D&D General What is player agency to you?

[FrogReaver]

Why have the examples shifted from something reasonable that might actually come up - a noble seeking an audience - to players trying to jump over the moon or find eggs (?) in a lifeless demiplane?

To demonstrate that all games have a credibility test for player actions.

 

[soviet]

Personally I don’t think a player has to be playing in bad-faith to use an ability when the GM doesn’t think it makes sense.

Theres a few reasons for this
1. The player and GM simply disagree about whether it makes sense.
2. The player isnt privy to all the information the GM is and so makes a flawed determination.

I agree. It can be a legitimate outcome. But I think it shouldn't be very common.

 

[FrogReaver]

I agree. It can be a legitimate outcome. But I think it shouldn't be very common.

I agree! I also think most if not all here agree with us!

 

[FrogReaver]

It does seem like 'the logic of the game world' and such like is very often just an objective seeming gloss over 'how I want the game to go'

It can definitely be used to obfuscate that motive. I don’t think that’s all that common though.

 

[soviet]

I agree! I also think most if not all here agree with us!

But I don't think any of the reasons given for the Noble background not working would fall into that category, frex. Aside from the one where it's already established the Duke is somewhere else (even then I'd be looking for an audience with the deputy head of the household or some other stand-in).

 

[FrogReaver]

But I don't think any of the reasons given for the Noble background not working would fall into that category, frex. Aside from the one where it's already established the Duke is somewhere else (even then I'd be looking for an audience with the deputy head of the household or some other stand-in).

I thought most if not all were reasonable.

I think you have a good point about a stand-in for when the primary noble is away. That's definitely something I would allow, assuming I or the player thought of it in the moment. It definitely should be what happens IMO.

Did you agree with the City of Brass example?

 

[FrogReaver]

Who decided that the demiplane has no, and never had any, life at all?

Let's say the DM based on their prep.

If it's the player of the egg-finder, then why are they now declaring an action that contradicts their previous decision?

Presumably they don't know all those facts about this demiplane - his PC just got here.

But if - as I imagine you are taking for granted - it's the GM, then this is just another example of low player agency RPGing.

I say it's high player agency RPGing.

Why the heck should the DM take away the egg-finder player's agency to decide for his PC to go to a demiplane that has no, and never had any life?

 

[hawkeyefan]

Why have the examples shifted from something reasonable that might actually come up - a noble seeking an audience - to players trying to jump over the moon or find eggs (?) in a lifeless demiplane?

To show examples that shouldn’t work, in order to point out how it’s a bad idea to agree to any examples.

To demonstrate that all games have a credibility test for player actions.

Don’t the players have some responsibility here? The background features work in pretty specific circumstances. To stick with the noble example, I’d expect it to come up in a game either when nobles were introduced or otherwise previously established, or else the player to ask about the topic. “Are there any local nobles in this city?” Or something similar.

If there are nobles, then why wouldn’t it work? If there are no nobles, then why would anyone expect it to work?

And why is everyone automatically assuming that whatever the audience is for somehow solves a problem? All the ability does is say that they get the audience. It’s just an opportunity for something… it’s not guaranteed success or resolution.

 

[pemerton]

It does seem like 'the logic of the game world' and such like is very often just an objective seeming gloss over 'how I want the game to go'

I think that's a bit unfair.

It's a gloss over "how I imagine this imaginary situation developing". In other words, I think the relevant mental state is closer to belief than to desire.

 

[pemerton]

Why the heck should the DM take away the egg-finder player's agency to decide for his PC to go to a demiplane that has no, and never had any life?

I simply re-ask the question: who decided that the demiplane is lifeless - the GM, or the player?

And when the player chooses to have their PC go there, what do they know about it? I mean, if they know that it is lifeless, then why are they looking for eggs? If the PC has heard tales of it being lifeless, that of course is a different matter - maybe the epic egg-finder is going to prove those tales false!

EDIT: To speak as if the setting has an objective existence, such that the player chooses to have their PC go to <this place>, and then <this place> just happens to be devoid of life, is obscurantism. Someone decided to invent an imaginary, lifeless place. That person exercised agency over the fiction.