D&D General What is player agency to you?

[Maxperson]

Combine it with their next sentence.

There is no misunderstanding. This DM does what HE wants to do regardless of what the players want.

It's written poorly, but what that sentence is saying is this.

1. The players describe in vague terms something they want to encounter. For example, we want to encounter bad guys who kidnap someone.
2. The DM creates the encounter, but has to be specific about it, so he chooses dopplegangers kidnapping the the miller's daughter for ransom.
3. Because the DM and players are different people with different ideas, there's no way that the DM will come up with what the players are envisioning, so it's guaranteed to be different.

It's not that he's trying to do the opposite or not give them what they want. It's that he can't because they were vague, so @mamba is correct when he says it's a misunderstanding.

 

[Mort]

It's written poorly, but what that sentence is saying is this.

1. The players describe in vague terms something they want to encounter. For example, we want to encounter bad guys who kidnap someone.
2. The DM creates the encounter, but has to be specific about it, so he chooses dopplegangers kidnapping the the miller's daughter for ransom.
3. Because the DM and players are different people with different ideas, there's no way that the DM will come up with what the players are envisioning, so it's guaranteed to be different.

It's not that he's trying to do the opposite or not give them what they want. It's that he can't because they were vague, so @mamba is correct when he says it's a misunderstanding.

I'm also taking what was said in the context of everything else the OP posted. In this thread and others. For example they specifically said they don't like to do the talk to the players thing - so the easiest way to remedy any misunderstanding - to talk to the players for clarification - is out. And at that point it really does become do what the DM wants regardless of the players' input.

Note, I'm talking about the specific here. As in issues clearly presented in the OPs game. Not some general game where misunderstandings etc. Can be ironed out

 

[Maxperson]

I'm also taking what was said in the context of everything else the OP posted. In this thread and others. For example they specifically said they don't like to do the talk to the players thing - so the easiest way to remedy any misunderstanding - to talk to the players for clarification - is out. And at that point it really does become do what the DM wants regardless of the players' input.

Note, I'm talking about the specific here. As in issues clearly presented in the OPs game. Not some general game where misunderstandings etc. Can be ironed out

Oh, I agree that such a situation isn't likely to turn out well for the players as far as follow-up communication and getting fixed, but that in instance he wasn't saying what you think he was saying.

 

[Mort]

Oh, I agree that such a situation isn't likely to turn out well for the players as far as follow-up communication and getting fixed, but that in instance he wasn't saying what you think he was saying.

I think I got it.

He was doing his typical players are garbage at telling me what they want and I think differently then they do so it's not my fault I don't give them what they want bit.

Yes that's not exactly substituting what he wants for what the players are asking - but it effectively becomes that if you don't actually listen to the players and/or constantly interpret what they are saying through a lense where it conveniently becomes what you wanted anyway

 

[hawkeyefan]

A lot of people don't use 5e BIFTS, so claiming that DW bonds are just as easy isn't really a selling point.

Don’t you think that says a lot about the focus of 5e vs. the focus of a game like Dungeon World?

In 5e, the BIFTs are little more than a tacked on afterthought, ignored entirely by a seemingly significant portion of the playing pool. At best, they’re suggestions to encourage and reward roleplaying, but aren’t required, and certainly don’t make things difficult for the player unless they choose to allow them to.

In Dungeon World and its derivative Stonetop, they’re essential to play. Your XP is dependent upon them, and your bonds help the GM with what to use in play. I’m more familiar with Stonetop myself, and the entirety of the game revolves around fighting for the people you care about.

Modules need to do that, though. They can't assume that DMs, especially new DMs, will be able to improvise a greatly altered trajectory. Experienced DMs will often just roll with it and things change.

You can't really use official modules with need to be designed to be useful to as many different kinds of DMs as possible as how people run private games.

But the published modules are the primary teaching tool for DMs. The primary example of what play should be like. So I think you have to consider them in this type of discussion because they’ve undoubtedly had an impact on most DMs, in one way or another. Obviously, that impact will vary across time and editions, but it is significant, no matter what.

Also, published modules don’t need to follow the 5e format. Look at older editions before the Adventure Path model really took hold (though, as the G-D series shows, it was always kind of present). Look outside of 5e. Two games I enjoy that are pretty far apart as far as style, Mothership and Spire (the first is very traditional and the second very narrative) both have fantastic published scenarios.

