D&D General What is player agency to you?

[pemerton]

I'm not sure how any of that makes the introduction of the item not be player fiat. - Actually the last part if true maybe, but it certainly wasn't established in the example (not sure if it was in the actual play). And I think the Beliefs would have to be far more specific about the item in question than just conflict with the brother in general.

I don't know how much familiarity you have with Burning Wheel, either via reading or play.

Suppose that the player, at the start of the session, wrote a Belief for his PC: "I will recover the Falcon's Claw from my old tower." (And for all that I can recall, maybe that's what happened.)

That will affect what sorts of actions and roleplay earn Artha. It doesn't make any difference to the basic proposition that (i) it is the player who is making discovery of the Falcon's Claw a possible element of play, and (ii) the canonical procedure for resolving that possibility is a test on Scavenging.

 

[JAMUMU]

A quest is just a general goal. That's it. A player stating they want to find their father's killer and bring them to justice. It's not the player dictating anything of any particular importance. Same with wishlists. It's still a wish list. 4E was far more magic item dependent, but a DM asking players what items they want to get is hardly new.

Neither is not a radical idea, nor do they transform or really affect the game in any appreciable way. I just don't see how to do with player agency. I simply think you're simply making them out to be a bigger deal than they are, these concepts have always existed and continue to exist in D&D.

A quest is not just a general goal, not in fantasy fiction. It's either an achievable goal (no matter how unachievable the individual links in the chain may seem), or it's a quest without end, a wild-goose-chase. The player wants to find their parent's killer. The GM decides a) this is achievable or b) this is not achievable. The agency occurs in the space between, the space the referee MUST articulate. If I want to avenge my father's death, and the referee lets me think it's achievable, but actually it isn't and the referee leads you up the garden path for session after session, month after month? I'm slashing your tyres and possibly slashing the referee. Then i'm phoning your agency and getting you fired.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Nobody in the City of Brass is going to care about some meaningless title. There's just no logical reason for it to work and I don't do stuff just because of a single sentence taken out of context of the rest of the descriptive text.

Nobody, really? You can't think of one reason why someone in the City of Brass might take an interest in a noble from some backwater prime requesting an audience?

I mean... no one in the City of Brass is simply curious? None of them could be bored and play along with malicious intent? None could be bound by some ancient pact to honor such requests? None could possibly recognize that a group of mortals who managed to make their way to the City of Brass may be far from typical, and may be worth investigating a bit?

Not one of them has ever had need for a party of adventurers? Whoever heard of such a thing?!?

The most common reason I say no is the player(s) have a weak, half idea that would only work in a very dumb cartoon or such fiction.
Second is when the players put no effort or work into an idea. They just say "whatever" and want a Win Button.
Third is when the player makes a wild crazy assumption about something in the game world AND they want to game world reality altered to whatever they just said on a whim.
Fourth is when the player makes something they want to happen/not happen a "One Way" sort of thing...more 'bending reality' here.
Fifth is when the clueless player makes a clueless plan that simply will not work ever.

I mean, your players sound like they don't get any encouragement, do they?

I mean, if I was always getting shot down with any idea I came up with, and forced along the railroad, I'm gonna give up coming up with any ideas.

Maybe it's you who should change?

 

[pemerton]

I would argue in a D&D game, where the player's PC knows the castle, the DM would simply give them a map of the castle - secret doors and all. So it wouldn't be making up a secret door, it would be: "Look everyone, I know where the secret door is." If the secret door was not on the map, the player could ask if there were any not on the map, thus planting the seed in the DM's mind. They may say yes and draw them in, or they may say no. It seems cool, so many DMs might go along with it. Others might have a very specific reason why they are not there, like the antagonist sealed them up because they don't want people who know about it to take advantage of it. And another DM might have already put them on the map, but trapped the hell out of them because that's what the antagonist would do if they knew about them. But in the end, it all boils down to the DM.

This is one way of playing D&D. It's not the only one. I can tell you flat-out it's not exhaustive of what can be done playing 4e D&D, using the rules for that system as presented in its rulebooks.

 

[mamba]

I don't see how the DM denying any player-initiated action can be anything but a removal of player agency. It's a given, no?

no, the player took the action, they just did not get the desired outcome.

If you attack an orc and miss, is that denying agency?
If you get the audience but all your proposals and requests are denied, is that denying agency? Is that denying less agency than not having the audience in the first place?

The player has the right to an attempt, not to a guaranteed outcome.

Okay, then you should be comfortable saying that setting fidelity and/or DM prep is more important than player agency. I don't see how you can read your comment any other way.

I am not aware that I need to read my comment in another way

I’d say the setting’s internal logic trumps a player’s wish to insist on something happening.

 

[JAMUMU]

no, the player took the action, they just did not get the desired outcome.

If you attack an orc and miss, is that denying agency?
If you get the audience but all your proposals and requests are denied, is that denying agency? Is that denying less agency than not having the audience in the first place?

The player has the right to an attempt, not to a guaranteed outcome.

None of those examples deny player agency.

If there's nothing, no how, nuh uh, no way the players can influence a situation? Attempt after attempt? Idea after idea?

That's a denial of player agency.

If the players want to achieve A and the referee sets their heart against the players ever achieving A? No matter the means?

That's denying player agency.

 

[Oofta]

Nobody, really? You can't think of one reason why someone in the City of Brass might take an interest in a noble from some backwater prime requesting an audience?

I mean... no one in the City of Brass is simply curious? None of them could be bored and play along with malicious intent? None could be bound by some ancient pact to honor such requests? None could possibly recognize that a group of mortals who managed to make their way to the City of Brass may be far from typical, and may be worth investigating a bit?

Not one of them has ever had need for a party of adventurers? Whoever heard of such a thing?!?



I mean, your players sound like they don't get any encouragement, do they?

I mean, if I was always getting shot down with any idea I came up with, and forced along the railroad, I'm gonna give up coming up with any ideas.

Maybe it's you who should change?

D&D is not a narrative game. The DM is not forced to change their concept of the world, how the powers that be function, what kind of hierarchy exists.

If that means I'm not the DM for you, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

 

[mamba]

Have you read the rulebook? Have you played Burning Wheel? It's not mysterious. It's one of the most clearly-written RPG rulebooks that I know.

no to either, I was going by the text you quoted

I don't know what you mean by "forgot to mention", or what that has to do with anything.

forgot to mention in his background

And yes, he was one roll away from having his PC find it. What's the problem?

no problem, if you like that type of play, knock yourself out

 

[Mort]

no, the player took the action, they just did not get the desired outcome.

If you attack an orc and miss, is that denying agency?
If you get the audience but all your proposals and requests are denied, is that denying agency? Is that denying less agency than not having the audience in the first place?

The player has the right to an attempt, not to a guaranteed outcome.


I am not aware that I need to read my comment in another way

I’d say the setting’s internal logic trumps a player’s wish to insist on something happening.

Let's say you tell the group it will take them 10 minutes to get to point x in the city. But you forgot that one of them is an urchin.

The player reminds you his pc has the urchin background. Do you, having already determined that 10 minutes is the shortest time (because you made the map), say nope, sorry - 10 minutes?

 

[JAMUMU]

D&D is not a narrative game. The DM is not forced to change their concept of the world, how the powers that be function, what kind of hierarchy exists.

If that means I'm not the DM for you, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

This is what it comes down to. No shade. Some DMs run the worlds that exist in their heads, and the players are visitors in that world, and if they don't grok the rules then EFFEM!

Nothing wrong with that.