Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Dealing with agency and retcon (in semi sandbox)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ZebraDruid" data-source="post: 9066396" data-attributes="member: 7041885"><p>It is subjective, and I think perhaps being 'informed' is subjective as well.</p><p></p><p>Is knowing the exact AC of an enemy informed?</p><p>Or is knowing that the enemys AC is "high and hard to hit" enough?</p><p></p><p>I often will let my players roll a relative DC to see if they can gleam information about a monster.</p><p></p><p>Oh is that a zombie? I'll roll a religion check to see more information (or perhaps arcana, it just depends).</p><p>Ah theres an ice golem, yes I've studied arcana and know a bit about golem construction, roll a DC to recall/inspect specific information about the golem.</p><p></p><p>This gives players with more mental based skills a chance to feel important and useful.</p><p></p><p>It seems to be, I asked my group, and asked if it would have been better that I told them no to going to the necromancer crypt. And two of them said yes, they would have preferred I kept it rail roaded.</p><p></p><p>Remember, the fact that they <strong>went to the necromancer</strong> at all is the <strong>result of giving</strong> them <strong>agency</strong></p><p></p><p>I <strong>didn't plan</strong> it. I <strong>reacted</strong>.</p><p></p><p>I think I'm finding out that agency should be taken away sometimes, by my players as well. But to what degree I'm still figuring out.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Somewhat agree.</p><p></p><p><em>Hiding obvious information like.</em> "The bridge in front of you seems rickety and unstable*</p><p></p><p> I totally agree. It's obvious, and it's something they'd notice right away.</p><p></p><p><em>Hiding</em>.</p><p> "Theres a trap in this hallway and it's a DC check of 25 to disarm, only Jibs can disable it by rolling a 17 or higher, the trap is a fire burst trap that will explode in a 5' radius dealing 4d8 fire damage. The guards that you're unaware of in the next room will also roll a d20 with a bonus of + 9 against a DC of 15 perception check to hear you. The guards are level 4 with 21 AC, +9 to hit carrying longswords that deal 1d8, and armed with shie---" Etc etc.</p><p></p><p>Sometimes these details are better left to be discovered, or undiscovered entirely. It doesn't really add much to their decision making besides adding a lot of risk factor analysis, which I think can be fine, but let them discover it through actions and RP. Inspect the trap, and get an idea of how tough it is. Inspect the walls, maybe they're charred? Listen quietly, do you hear voices through the wall, perhaps guards?</p><p></p><p>I think it is a spectrum, but I tend not to like absolutes in general.</p><p></p><p>Total complete agency can't exist in anything but a infinitely adaptive simulation, and players should realize a person has to actually create and think up all the content that goes on in a game.</p><p></p><p>So in that sense I think you could say...</p><p></p><p>A video game like Skyrim has a good deal of agency</p><p>But less agency than pen and paper sandbox</p><p>But pen and paper sandbox has less agency than a quantum computer generated simulation.</p><p></p><p>If you think that isn't a kind of <em>spectrum to some degree,</em> then I kind of wonder if <em>we</em> even have agency, or you can ever truly have it at all.</p><p></p><p>I get that point. I agree. </p><p></p><p>I agree with [USER=6879661]@TheSword[/USER] on this. There is definitely a kind of social contract when it comes to agency.</p><p></p><p>Case example. In my first dungeon, my bard jumped into that deep dark hole. He had...</p><p></p><p>8/8 healing potions</p><p>1/1 lockpick sets</p><p>1/1 healers kits</p><p>2/3 torches</p><p>A powerful magical sword (the only magical weapon in the party)</p><p>The best armor in the group</p><p>The only backpack (One of those rough it dungeons)</p><p></p><p>He dropped all this stuff into the pit with him, broke his legs at the bottom, and was eaten by zombies. He then left his party of 2 (3 - 1) to try to beat a dungeon designed for a party of 3, with none of the resources provided to make it easier.</p><p></p><p>Was that his agency to jump into the pit with all the resources and die? Yes, but wouldn't it be in the realm of social contract for the game/friends sake not to?</p><p></p><p>To my point about not being able to <em>'make the paladin'</em> do the '<em>good thing'</em>. I'd also say that I can't stop the whole party from doing the boring/useless thing.</p><p></p><p><em>Hey guys, do you want to maybe go adventure instead of <strong>sitting</strong> in the tavern<strong> drinking</strong> like the last <strong>3 sessions</strong>? N..No? Ah okay...</em></p><p></p><p>That's their agency to do after all...