A Question Of Agency?

[pemerton]

The problem is that the most popular game isn’t presented any particular way. It’s a whole lot of “here’s some ideas but do what’s best for your table”

Which edition are you talking about? AD&D (either edition) is definitely presented in a particular way (different for each edition; I've just quoted some of the key bits of the 1st ed presentation).

4e is presented a particular way: between about 2008 and about 2011 (? or thereabouts) there were endless threads in which those who didn't like that presentation complained about it.

I can't comment on 5e beyond the Basic PDF and SRD. My own view is that these are slightly incoherent in their presentation, because the basic play loop and also the section on ability/skill checks suggests one approach to deploying the action resolution mechanics, whereas there are other lengthy sections - the class descriptions, the spell descriptions, the combat rules, the exploration rules - which suggest a different approach.

EDIT: As I read on, I've seen @Campbell and @hawkeyefan making posts that are relevant to this - strong GM control over plot and a focus on players as providing characterisation helps obviate the incoherencies I've pointed to, because when the game is played in that fashion then the resolution mechanics don't need to bear the sort of weight that would make these incoherencies really stand out.

Conversely, I can say that in running Classic Traveller without GM-driven plot some of the weaknesses in its resolution framework (as I've often posted, the onworld exploration rules being the most egregious) very clearly come to the fore.

 

[pemerton]

I have problems as a player with using memories and recollections to change the fiction (such as putting a Contact in town, or placing a landmark nearby) if and when they raise questions along the lines of "Why didn't we go to the Contact sooner?" or "If the landmark is so close, and so tied to our goals, why didn't we go there instead of here?" Plausibly this connects to my preferences for a more GM-authored world, though it at least feels as though it's looking at that preference from a different direction.

But do you think this comes up very often (at all?) in systems that use these mechanics?

 

[Lanefan]

Secondly characters are entirely too specialized in 5e. Outside the confines of a group characters are not very capable of making their way through their environments.

I see that as a feature rather than a bug, in that it promotes group interdependence and discourages one-man bands.

It's the same line of thinking that leads me to rather harshly penalize multi-classing in my own game and not be a fan of it in other games/systems. By this I mean if it's there, if there's an advantage to be had I'll use it; but I'd be happier if it wasn't there as an option.

 

[pemerton]

Memories might be internal to the character but the things that the memories are about are not. Please stop this obfuscation.

Moving the muscles of one's sword arm might be internal to the character, but the sword is not, its failure to shatter or be blown away by a strong wind gust is not, the Orc is not, the Orc's failure to parry is not, etc.

All declared actions implicate phenomena that are external to the PC.

 

[pemerton]

I actually have the opposite opinion of PF2. It's terrible at adventure paths. It's pretty strong at providing a skilled play environment and it's more broadly capable characters can excel in games that drift more towards active protagonism. It's not good for GM plots in my opinion even if it's what they have been trying to sell.

Sounds a little bit like MHRP!

 

[Lanefan]

If you encountered someone who [...] had never played TTRPGs [...] and you had to make a firm delineation where Character is an exclusive Medium/Vector for agency (capable of sufficiently separate from Situation and Setting to warrant its own classification)...what would you say to them?

I'd say we're both severely overthinking it, pour us both a beer, and get on with rolling up the player's first character.

 

[pemerton]

What, how, why? What would you need to moor them?

Memories? Relationships? All the things you're objecting to in a RPG?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Moving the muscles of one's sword arm might be internal to the character, but the sword is not, its failure to shatter or be blown away by a strong wind gust is not, the Orc is not, the Orc's failure to parry is not, etc.

All declared actions implicate phenomena that are external to the PC.

The causal relationship is completely differnt.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Memories? Relationships? All the things you're objecting to in a RPG?

I am not objecting either.

 

[FrogReaver]

The causal relationship is completely differnt.

Yep. Additionally "One doesn't go, we are in some random location trying to cross this river so I am going to look for one of my friends because doing so will let me have a chance encounter here and get some help".

The result of the "looking for your friends" action in the fiction just doesn't follow as something that would occur in the fiction due to your character "looking for your friends".