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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TiQuinn" data-source="post: 9641473" data-attributes="member: 4871">Consistency is paramount at what level of the game?Because I can say right now that I'm playing a Mothership game in which we found out last session that the villain of the scenario is a powerful AI that has the ability to plan ahead and strategize at a level beyond what we as PCs could handle. There were clear rules for the GM about how that impacted the game, but those rules were not necessarily ones that we as players knew going in but had to discover in the course of investigation of the "dungeon", i.e. the space station.Was this consistent? Did we have meaningful choices? Did we have agency if the AI could potentially counteract whatever we had planned?I can only say that this made complete sense within the narrative of the game, it increased the tension of the game, and we still were able to impact the scenario, though not in the way that we necessarily thought at the beginning of the scenario.When you say that it's paramount, it suggests that the absence or hindrance of it automatically results in a lesser game, which is the problem I have with these threads. Even from the OP's initial post, the framing of his definition of player agency is to view games that fall outside their particular definition as being wrong somehow, not to mention you then have others chiming in with asides of "games versus storytelling exercises".I'm perfectly fine with someone saying they don't enjoy a particular game or a style of play, but this thread so far (as the GM fiat thread and others that spawned it...we're on the 3rd or 4th iteration now) state in a very high-minded way that "Your fun is wrong."</blockquote>

Verification