</p><p></p><p>The players ask if there <strong>was a will</strong>, and the older noble said yes but they couldn't see it. They seen a <strong>study down the hall with bookshelves</strong>. When they returned during the night they seen the same study again, but didn't see any chests in it, so deemed it useless. The mage went upstairs and seen a<strong> bunch of papers and books on a table,</strong> and instead <strong>went for</strong> the chests in the room that had<strong> loot</strong>.</p><p></p><p>The crypt had <strong>bloody skulls, necromantic runes,</strong> etc. I've already repeated all this before.</p><p></p><p>I let them<strong> know</strong> the two <strong>brothers</strong> were both <strong>lying</strong>.</p><p></p><p>The 'quest' ended when they exited the manor with the body.</p><p></p><p>Their <strong>agency</strong> was <strong>exercised</strong> when they <strong>went</strong> to the <strong>necromancers ritual</strong>.</p><p></p><p>Not only was this not part of my plan, but they didn't even have the information that would have keyed them in to go to the ritual in the first place.</p><p></p><p>A <strong>simple quest</strong> was <strong>made complex</strong> <strong>by their agency.</strong></p><p></p><p><em>Let me clarify If it was <strong>truly railroad</strong>. They <strong>wouldn't have been able</strong> to <strong>go</strong> to the<strong> necromancer until</strong> they <strong>had</strong> the <strong>information</strong> from the house.</em></p><p></p><p>This circles my point about preventing them from doing things that can cause them trouble. I can't.</p><p></p><p>The <strong>'real' consequences</strong> that the group is <strong>mad about</strong>, is that the <strong>paladin ratted</strong>. They <strong>don't really care</strong> about the <strong>noble families death</strong>, it bummed the paladin, but he is much<strong> more upset</strong> about the fact that the<strong> group (IC)</strong> <strong>hates</strong> his <strong>paladin</strong> for <strong>ratting </strong>on him.</p><p></p><p>But I as a DM can't stop him from tattling on the other players.</p><p></p><p></p><p>They actually didn't follow the quest. Which is what put them in trouble. The quest wasn't to go partake in the ritual, then tattle on the group for necromancy.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As I said before I sometimes let my players do rolls to check for a creatures statistics. Roll arcana to see the slimes AC/possible weakness. (Failure tells nothing or little) And I'll give them a vague idea of the DC of an action. "That gap looks really far." "This lock looks almost impossible to pick."</p><p></p><p>But yeah, I totally agree telling them the exact number adds nothing to making their actions meaningful. It only allows them to make calculations. It actually ends up slowing the game down as well.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think the actual numbers matter.</p><p></p><p>It could be a .0000000000000001% chance of death by staying inside that day. It doesn't change the fact that there 'is' a risk. It's a non-zero factor.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think the black box applies to this games situation.</p><p></p><p>Obviously an unknowable pandora's box is a bit of an issue.</p><p></p><p>But this doesn't stop the player from choosing to open it or not.</p><p></p><p>Where it would be a violation of the players agency, as I said some ways up</p><p></p><p></p><p>If the player existed in a theoretical void with nothing to win or lose, I'd say there could be no violation of agency no matter what the consequence/reward was to opening the box.</p><p></p><p>They have nothing to gain or lose.</p><p></p><p>If they existed in a typical world, and opening it destroyed the universe, and they didn't know. Then that could be considered a violation of agency. <em>In my opinion</em></p><p></p><p></p><p>----------------</p><p>The risk assessment they took, was that they were breaking into a home (Illegal) stealing things (Illegal) dealing with a feuding family (suspicious, and perhaps dangerous) and resurrecting bodys (Magical casters involved)</p><p></p><p>In this instance, not investigating the details of the story, and not stopping the necromancer. The consequences was a family they weren't related to, and didn't know, would get killed.</p><p></p><p>Keep it in mind that I have <strong>written nothing else</strong> as to whether this even matters in the long term. Does a powerful necromancer cult arise because of this? That might actually be a 'good thing' because then it gives them another quest.</p><p></p><p>The consequences of their actions were relatively banal.</p><p></p><p></p><p>A deeper examination into the nature of existence.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I suppose I'd say then. If you were given a choice of two hands by someone you 'trust'. And one hand had a relative reward, and one a relative consequence.