A Question Of Agency?

[Lanefan]

Not talking about magic item wishlists, so I'm not sure where you got that. If you're taking what I'm saying and applying it in that area, then all I have to say is that wishlists like that should be considered, for sure.

It's more about the concept of the PC searching for his brother being considered and added to play, to simply be negated or seriously altered by GM fiat. Not over time, not in response to player actions, just out of hand decided.

OK. Player searches for his brother. To give herself some idea of exactly what the PC is up against in this search, GM rolls some dice to determine what's become of said brother since last seen by the PC.

GM determines: brother is living the high life as the most successful merchant in Praetos City, and that he and his high-ranking-politician wife have just had a daughter. Dick move?

GM determines: brother died as a commoner in a fire near the Praetos docks two years ago and, as no immediate family could be found, his meagre assets were revoked to the Crown. Dick move?

 

[innerdude]

I also want to comment that I do realize that I have probably been guilty of actively promoting the idea that adding more player agency is a simple formula to making RPG play "better."

And would say that in general, this has held true for me. Greater player agency = players that are more engaged, feel more connected to the fiction and their contributions to it, and are more likely to participate positively, and feel a sense of ownership in creating good vibes for the group at large.

However, all of this is obviously "up to a point." The point isn't just to allow maximum player agency (though I'd advocate for it as much as possible)---it's to create a compelling, enjoyable gaming experience. There are dozens of other components that go into the formula of creating a compelling, enjoyable experience.

Greater player agency isn't a "one size fits all" solution for better gaming. Just like adding "greater realism" to RPG play isn't the end-all, be-all of better gameplay either.

And to a certain extent, the real point of deep diving into player agency in the first place is to get ourselves as GMs to look outside of ourselves. To look at what we're doing, and ask hard questions of ourselves.

Are we really doing the best we can? Are we really giving our players the best experience possible? Could we change things that would improve our sessions week-to-week, month-to-month?

I've found that increasing player agency overall has, in most cases, a net positive effect on RPG play. But my attitude as a GM toward learning, improving, and getting better are more important than any single technique.

 

[Campbell]

Here's how I think about and talk about agency. Not only when it comes to games, but also in regards to real life.

It's almost always in regards to a particular objectivity. The agency required to achieve political change or agency over my personal earnings. I think agency requires autonomy, power, and information. You need all three in some amount to have any, but can have more or less overall agency depending on the amount of each you have. You need the autonomy to move freely and choose both your ends and your means. You also need the power to bring about change in your environment. Finally you need information so you can make informed choices about how to leverage your power.

In an old school sandbox like Moldvay you start with almost unlimited autonomy. You can pretty much go anywhere and do anything. What you have very little of is power and information. The entire point of the game is to utilize your autonomy in order to gain more power and information so you can have meaningful agency to achieve your goals. In the real world power often comes with less autonomy, but games are not life so as you progress in level you mostly become more powerful and gather more information while retaining your autonomy. It takes skilled play to gain agency.

I will admit that in most of the character focused games I run players generally have less autonomy, but far more power than starting D&D character (and generally a lot more social influence than most D&D characters of any level) and a lot more access to information to make informed decisions. Like a common fictional conceit is that players might play generals, merchants, etc. People that are connected, but have less freedom of movement. Also characters tend to lives with responsibilities they must juggle against their aims. Agency is not something you are expected to earn in the same way. You can gain more through good play, but not much.

While these contrasts all generally apply to the shape of the fiction I'm talking mostly about players here. So like in an old school sandbox information is centered around the player pretty often like knowledge of monsters, traps, etc. In Apocalypse World we use a lot of telegraphing before we punch the player in the metaphorical face.

 

[Lanefan]

I think there's an element here of just basic "how do we agree on the milieu?" If the game is a fairly limited magic kind of D&D setting (IE lower/mid-level D&D) then establishing the action in the desert probably precludes the other options from coming up, or at least constrains their appearance. If a player is complaining, after it was thoroughly established and agreed, on the desert being the primary location, that his Arctic Barbarian PC wants to 'head north' and the heck with other threads of the story, then something has gone amiss. Some of the things you mention might be possible fixes, but I would avoid the problem at the start, if possible.

Fair point.

I'm thinking more of situations where players - regardless of what PC(s) they might happen to be playing at the time - just want a change of scenery.

