Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 8162933"><p>Yes it is. Agency is very much a morally loaded term. When people on my said they were interested in trying to increase agency due to adventure structures they were encountering, it was because they were bothered by them. We felt anger towards the constraints, and while it is just a game and no one is suggesting this translates into real life issues, it is fundamentally about giving players freedom (and freedom isn't a morally neutral concept). Further your side has clearly painted this conversation in moral terms when it has discussed the way our side approaches GMing. And even if it isn't given moral value, agency is a valued term, and it is taken as a value statement to say this game gives agency and this one doesn't. And not to beat a dead horse, but the reason people who like this style are taking issue is because our style grew up around the idea of enhancing agency. It is an important aim of the style. But your response is to insist on a defintion of agency we don't even use, in order to force us to agree with you that your approach offers the most agency (and then you keep turning around and saying 'but we're just coldly analyzing, there is nothing wrong with your style of play'). I don't see cold analysis, I see analysis that is geared towards the conclusions you've already reached about styles and games.</p></blockquote><p></p>