Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8221608" data-attributes="member: 16814">And I've clearly said that there's no reason to attempt to hide improv, so you being able to tell is really not a strong point because it's countering an argument not made -- that improv is indistinguishable from prep.  That's a silly argument, and not one I'd make.What I did say was that in a given moment of play that you cannot tell the fiction generated from one to the other, and that a story hour -- or a presentation of the fiction in play -- you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference if both are well run.As such, being able to tell the difference isn't really about the fiction created, but rather some other feel in the game.  I'd hazard a new guess, here, that it's that you enjoy asking questions about the setting material and getting answers you know were prepared, because this makes the play that involves asking questions rewarding.The way I was using agency here was against improv, though, not against prep. You're correct I see agency with a broader lens, but I was speaking to the fact that if a GM has no constraints on their ability to introduce fiction and it doing so in reaction to player actions, then this can easily reduce agency on the improv side.  My argument here is that the preference for prep is that it introduces a constrain on the GM that increases agency over no constraint.  My broader consideration of player agency in games (ie, that I expand it past just being able to declare actions for your PC) doesn't really apply here.This is, indeed, agency.  You get more agency if you have control over action declarations AND other bits of fiction -- like outcome on a success.  If I get to try a thing and say what happens if I succeed in a check to do that thing, then I have more agency than if I can just try the thing and someone else gets to say how it works on a success (assuming failures are dictated by someone else in both cases).  This, however, says absolutely nothing about which system of play is better.  Agency is not a fixed good.  In fact, constraints on agency are one of the key things that differentiate games and can create different experiences, so differences in agency are absolutely to be expected and welcomed as they create different play spaces.  I mean, even in D&D, the various ways to apportion agency, though similar, can create large differences in play.  You're pointing that out right here!</blockquote>

Verification