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps you had to eat what was in their hand. One being a piece of candy, the other an old dirty walnut. (Or something.)</p><p></p><p> You trust them that the reward or consequence isn't going to be disproportionate to the information you have, or the effort you put into choosing.</p><p></p><p>Is that agency to choose to pick a hand or not?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Agreed. Walk in a straight line in minecraft. Lots of agency. Nothing interesting or unique going on.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Agreed, yeah. I wanted to keep them safe for awhile, while they figured out their characters. Because I was afraid something like this would happen.</p><p></p><p>I know my group and they like to do dangerous brazen stuff.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ZebraDruid, post: 9066396, member: 7041885"] It is subjective, and I think perhaps being 'informed' is subjective as well. Is knowing the exact AC of an enemy informed? Or is knowing that the enemys AC is "high and hard to hit" enough? I often will let my players roll a relative DC to see if they can gleam information about a monster. Oh is that a zombie? I'll roll a religion check to see more information (or perhaps arcana, it just depends). Ah theres an ice golem, yes I've studied arcana and know a bit about golem construction, roll a DC to recall/inspect specific information about the golem. This gives players with more mental based skills a chance to feel important and useful. It seems to be, I asked my group, and asked if it would have been better that I told them no to going to the necromancer crypt. And two of them said yes, they would have preferred I kept it rail roaded. Remember, the fact that they [B]went to the necromancer[/B] at all is the [B]result of giving[/B] them [B]agency[/B] I [B]didn't plan[/B] it. I [B]reacted[/B]. I think I'm finding out that agency should be taken away sometimes, by my players as well. But to what degree I'm still figuring out. Somewhat agree. [I]Hiding obvious information like.[/I] "The bridge in front of you seems rickety and unstable* I totally agree. It's obvious, and it's something they'd notice right away. [I]Hiding[/I]. "Theres a trap in this hallway and it's a DC check of 25 to disarm, only Jibs can disable it by rolling a 17 or higher, the trap is a fire burst trap that will explode in a 5' radius dealing 4d8 fire damage. The guards that you're unaware of in the next room will also roll a d20 with a bonus of + 9 against a DC of 15 perception check to hear you. The guards are level 4 with 21 AC, +9 to hit carrying longswords that deal 1d8, and armed with shie---" Etc etc. Sometimes these details are better left to be discovered, or undiscovered entirely. It doesn't really add much to their decision making besides adding a lot of risk factor analysis, which I think can be fine, but let them discover it through actions and RP. Inspect the trap, and get an idea of how tough it is. Inspect the walls, maybe they're charred? Listen quietly, do you hear voices through the wall, perhaps guards? I think it is a spectrum, but I tend not to like absolutes in general. Total complete agency can't exist in anything but a infinitely adaptive simulation, and players should realize a person has to actually create and think up all the content that goes on in a game. So in that sense I think you could say... A video game like Skyrim has a good deal of agency But less agency than pen and paper sandbox But pen and paper sandbox has less agency than a quantum computer generated simulation. If you think that isn't a kind of [I]spectrum to some degree,[/I] then I kind of wonder if [I]we[/I] even have agency, or you can ever truly have it at all. I get that point. I agree. I agree with [USER=6879661]@TheSword[/USER] on this. There is definitely a kind of social contract when it comes to agency. Case example. In my first dungeon, my bard jumped into that deep dark hole. He had... 8/8 healing potions 1/1 lockpick sets 1/1 healers kits 2/3 torches A powerful magical sword (the only magical weapon in the party) The best armor in the group The only backpack (One of those rough it dungeons) He dropped all this stuff into the pit with him, broke his legs at the bottom, and was eaten by zombies. He then left his party of 2 (3 - 1) to try to beat a dungeon designed for a party of 3, with none of the resources provided to make it easier. Was that his agency to jump into the pit with all the resources and die? Yes, but wouldn't it be in the realm of social contract for the game/friends sake not to? To my point about not being able to [I]'make the paladin'[/I] do the '[I]good thing'[/I]. I'd also say that I can't stop the whole party from doing the boring/useless thing. [I]Hey guys, do you want to maybe go adventure instead of [B]sitting[/B] in the tavern[B] drinking[/B] like the last [B]3 sessions[/B]? N..No? Ah okay...