I also think the authorship vs exploration is flawed, because it rests on the concept of having total control over your character. You NEVER have total control over your character, even in the "default" trad way of playing D&D. You might find that some evil entity with magical power polymorphs your character into, say, a gorilla. That is not something that you had any control over; the only control is, what does your character do about that now? The answer is an exploration of character, at least according to any but a highly unusual definition of that phrase.
And this kind of stuff happens all of the time in D&D. You don't sit around thinking about your character in D&D, you are exposed to stimuli beyond your control, either from the DM, or sometimes from the other players. I don't understand how that is NOT exploring your character. Sure, it's not the same as using mechanics to explore your characters reactions with mechanical stimuli, but stimuli beyond your control is stimuli beyond your control.
Some players may not find certain types of stimuli fun to use, but to me that seems little different than saying something else about mechanics, like "I don't like Action Points" or "I don't like advantage/disadvantage" or something like that. It doesn't fundamentally change anything about what you're doing, just about how you're doing it.