I don't think your c) is actually a problem. Gygax discussed this in 1e DMG, and that seemed cogent. That is, such a trek can be played out at once and then simply represents the time commitment for those characters. If there's some obvious point of intersection with other PCs that must be played out, then perhaps those PCs also need to be advanced to the point in time in question.

Exactly. My point is that, assuming those being-advanced-in-time PCs want to do any adventuring and that the expectation is that said adventuring will be played out as usual, advancing those other PCs can take months or even years of real time - by which time the players might have forgotten why their original PCs were going north in the first place!

Of course this is all very much considering a fairly rigid Gygaxian Troupe Play kind of situation. IME few games are run that way nowadays.

That's a pity.

Even if there might be some limited form of it in one of my games, it would be pretty limited, and problems aren't likely to arise. Obviously in your case the players may find at some point they want/need to go run other characters for a while, but that is the price of playing in that style.

Beleive me, one of the hardest things about running a multi-party world is trying to keep everyone more or less up to date in game time and not let one group get too far ahead or behind the other(s).

 

[Fenris-77]

One reasonable conception of agency I've read divides it into three types, ranked lowest to highest (amount of agency). Here's a quick and dirty precis:

Agency Level 1: The freedom to deal with the situation. This is the an ogre jumps out of the birthday cake, what do you do? level of agency. Very common, and seldom quashed except by railroad tycoons.

Agency Level 2: The freedom to choose the situation. This is the level where players have the ability to choose their own route through an adventure. Whether that's multiple paths to pick from, or the freedom to creatively think of other approaches on the spot. Summed up, this is free exploration.

Agency Level 3: The freedom to choose the goal. This is sandbox agency, where the goals of play are player decided. They can do whatever they want. Rescue the princess, wash their hair, or go into business selling trinkets crafted by needy Goblin orphans.

What's interesting about this is that I see people talking about sandboxes and both levels 2 and 3 as the 'definitional agency' of that playstyle. I'm not suggesting that's wrong, only that different styles of sandbox involve different versions and complexions of the latter two. Most RPGs are pretty heavy on level 1 no matter what system or style. I wouldn't say this is by any means the last word in how to construe agency, but I do find it a helpful model.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Agency Level 3: The freedom to choose the goal. This is sandbox agency, where the goals of play are player decided. They can do whatever they want. Rescue the princess, wash their hair, or go into business selling trinkets crafted by needy Goblin orphans

I think your levels are an interesting take on it, but would there be one more? Or maybe a bit different?

Level 3 says free to do whatever.....but what if the GM doean’t put a princess to be saved anywhere? Can a player offer up such a detail?

 

[Lanefan]

One reasonable conception of agency I've read divides it into three types, ranked lowest to highest (amount of agency). Here's a quick and dirty precis:

Agency Level 1: The freedom to deal with the situation. This is the an ogre jumps out of the birthday cake, what do you do? level of agency. Very common, and seldom quashed except by railroad tycoons.

Agency Level 2: The freedom to choose the situation. This is the level where players have the ability to choose their own route through an adventure. Whether that's multiple paths to pick from, or the freedom to creatively think of other approaches on the spot. Summed up, this is free exploration.

Agency Level 3: The freedom to choose the goal. This is sandbox agency, where the goals of play are player decided. They can do whatever they want. Rescue the princess, wash their hair, or go into business selling trinkets crafted by needy Goblin orphans.

What's interesting about this is that I see people talking about sandboxes and both levels 2 and 3 as the 'definitional agency' of that playstyle.

What's not so interesting is when people talk about the sum total of these as being the baseline level of agency to be expected in any RPG, and that the only agency that matters is that which goes beyond this sum.

I'd add one more to the above list, however:

Agency level 0: The freedom to characterize your character. This means the agency - within genre, system, and social constraints - to play your character as you like both in action and in voice. Most RPGs provide this agency in theory; many individual tables impinge on it in practice.

 

[prabe]

I think your levels are an interesting take on it, but would there be one more? Or maybe a bit different?

Level 3 says free to do whatever.....but what if the GM doean’t put a princess to be saved anywhere? Can a player offer up such a detail?

I'd think of the "agency types" as more sliders or gauges than switches. So, maybe the ability to choose from goals you know about is X amount of level 3, and the ability to create a goal is Y amount?

