Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Game Mechanics And Player Agency
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="iserith" data-source="post: 7744794" data-attributes="member: 97077"><p>I really don't think it is. I think it just looks that way to you. There's always the next orc.</p><p></p><p>Typically, when I see people on the forums raise objections to this approach, it's from a viewpoint that they'll forever be subject to some other person's decision. But don't worry - sometimes it's you who gets to decide what to do with the proverbial orc. Presumably all the players are properly socialized humans who share spotlight with each other.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>First, I think "table mechanics" is a silly term and looks suspiciously like you want to conflate actual game mechanics with an agreement the players have made about how to play the game that exists separate from the game mechanics. But anyway, as I mentioned previously, a player might want to have an exchange that suggests something about his or her character or the relationship his or her character has with the character with whom he or she disagrees.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You as a player will have agreed to an approach that accepts the idea of a fellow player and adds to it, rather than negates or subverts it. In this example, another player's idea is not to kill the orc. You would agree to that. Your character may take issue and you may decide to play that out for color, but ultimately he or she does nothing to negate or subvert that.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I suppose if you wanted to make a game of torture for some reason (a red flag for me), you would still be keeping your agreement as long as you kept the orc alive. Your agreement is binding as long as you want to be seen as the kind of person who keeps his agreements. I realize that's not for everyone.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There are no rules for how to play a low-Wisdom character "properly." But that's a whole other topic (and one that's been done to death). Anyway, it is sometimes the case that a player will choose to do something like that because it will be fun for everyone and help create an exciting, memorable tale. Again, bear in mind, the players willingly share the spotlight and the DM has some measure of control over it to boot, so someone acting in bad faith will be exposed pretty quickly. And someone acting somehow in good faith with what you propose won't have the spotlight all the time.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="iserith, post: 7744794, member: 97077"] I really don't think it is. I think it just looks that way to you. There's always the next orc. Typically, when I see people on the forums raise objections to this approach, it's from a viewpoint that they'll forever be subject to some other person's decision. But don't worry - sometimes it's you who gets to decide what to do with the proverbial orc. Presumably all the players are properly socialized humans who share spotlight with each other. First, I think "table mechanics" is a silly term and looks suspiciously like you want to conflate actual game mechanics with an agreement the players have made about how to play the game that exists separate from the game mechanics. But anyway, as I mentioned previously, a player might want to have an exchange that suggests something about his or her character or the relationship his or her character has with the character with whom he or she disagrees. You as a player will have agreed to an approach that accepts the idea of a fellow player and adds to it, rather than negates or subverts it. In this example, another player's idea is not to kill the orc. You would agree to that. Your character may take issue and you may decide to play that out for color, but ultimately he or she does nothing to negate or subvert that. I suppose if you wanted to make a game of torture for some reason (a red flag for me), you would still be keeping your agreement as long as you kept the orc alive. Your agreement is binding as long as you want to be seen as the kind of person who keeps his agreements. I realize that's not for everyone. There are no rules for how to play a low-Wisdom character "properly." But that's a whole other topic (and one that's been done to death). Anyway, it is sometimes the case that a player will choose to do something like that because it will be fun for everyone and help create an exciting, memorable tale. Again, bear in mind, the players willingly share the spotlight and the DM has some measure of control over it to boot, so someone acting in bad faith will be exposed pretty quickly. And someone acting somehow in good faith with what you propose won't have the spotlight all the time. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Game Mechanics And Player Agency
Top