D&D General What is player agency to you?

[mamba]

Though this is my exact problem: Players will complain if the ONLY way to save the princess captured by pirates on an island, is to go to the island and rescue her.

what other option do they suggest? If they find a way to teleport her out of there without going there, sure, but other than that…

 

[hawkeyefan]

If there is a way to make the audience work (ie the noble is not dead, not far, far away and IS available for an audience) the DM really needs to examine why he's saying no.

That's the big thing. The DM needs to examine why he's saying no. What is the reason to do that? I think if we self-examine these moments rather than just rely on play assumptions from past experience, then maybe we can get to the actual issue.

Why does a DM decide to choose his prep or his sense of what makes sense or any other reason over the player's idea?

 

[mamba]

I'm saying the provided excuses are NOT good enough to override the feature. they're basically just the DM saying "No, I don't want you to..."

well, we disagree

Are there good enough reasons? Sure, the Noble is dead (though for a high enough level group this wouldn't be an obstacle) the noble is far, far away (again, little issue for a high level group) - or stuff of that nature - where a meeting is near physically impossible.

and how is ‘the noble is not around’ any less the DM just wanting to deny an audience? To me that is the laziest one

 

[TwoSix]

My point is that whatever reason it is, this is an example of the DM overriding the player's idea. Can you see how that impacts player agency?

Sure, but from a simulationist perspective, that's a worthwhile tradeoff to make in order to assert the reality of the setting trumps player need.

If you don't sometimes nix a player's idea because of the existence of pre-generated fiction states, you're not really pursuing a simulationist agenda.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What incentive does the player have to take the noble background if the DM can just disregard it's primary feature anytime they feel like it?

If there is a REAL reason such as the requested noble is dead then sure. Otherwise it's 9 out of 10 times just the DM blocking the feature arbitrarily.

Then I have to back to this advocating for the rules to trump the narrative.

 

[soviet]

Then I have to back to this advocating for the rules to trump the narrative.

The DM's narrative.

 

[mamba]

It seems that the DM's job appears to be finding a reason to work with the player's idea, or finding a way to shoot it down.

yes, one or the other Usually work with it, unless there is a good reason not to

 

[soviet]

Sure, but from a simulationist perspective, that's a worthwhile tradeoff to make in order to assert the reality of the setting trumps player need.

If you don't sometimes nix a player's idea because of the existence of pre-generated fiction states, you're not really pursuing a simulationist agenda.

I'm not sure anyone is saying that greater player agency is always better. To some extent it is a tradeoff with other things, for sure. It's about different agendas for play.

 

[Scott Christian]

If you feel better about an audience where you get insulted and all your requests denied, but at least your feature got you one, let me know. I do not really see a difference here, so can the DM then not deny requests either?

It's a sticky note question.

What if the player says they only want to hunt and kill CR 1/4 skeletons. That's it. They get to tenth level. No, only CR 1/4 skeletons. Then the DM changes one of the skeletons stat blocks. Did they just break that request?

You already have the answer, and despite what someone is willing to argue about, D&D is ultimately a game where the players need to trust the DM to make decisions. And if they can't even trust the DM to make a decision about granting an audience, then the table might already be broken.

But you know this, I am just reiterating for you.

 

[mamba]

That's the big thing. The DM needs to examine why he's saying no.

the DM already examined that and concluded he had a good reason

What is the reason to do that? I think if we self-examine these moments rather than just rely on play assumptions from past experience, then maybe we can get to the actual issue.

there is no actual issue, most of the time the answer ie ‘sure, you get an audience’, sometimes it is ‘sorry, no’, and the latter always with an in-world reason

Why does a DM decide to choose his prep or his sense of what makes sense or any other reason over the player's idea?

So if the DM grants the audience and then denies all the char’s requests, is that ok? How is that different from not granting an audience in the first place?