D&D General What is player agency to you?

[Oofta]

You can, and as I've said I do incorporate player quests into my campaign prior to play, if the players want them. But that doesn't make it a narrative game, which is how Pemerton played 4e.

If you can make 4E a narrative game you can make any edition of D&D a narrative game.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

If you can make 4E a narrative game you can make any edition of D&D a narrative game.

I think this is trivially true but it's drastically easier to do with 4e than 5e, for example.

 

[Oofta]

I haven't done that. I've intentionally kept my discussion here on 5e alone, except for perhaps a couple of comments about things others have said.

But no one else has offered examples of play of two contrasting styles and pointed out how they're different. I have done that at a basic level... I've talked about some D&D games I've played in versus others I've played in or run, and the differences there. @pemerton has provided several examples of play from multiple games.

Most others have compared their 5e game to ideas they have about other games, or hypotheticals about other games.

I'm asking anyone else to offer two actual examples and compare them.



Yes, this is very true.



There's still something lacking... and I don't say this to dismiss you, but it's simply true.

Look, I don't play GURPS. My experience with it was maybe two or three sessions decades ago. I have a very rudimentary knowledge of the game. That doesn't mean that I can't have any insights about it at all... but it doesn't make me as capable of discussing the ins and outs of the game as those who are very experienced with it. Why would I expect it to?

No one is being dismissive of what you say. It's actually being acknowledged. It's the strength of your claims that's being challenged.



No, I've done nothing of the sort. As I said above, I've only been talking about 5e in my posts.

But very nice attempt to dismiss what I've been saying as off topic, while simultaneously complaining about being dismissed yourself.



I can't and wouldn't argue with that.

I've played other games, I've read up on and watched streams for the PbtA game DW (Dungeon World) to understand it. But the entire approach and what people get out of it is very different. It really is comparing apples to oranges. In DW the players are adding to the fiction, moves are resolved with a roll of 2d6 modified by your ability and either it works (player gets to say what happens) or it doesn't and something bad happens. At a very high level anyway, it's been a while so I'm likely getting detail wrong. I just read and watched enough to know that it's not for me.

I didn't find that players had any more agency, they had different type of agency. So that's why I can't do a direct comparison, direct comparisons make no sense. The main difference was that there was more collaboration of the story for the world itself, but it was also less concerned with simulation.

The problem is that we don't get details from people who like both types of games, we get lopsided views because the games appeal to different personalities and goals.

 

[Maxperson]

You said that the lowest agency was a pure railroad. Where the DM had taken away all player choice. So what if instead of no choice, the DM gives the players two? This would be at any single instance of play… there’s some guards, you can fight them or you can talk to them, those are your options.

You asked for an example of low agency or lowest or whatever. A railroad is the only way to not have agency, so I listed it.

Certainly this allows for more agency than the railroad, correct?

No. Agency is binary. How you value the aspects of agency determine whether it's higher or lower for YOU. Objectively there is no higher or lower for agency.

Then what if the DM added another option? You can also sneak by the guards? What happens then; more agency, less, the same? Why?

The DM doesn't add options. Options exist independent of the DM. The player thinks of them or he doesn't. If there's a door, the DM didn't add the option to pick the lock, cast knock or bash it down. They were there the instant the door was placed into position. Excepting something that would negate things, such a wizard lock on the door.

I agree that the quality of choices matters quite a bit. But given we were talking about railroads, I was starting at a very basic level.

But if we look at @Oofta ‘s post about character options, what would you say the impact would be on 5e if each and every class had abilities and options that improved their performance in the exploration and social interaction pillars?

I think that the game would be enhanced, because as a general rule, players like to have a better chance of success and that translates into fun. It's not adding agency, though. It's adding quality. Every class can already engage in a huge number options in all of the pillars. My wizard can attempt to track orcs, even if he doesn't do it very well. Adding in a spell to track better just makes tracking a higher quality option.

 

[Oofta]

I think this is trivially true but it's drastically easier to do with 4e than 5e, for example.

Why?

 

[Raiztt]

Why?

I second this why... narrativism can be slapped onto anything.

 

[Maxperson]

Is it though? For an RPG?

Yes. That's what an analogy is. It's not supposed to be a perfect match. It's supposed to illustrate a point which the sports analogy did very well.

A player in any sport has zero agency.

Wrong. Objectively wrong in fact. Proven every time the QB decides which player to throw to, or calls an audible. And every time a basketball player chooses who to pass the ball to, or decides not to pass and takes a shot.

I think you're confusing rules for a game with lack of agency.

Other then Reality, there are a ton of GMs with a ton of Rules telling a player what they can and can't do.

Completely irrelevant to agency. You don't need a game with no rules in order to have agency.

If "having rules" is how you determine who is a bad DM, then it's no wonder you think it's 50%.

 

[Maxperson]

Lets take the most simple Railroad Plot ever: Giant Rats in the Cellar. The PCs are hired by an NPC to "get rid of the giant rats in the cellar". This simple adventure is the whole game world: The PCs can do NOTHING else other then "get rid of the giant rats in the cellar". It's a railroad.

I missed this when I responded before. No, it's not a railroad.

Mayor: "I want to hire your group to kill the rats in the cellar of the town hall."
Group: "Okay, but we want half now and half later."
Mayor: "That's reasonable."
(some time later)
Group: "Okay DM, we're skipping town with the half payment we received."

The group has options. It does not have to go kill the rats. It would only be a railroad if you contrived through your power as DM to force them into the cellar and made them do it. As you present it above, though, there's no railroad.

 

[Campbell]

I missed this when I responded before. No, it's not a railroad.

Mayor: "I want to hire your group to kill the rats in the cellar of the town hall."
Group: "Okay, but we want half now and half later."
Mayor: "That's reasonable."
(some time later)
Group: "Okay DM, we're skipping town with the half payment we received."

The group has options. It does not have to go kill the rats. It would only be a railroad if you contrived through your power as DM to force them into the cellar and made them do it. As you present it above, though, there's no railroad.

All of that depends on the social environment at the table. Just because the characters would be free to go on about their business does not mean that's how it feels at the table.

 

[Maxperson]

All of that depends on the social environment at the table. Just because the characters would be free to go on about their business does not mean that's how it feels at the table.

But they choose that social environment, so if they've chosen to accept and follow the quests that the DM is offering, agency has been preserved. They could have opted out prior to play. As I said before, players opting into a railroad is the only acceptable railroad as it's the only way to preserve agency.

In the vast majority of the games that I've played in, though, if we said that we were going to skip out on killing the rats, it would be done. There might be in game consequences to something like that, but that's just part of game play.