An examination of player agency

[Micah Sweet]

In that case, perhaps you share my frustration at people complaining about how the OP has characterised player agency, as if it was a less reasonable characterisation than the one they are putting forward.

That definition is considerably more narrow than others. It actively closes off options for "what is agency" that would otherwise be open. And it presents that definition as if it should be obvious they are correct.

That frustrates people.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Inviolate suggests that the rules have to followed, that you really can't ignore or change them.

But… that’s what “intended to be followed withoutdeviation means”…

I’m so confused.

But anyway… many such games also have sections about chamging the rules. Entire chapters even. They provide actual guidance on howto do so, and suggestions about potential side effects of certain changes.

So it’s not that the game can’t be changed or made to better serve a specific group… it’s that doing so is meant to he done prior to play and not during play.

 

[pemerton]

That definition is considerably more narrow than others. It actively closes off options for "what is agency" that would otherwise be open. And it presents that definition as if it should be obvious they are correct.

That frustrates people.

Similarly, narrow definitions of "railroading" that actively close off options for "what is railroading" that otherwise would be open; and that present themselves as it should be obvious that they are correct; frustrate people.

Where by people I mean me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You seem to have read a bit of my Torchbearer 2e actual play.

Do you really think the reason that I enjoy TB2e (or Burning Wheel, or 4e D&D, or Classic Traveller, or Prince Valiant, or any of the other RPGs that I enjoy) is because I'm a bad GM who needs to be controlled?

Anyway, I'm going to test this hypothesis by starting a thread about the Prince Valiant healing rules. I predict that I will get many ENworlders complaining that they involve too much GM fiat!

EDIT:
Is this why you're obsessed by rules for "simulating" things like getting hungry while trekking through the wilderness - because you're a bad GM who plays with bad players?

Not sure what you're getting at. That I'm a hypocrite? Never mind the insulting quotation marks around simulating. I use rules for getting hungry because people get hungry in real life. It makes sense to me and my players, none of whom have ever complained that their PCs occasionally had to eat.

I like rules. Many games I enjoy have a lot of them. None of them are designed to explicitly control the GMs actions in that inviolate way the OP seems to want for the players to have agency in their mind.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm not sure. OP's view is quite extreme. It implies Narrativist play isn't even possible with trad RPGs (surely it requires player agency, which OP says is logically impossible in trad RPGs). None of the OG theorists I'm familiar with would agree with that.

Ron Edwards is clear that any game can be played in that style. Narrativist games just facilitate it, mostly by making prep easier for the GM.

I remember Vincent Baker saying something to the effect that the GM rules in Dogs in the Vineyard and Apocalypse World aren't there to constrain them, but to help them do what good GMs do intuitively.

Does this not suggest that to Vincent Baker, "good" GMs run their games like he tell them to in his books and if they don't they aren't good GMs?

 

[Campbell]

Does this not suggest that to Vincent Baker, "good" GMs run their games like he tell them to in his books and if they don't they aren't good GMs?

Good Narrativist GMs at least. The context for these conversations was "let's do Narrativism". Trying to extrapolate them to a general audience is not a very sound idea.

Particularly when we have Vincent in other contexts designing OSR material and talking about how much he loves Moldvay.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If you're defining "agency" to try and cover games that I would regard as railroads, and would not touch with a 10' pole for that reason, it seems to me that you are using problematic definitions and semantics to try and win a style debate.

You are actively trying to rob me of the vocabulary to explain why I wouldn't touch various games with a 10' pole.

If you get a lot of pushback on your particular use of a particular term, is it not worth at least considering changing your language so the discussion can go forward, particular if the definition you're using takes what is often considered a pejorative term and expands it's use to cover a much larger swath of games?

IMO the OP is doing the opposite: taking a term generally considered to be a good thing by many and redefining it such that a large swath of games are now excluded from it. And it causes the same problem regarding pushback.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So what you meant by 'worldbuilding powers' was 'the power to worldbuild'? That's circular. Until you provide at least some sense of what you mean, this is impossible to engage with.

I'm not the one who first used that term here anyway.

 

[Micah Sweet]

?
Which games do you think do not allow this? Mine certainly allows it.

Do your players get to affect the setting outside of their PCs (once play begins)? If not, do you believe they possess agency? Mine do not, but they and I believe they have agency.

 

[pemerton]

Not sure what you're getting at. That I'm a hypocrite? Never mind the insulting quotation marks around simulating. I use rules for getting hungry because people get hungry in real life. It makes sense to me and my players, none of whom have ever complained that their PCs occasionally had to eat.

I like rules. Many games I enjoy have a lot of them. None of them are designed to explicitly control the GMs actions in that inviolate way the OP seems to want for the players to have agency in their mind.

You could tell the players that their PCs need to eat without having rules for it.

I mean, I'm guessing that your game has no rules for getting filthy, sweaty and stinky, yet I'm sure sometimes you tell the players that their PCs, if they wish to be clean and presentable, need to wash and change.

So why do you have rules for hunger?