Mothership offers a few different types of adventures from a sandbox space station to a haunted factory that serves as a mega-dungeon. Spire has three published scenarios that all involve investigative shenanigans that are little more than a beginning scenario and the related factions and NPCs.

There’s no need for WotC to produce the large Adventure Path style books except that they appear to be successful. They also cost significantly more; Mothership scenarios are about $15-$20 in print, and less in pdf, Spire offers all their campaign frames free in PDF and $10 for print.

And their success means that their primacy as examples will continue. Especially given how easily 5e players and DMs seem to dismiss anything outside of 5e.

Oh, I agree that such a situation isn't likely to turn out well for the players as far as follow-up communication and getting fixed, but that in instance he wasn't saying what you think he was saying.

Except he went on to point out it wasn’t a misunderstanding at all. “Not even remotely”, I believe were the words used.

 

[mamba]

But the published modules are the primary teaching tool for DMs. The primary example of what play should be like. So I think you have to consider them in this type of discussion because they’ve undoubtedly had an impact on most DMs, in one way or another.

Genuine question, do Dungeon World, Burning Wheel etc. have published adventures, that sounds pretty antithetical to the whole genre.

 

[Old Fezziwig]

Genuine question, do Dungeon World, Burning Wheel etc. have published adventures, that sounds pretty antithetical to the whole genre.

Burning Wheel has three scenarios in the Adventure Burner, but most of that book is really advice on how to run BW. Of the scenarios, I've run and played in "The Sword," which is more of a convention demo than anything else. I've never played or run "Trouble in Hochen" or "Thelon's Rift," but I know there's at least some fondness for the former in the community.

Torchbearer definitely has adventures, but given that it's BWHQ's riff on Moldvay D&D, that's probably not surprising. I've run "Under the House of Three Squires" from the 1e book, and we had some fun with it in my group. I'm only familiar with a few others. Sean Nittner's Stone Dragon Mountain can be run as a campaign, for instance, but my game fizzled out before I could run it in part or whole.

I can't speak to Dungeon World. I don't think it does, but I came to it pretty late and have never been very plugged into it.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Genuine question, do Dungeon World, Burning Wheel etc. have published adventures, that sounds pretty antithetical to the whole genre.

Yeah, @Citizen Mane provided a good summary. Some games do have published scenarios. Many do not (though I imagine we can find third party examples).

Blades in the Dark, for example, has some sample scores available for free on their website, but those are pretty barebones. The Spire scenarios I mentioned are called Campaign Frames, and are more of a general campaign concept… a central target/enemy/mystery for the players to deal with, and suggestions about how the city’s factions may respond to different types of actions.

Most that I’ve seen are very loose, and often don’t present any kind of chapter sequence. Like “once that is done, then this happens” and so on. They just present a starting situation and some related NPCs along with motivations, and then suggestions about how they respond and behave.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

There is no problem with the person saying it and finding for themselves a game in a safe space. It just will not be my game.

Because that is not what it is about. It's that Slippery Slope. You think it's easy as you simply won't mention three things that you would never mention anyway...and the game moves on and everyone is happy.

But if the person is on your side, and both of you think nearly exactly the same things and agree on most things in general. And this won't always be the case. A person like myself won't think or agree with such a person on most things: this triggers the person to be "on edge" to try and ruin the game in "revenge". So to ovoid that, I will simply tell the person they can't play in my game.

Though....on the other hand.....if you do Want a "Politically Incorrect" game, I'm down with that.

You do realize that slippery slope is a fallacy, right?

That making a slippery slope argument is a flaw in your reasoning and a perfectly legitimate reason for rejecting any conclusions you draw from it? (So long as one does not commit the fallacy fallacy by doing so, of course.)

You literally just labeled your own argument with the very reason why I should ignore it.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Genuine question, do Dungeon World, Burning Wheel etc. have published adventures, that sounds pretty antithetical to the whole genre.

No. Or at least not really.

Instead, I've seen a lot of what are called "starters." They are not canned adventures. Instead, they're more like well-defined adventure seeds or prompts. They may or may not include Fronts, usually do include at least a few events in the world that will come to pass, and usually loose details about one or more locations, groups, or entities that are relevant. Usually no more than one page, double sided. Sometimes no more than a single side.

Starters are very loosely analogous to canned adventures, but mostly different.