[/I] That's their agency to do after all... The players ask if there [B]was a will[/B], and the older noble said yes but they couldn't see it. They seen a [B]study down the hall with bookshelves[/B]. When they returned during the night they seen the same study again, but didn't see any chests in it, so deemed it useless. The mage went upstairs and seen a[B] bunch of papers and books on a table,[/B] and instead [B]went for[/B] the chests in the room that had[B] loot[/B]. The crypt had [B]bloody skulls, necromantic runes,[/B] etc. I've already repeated all this before. I let them[B] know[/B] the two [B]brothers[/B] were both [B]lying[/B]. The 'quest' ended when they exited the manor with the body. Their [B]agency[/B] was [B]exercised[/B] when they [B]went[/B] to the [B]necromancers ritual[/B]. Not only was this not part of my plan, but they didn't even have the information that would have keyed them in to go to the ritual in the first place. A [B]simple quest[/B] was [B]made complex[/B] [B]by their agency.[/B] [I]Let me clarify If it was [B]truly railroad[/B]. They [B]wouldn't have been able[/B] to [B]go[/B] to the[B] necromancer until[/B] they [B]had[/B] the [B]information[/B] from the house.[/I] This circles my point about preventing them from doing things that can cause them trouble. I can't. The [B]'real' consequences[/B] that the group is [B]mad about[/B], is that the [B]paladin ratted[/B]. They [B]don't really care[/B] about the [B]noble families death[/B], it bummed the paladin, but he is much[B] more upset[/B] about the fact that the[B] group (IC)[/B] [B]hates[/B] his [B]paladin[/B] for [B]ratting [/B]on him. But I as a DM can't stop him from tattling on the other players. They actually didn't follow the quest. Which is what put them in trouble. The quest wasn't to go partake in the ritual, then tattle on the group for necromancy. As I said before I sometimes let my players do rolls to check for a creatures statistics. Roll arcana to see the slimes AC/possible weakness. (Failure tells nothing or little) And I'll give them a vague idea of the DC of an action. "That gap looks really far." "This lock looks almost impossible to pick." But yeah, I totally agree telling them the exact number adds nothing to making their actions meaningful. It only allows them to make calculations. It actually ends up slowing the game down as well. I don't think the actual numbers matter. It could be a .0000000000000001% chance of death by staying inside that day. It doesn't change the fact that there 'is' a risk. It's a non-zero factor. I don't think the black box applies to this games situation. Obviously an unknowable pandora's box is a bit of an issue. But this doesn't stop the player from choosing to open it or not. Where it would be a violation of the players agency, as I said some ways up If the player existed in a theoretical void with nothing to win or lose, I'd say there could be no violation of agency no matter what the consequence/reward was to opening the box. They have nothing to gain or lose. If they existed in a typical world, and opening it destroyed the universe, and they didn't know. Then that could be considered a violation of agency. [I]In my opinion[/I] ---------------- The risk assessment they took, was that they were breaking into a home (Illegal) stealing things (Illegal) dealing with a feuding family (suspicious, and perhaps dangerous) and resurrecting bodys (Magical casters involved) In this instance, not investigating the details of the story, and not stopping the necromancer. The consequences was a family they weren't related to, and didn't know, would get killed. Keep it in mind that I have [B]written nothing else[/B] as to whether this even matters in the long term. Does a powerful necromancer cult arise because of this? That might actually be a 'good thing' because then it gives them another quest. The consequences of their actions were relatively banal. A deeper examination into the nature of existence. I suppose I'd say then. If you were given a choice of two hands by someone you 'trust'. And one hand had a relative reward, and one a relative consequence. Perhaps you had to eat what was in their hand. One being a piece of candy, the other an old dirty walnut. (Or something.) You trust them that the reward or consequence isn't going to be disproportionate to the information you have, or the effort you put into choosing. Is that agency to choose to pick a hand or not? Agreed. Walk in a straight line in minecraft. Lots of agency. Nothing interesting or unique going on. Agreed, yeah. I wanted to keep them safe for awhile, while they figured out their characters. Because I was afraid something like this would happen. I know my group and they like to do dangerous brazen stuff. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Dealing with agency and retcon (in semi sandbox)
Top