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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8150561" data-attributes="member: 42582">This I understand: different games put different components of the fiction under the control (or at least prima facie control) of different participants.So in a lot of D&D play, for instance, generally I get to decide whether or not my PC holds a prejudice against a particular race (think the classic Orc- or Elf- hating Dwarf); but the GM gets to decide whether or not there is a lantern hanging from the cross-beam of the tavern roof.But I now invite you to take these next steps:(1) If some of what a typical D&D GM controls is given over to a greater extent to the players (whether via formal mechanics, or via a much greater reliance and perhaps even systematisation of taking suggestions), then (everything else being equal) that will increase the players' agency in respect of the shared fiction;(2) If under some circumstances what a typical D&D player controls is given over to a greater extent to the GM (eg as in the Force of Will/dark naga example) that may reduce some player agency but perhaps still leave the player with a net overall greater agency.(3) On balance, think of (1) and (2) combining so as to (a) reduce (not necessarily eliminate) sharp boundaries between who controls which bits of the fiction, with the result that (b) the fiction is shared not only in the sense that we all imagine it together but that the production of it involves  a more distributed/sharing/cooperative process, while it still being the case that (c) the player and GM roles are quite distinct.How is 3(c) true given (3)(a) and (b)? Because the distinction consists less in who controls which bits and more in what are the mechanical process together with broader principles that govern who gets to introduce which bit of content at which point of play.</blockquote>

Verification