 

[Fenris-77]

Yeah, when I picture this it's a series of sliding scales with a lot of nuance. Different mechanics and different playstyles will slide the game various ways on all three axis. It's not about example X being one or the other, but rather about how example X might affect play at one or more of the levels. That's my take anyway.

@hawkeyefan - I would put player proffered goals in tier 3 for sure. Playing to find out in general works at all three levels, but is especially strong in working that tier 3 generally, which is why I think it's so divisive, not everyone wants that level of choice

@Lanefan - frankly, I don't think that's agency at all, at least the way the tiers look at it. I'd call that more a function of the social contract at the table. Let me rephrase, it is agency of a sort for sure, but not agency that's normally hindered or fostered by the system or the mechanics. That said, many games do have something to say about playing your character, so I don't think it throws a wrench in the works to add it to the list even given my initial definitional uncertainty.

 

[Manbearcat]

I use Into the Wyrd and Wild as the base for my OSR Wilderness rules. It uses a roles and camp loop that is broadly similar to the DW one, and puts resource management front and center by calling for regular consumption connected to a light but effective exhaustion mechanic, which I have looped into a bespoke rest mechanic generally. I'm using it in a system that has Usage Dice to track consumables, rather than counting individual portions, but it would work fine with either. I'm still ironing out the kinks, but on the whole I'm quite happy with it.

Thanks for this Fenris. I'm going to give you a quick example of the DW (PW) loop above in action. If you would, map this onto your system. How would this manifest in ItW&W and what would the implications on agency be (relative to how they're made manifest in DW)?

Consult where you are on the map and where you want to go > Confirm course to get there and how far you can get in a day:

• At the nearly abandoned, haunted, river village of Dorhollow.
• To Eldenbright's Grotto (a cave in a sunken garden where a PC's uncle plays his harp even in death).
• 2 day shortcut through the Wyvern-infested, treacherous hike up and over Skyreach or 4 day trek under the looming Redwoods of a mercurial grove whose name is lost to time (because no one will enter it). The former.

Pick Scout, Navigator, Quartermaster

* Thistle the Halfling Druid, Caedius the Elven Arcane Duelist, Astrafel the Elven Bard

Make Scout Ahead move and resolve any related Dangers or Discoveries encountered along the way

* Thistle Shapeshifts, spends 1 Hold on Mountain Ram (his home), skips ahead easily. 2d6+Wis = 10 result. Choose 2. Player chooses:

- You discern a beneficial aspect of the terrain—shortcut, shelter, or tactical advantage (describe it). At the top of the ridge is a partially ruined watchtower. Should give us good shelter for the night.

- You make a Discovery (ask the GM). Wyvern nest under an overhang. Mama and the hatchlings sleeping. Some poor traveling scholar recently lost their life feeding them. Pack in tatters w/ Coin and Bag of Books strewn about. Take a closer look?

Tempting, but not today.

Make Navigator move and Resolve any related Dangers or Discoveries

- 2d6+Int = 6-. Caedius player marks xp and GM hard move.

- Huge Stone Giant unmelds from cliff face they're climbing and grasps the two of them in a crushing clinch. Takes them back to his lair to sip Stone Adder poison (petrification - Spout Lore) to let the Mountain Spirit determine if they're worthy of traversing these hallow grounds.

Bard uses their racial to learn something relevant about this place's history, uses Charming and Open to get the Stone Giant to give her leverage in Parley. Social Conflict Clock defeated by the two Elves and the Stone Giant lets them free after a small tithe to the Mountain Spirit.

Make Camp Move = QM makes Manage Provisions Move and resolve Rations and any soft/hard move + one person on watch rolls +nothing for night event > if Danger resolve Stay Sharp move and then resolve Danger.

- Bard Manage Provisions 2d6+Wis = 7-9. The party consumes the expected amount of rations (1 per person
except Druid who doesn't have to eat or drink and GM soft move. The climb and journey was exhausting and the food is so tasty! 1 extra Ration consumed by Caedius!

- Roll 2d6+nothing (with take +1 due to Druid's scouting and elements can't be a soft move) = 7-9. GM chooses 1. One party member of the GM’s choice suffers a restless night. Caedius suffers a restless night haunted by a terrible song of discordant chords and inscrutable melody (Eldenbright is his uncle). He heals on 1/4 max HP from rest. Everyone else heals 1/2 max HP.

---

That is what a day's Journey play loop looks like. How would that manifest/work out in ItW&W?