which consists, typically, of a major premise that corresponds to the agent’s goal and a minor premise that corresponds to the agent’s take on how to attain the goal”[/INDENT] As Suits put it, to play a game is to accept “unnecessary obstacles” [INDENT=2]To describe rules as operating more or less permissively with respect to means seems to conform to the ways in which we invent or revise games. But it does not seem to make sense at all to say that in games there are always means available for attaining one's end over and above the means permitted by the rules. Consider chess. The end sought by chess players, it would seem, is to win, which involves getting chess pieces onto certain squares in accordance with the rules of chess. But since to break a rule is to fail to attain that end, what other means are available? It was for just this reason that our very first proposal about the nature. of games was rejected: using a golf club in order to play golf is not a less efficient, and therefore an alternative, means for seeking the end in question. It is a logically indispensable means.[/INDENT] To list then the normal goals of an agent when playing a game [LIST] [*]To play the game [*]To achieve some game states [*]To follow or work within the defined processes [/LIST] In most cases, overall, an agent has the goal of experiencing play of the game (including experiencing the processes.) They may have the goal of excelling in play of the game, and they might have extrinsic rewards (or penalties) riding on the result. The “paradox” alluded to in the title is that players obtain greatest agency to play a game by constructively surrendering agency. Some modes of TTRPG play introduce further goals [LIST] [*]To change the game parameters, processes, or contents [*]To achieve some ideal game states [/LIST] By "ideal", I mean to refer to forms translated into the game based upon external ideas of what its states ought to be like. For example, the ideal of driving a dramatic narrative arc, or genuine protagonist dilemmas. This has historically been the province of game designers, but increasingly sophisticated designers / players are blurring the boundaries of the magic circle: finding routes to exerting metagame agency that don’t “shatter the play-world itself” as Huizinga might have feared. It’s no surprise though to read reactions along the lines levelled at spoilsports, e.g. that they would step outside what has been predefined, to help themselves to outcomes. Above I wrote that moment-to-moment agency is seen "[I]wherever [B]player[/B] is turned to for the direction or outcome of play"[/I], but that cuts it too short. I should have said[I] wherever [B]player[/B] is turned to for the contents, direction or outcome of play[/I]. A statement roughly aligned with actor, author, director stance distinctions. Again, the paradox of agency is that it must be constructively surrendered, which I have dealt with in my earlier post by dividing agency focused upon moment-to-moment ("minor premise") influencing (such as toward creating a shared narrative) from agency focused upon the higher-order ("major premise") outcome (the experience of distinct game play). Thus I dissolve my "paradox" by saying that player agency is multi-faceted, and each facet needs its own treatment. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is player agency to you?
Top