D&D General What is player agency to you?

[TwoSix]

To answer the first question: HeroWars. Also, I would say, 4e D&D played with the default setting as presented in the PHB and MM. Also, the LotR/MERPish RPGing I've done using Cortex+ Heroic.

This doesn't entail the second question, because in "narrativist" RPGing based around heavy setting prep, the players are in on the setting prep. So they won't declare actions that contradict the setting.

Sorry, I was saying "setting prep" more in the lines of "secret notes" about the setting, like information about the yearly travels of the Duke or the disposition of the local innkeeper, things in that line.

For sure, plenty of narrative games have heavily prescribed settings, like Duskvol for BitD.

 

[pemerton]

Sorry, I was saying "setting prep" more in the lines of "secret notes" about the setting, like information about the yearly travels of the Duke or the disposition of the local innkeeper, things in that line.

Many of these discussions proceed from some posters (not necessarily you!) treating certain techniques as exhaustive of the range of possible techniques.

So eg setting gets treated as synonymous with setting that is known only to the GM and parcelled out to the players in little drops of info packets. And living setting gets treated as synonymous with only the GM gets to add new information about the setting.

I play games with rich settings. And with living settings. They just don't give the GM the sole power in respect of the setting.

A technical underpinning of this is moving beyond map-and-key framing and resolution; and moving beyond the-aim-of-the-game-is-to-unravel-the-mystery/puzzle/setting.

 

[Mort]

They have a criminal contact. Singular. They don't have criminal contacts wherever they go. I would also say that the NPC criminal contact, even if you can get a message to them, may not be able to help you out if you're in a different locale.

A criminal contact who acts as your liaison to a network of other criminals. So they should be able to get word to someone closer to you and see about aid or whatever. Or they could provide you with a name and you go from there. It's not a wish spell but it could easily benefit the party.

I have no idea why you're so adamant about this feature always being useful. Just like my scholar in Ravenloft that has no access to libraries, sometimes background features simply don't apply. Feel free to run it differently.

I'm not adamant about it ALWAYS being useful, I'm adamant that the feature should be given a fair shake TO be useful.

And as for your sage in Ravenloft? Ravenloft is filled to the brim with hidden knowledge, there are very, very significant historical facts that can REALLY aid the party. Even knowing where to get the information (what the feature allows for) without being able to get there (at least easily) can be a big benefit in Ravenloft where information like that is scarce.

 

[Oofta]

A criminal contact who acts as your liaison to a network of other criminals. So they should be able to get word to someone closer to you and see about aid or whatever. Or they could provide you with a name and you go from there. It's not a wish spell but it could easily benefit the party.



I'm not adamant about it ALWAYS being useful, I'm adamant that the feature should be given a fair shake TO be useful.

And as for your sage in Ravenloft? Ravenloft is filled to the brim with hidden knowledge, there are very, very significant historical facts that can REALLY aid the party. Even knowing where to get the information (what the feature allows for) without being able to get there (at least easily) can be a big benefit in Ravenloft where information like that is scarce.

We disagree on how these things work. Have a good one.

 

[Oofta]

Once again we see that (i) everything you do is the same as what I do, yet (ii) every proposition about GMing techniques that I put forward, you disagree with.

It continues to be a puzzling puzzle!

What I find a puzzling puzzle is that I'm not the only one pointing out that 4E is not some special unicorn edition when it comes to player specific quests, but you feel compelled to call me out on it. Puzzling indeed.

 

[pemerton]

What I find a puzzling puzzle is that I'm not the only one pointing out that 4E is not some special unicorn edition when it comes to player specific quests, but you feel compelled to call me out on it. Puzzling indeed.

I've replied to others also.

But you do seem especially determined to insist that there is no difference between how you approach GMing and how someone with whom you disagree in just about every reply to them approaches GMing.

 

[soviet]

Sorry, I was saying "setting prep" more in the lines of "secret notes" about the setting, like information about the yearly travels of the Duke or the disposition of the local innkeeper, things in that line.

For sure, plenty of narrative games have heavily prescribed settings, like Duskvol for BitD.

Personally I have detailed setting prep but it's about NPC agendas, traits, allegiances, stuff like that. It's not along the lines of 'this NPC would NEVER do :whatever:' or 'attempts to do X will always fail'. My notes don't trump the rules. My notes might affect the difficulty of the roll being attempted, or the possible outcomes that might ensue, but never in a way that negates player agency. I always try very hard to find at least some way to roll with what the player is doing.

 

[soviet]

The analogy I would make is the old 4e argument about 'can you trip a gelatinous cube?'.

A sim kind of approach is to say that no, what the rules literally say isn't plausible, my vision of the game world is my priority here, I will veto the rules. So, your power doesn't work and the cube is unaffected.

A more narrativist or agency-supporting approach is to say OK, what the rules literally say isn't plausible, supporting player agency is my priority here, I will seek an interpretation of that rules effect that makes sense in the gameworld. So, your power does work, but instead of actually being tripped over we will say that you slam it into the wall with a similar temporarily disabling effect.

I think this maps exactly to the Noble discussion.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think the second quote here answers the first: it asserts that a fundamental premise of D&D is players-explore-the-GM's-world.

I've posted rules text from 4e D&D that contradicts that "fundamental premise"; and together with others have posted rules text from 5e D&D - the Noble background feature - that contradicts that "fundamental premise" - but there are posters in this thread who downplay or dismiss the 4e text, and read caveats and exception into the 5e text, so as to uphold the "fundamental premise".

To be fair, one edition of the game and scattered bits from the next one is not much compared to all the rest of D&D. I wouldn't say "fundamental premise", but D&D is more that way than yours, and I see no reason to insist on the exception.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The analogy I would make is the old 4e argument about 'can you trip a gelatinous cube?'.

A sim kind of approach is to say that no, what the rules literally say isn't plausible, my vision of the game world is my priority here, I will veto the rules. So, your power doesn't work and the cube is unaffected.

A more narrativist or agency-supporting approach is to say OK, what the rules literally say isn't plausible, supporting player agency is my priority here, I will seek an interpretation of that rules effect that makes sense in the gameworld. So, your power does work, but instead of actually being tripped over we will say that you slam it into the wall with a similar temporarily disabling effect.

I think this maps exactly to the Noble discussion.

That exact question (and others like it) drove me nuts when I ran 4e, and led directly to my abandoning the system.