D&D General What is player agency to you?

[pemerton]

@Raiztt

The poster that I quoted - @CreamCloud0 - used the phrase most reasonable.

@FrogReaver used a similar phrase upthread ("most plausible", I think).

@hawkeyefan, I, and other posters, have given examples of sufficient in-game explanations. There are endless such explanations for why the Pasha of the Efreet, or the King of Australia and his other Realms and Territories, would grant an audience to a Noble PC.

Here's another one for each: the Pasha had (or should we say received?) a dream, last night, that a mortal noble would come to the City of Brass and demand an audience. Intrigued by the dream, the Pasha now grants the audience.

MI6 have briefed the Prime Minister about possible reality rifts affecting Britain. The PM warned the King of this in his weekly briefing. The King, intrigued by the prospect of visitors from a place with less ugly urban architecture and lots of natural medicines, grants the visitors an audience.

 

[Raiztt]

@Raiztt

The poster that I quoted - @CreamCloud0 - used the phrase most reasonable.

@FrogReaver used a similar phrase upthread ("most plausible", I think).

@hawkeyefan, I, and other posters, have given examples of sufficient in-game explanations. There are endless such explanations for why the Pasha of the Efreet, or the King of Australia and his other Realms and Territories, would grant an audience to a Noble PC.

Here's another one for each: the Pasha had (or should we say received?) a dream, last night, that a mortal noble would come to the City of Brass and demand an audience. Intrigued by the dream, the Pasha now grants the audience.

MI6 have briefed the Prime Minister about possible reality rifts affecting Britain. The PM warned the King of this in his weekly briefing. The King, intrigued by the prospect of visitors from a place with less ugly urban architecture and lots of natural medicines, grants the visitors an audience.

Sure and I'm good with the DM shutting all that down if they want. What is even being debated here?? Whether the book or the DM is the ultimate authority/arbiter?

 

[Oofta]

I don't know what you are talking about as "working" or as a "concern".

I said that it's nonsense to assert that shared fiction in which player priorities loom large will lack verisimilitude: that is to say, would lack the sense of being true or real, or would burden suspension of disbelief. Are you disputing that?

Yes. If I were playing a noble and could get an audience with any noble anywhere no matter which plane of existence we were on, whether I'm dressed in rags, no matter how minor my title, that game would lack verisimilitude for me.

 

[pemerton]

Sure and I'm good with the DM shutting all that down if they want. What is even being debated here?? Whether the book or the DM is the ultimate authority/arbiter?

My point is that (1) the things that are said to be impossible to reconcile with verisimilitude are not, and (2) if a GM decides to imagine fiction which precludes such reconciliation, in order to "shut down" a player's action declaration, that is an example of low player agency RPGing.

 

[Vaalingrade]

When the poster says "reasonable", he doesn't mean reasonable to HIMSELF, he means reasonable as far as the NPC/world feature is concerned.

Whenever anyone ever says 'reasonable', they mean reasonable to them inherently.

 

[Oofta]

How can you not recognise that this has implications for the agency exercised by the players over the shared fiction?

We disagree. Getting whatever you want is not agency, if [edit] not [/edit] getting an audience with a noble as long as there are alternatives that are reasonably understood the player still has agency. Is it "less"? I don't think so but I also don't care. Other things are more important.

 

[pemerton]

Getting whatever you want is not agency

Having your decisions produce the outcome you desire from them is agency, however.

 

[Oofta]

The upshot of this is that, in your game, things like the Dreadnought hoax will never happen. Things like Aragorn persuading Eomer to lend him horses will never happen. Things like Faramir believing Frodo, and letting him keep the Ring, will never happen. Things like Jean Grey shooting herself in front of Scott will never happen.

Your fiction will be a succession of the most reasonable upon the most reasonable as imagined by one participant.

Has anybody ever said anything like that?

 

[Oofta]

Having your decisions produce the outcome you desire from them is agency, however.

Having options that are relatively clear and being able to choose between those options is agency. I don't care if you succeed or not.

 

[gban007]

I do always put my setting and world logic above the player's action declarations. I do that because it's the best way I know how to run the game, the game feels more "real" to me if I do this. For me, it makes for a better game and one that's more enjoyable in the long run. Besides, if I had let the noble get an audience with the giant noble the noble would have had them for lunch. Not invited them for lunch, but literally had them as an entrée for lunch.

I'm just trying to give feedback that it feels like you're pushing one true way whether you realize it or not, I'm not saying it's what you mean or that it's intentional.

I would say that if Hawkeyefan is pushing one true way intentionally or not, then the same is for yourself and Maxperson, around how all these options other people are presenting are 'not reasonable'. And so one true way is for it to only be 'reasonable'. I don't think this is your intent either, but I think both sides are pushing hard on their preferences, and both are coming across a bit one true way.