Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 8136978">I am sorry [USER=6785785]@hawkeyefan[/USER]  (Re: Agency), but it really just feels like you are trying to define agency so that it perfectly fits the play style you want to advocate for. And since agency is being seen as a good thing (even a moral good I would argue as some are talking about it), I don't think that is a good way to have a discussion about this term (when it is clearly being used to mean very different things by these two posters). We have already had this discussion actually about agency and narrative versus more traditional approaches. I don't think it is worth diving into again. But I do think people trying to control the language in order to advance their preferred play style is a big reason these discussions often break down or end in tearsEDIT: Just to add here, I think it is a much better approach for you to talk about 'narrative agency', which sounds like a good term for what you are describing to me. But I don't think most people take character agency or player agency in RPGs to mean an ability to shape the narrative or plot. Certainly some might, but to me it seems like a play style concept is being loaded on to an existing term, to get people to agree with that approach. If you like narrative agency, that is fine. There is clearly an appetite for it out there, and the more clear you are about that as a play style approach, the more people you will win over to it. But I think this business of getting play style preferences into things by stealth is something we should really abandoned on both sides of these debates. It isn't good for the hobby, it isn't good for discussion and it just makes people hostile towards play styles they might otherwise enjoy.</blockquote>

Verification