Giving players narrative control: good bad or indifferent?

[Hungry Like The Wolf]

Only if such a pass and a route more direct but less travelled to it exist. Otherwise, it is pretty unreasonable.

If you're referring to the map as a draconian reality, then yeah not allowing for player suggestion is pretty unreasonable isn't it. http://thesaurus.com/browse/draconian

 

[Nagol]

If you're referring to the map as a draconian reality, then yeah not allowing for player suggestion is pretty unreasonable isn't it. http://thesaurus.com/browse/draconian

Nope, just a different play style, one i prefer as a player, actually. I much prefer using character agency (taking action and making choices as the character would) than using player agency (using tools and making decisions beyond the bounds of the character and acting as advocate for the character).

 

[Hungry Like The Wolf]

Nope, just a different play style, one i prefer as a player, actually. I much prefer using character agency (taking action and making choices as the character would) than using player agency (using tools and making decisions beyond the bounds of the character and acting as advocate for the character).

Those are made up terms that carry very little weight. You can't split character and player agency. You can't divorce yourself from the decision making process but I digress, If a character is a local then it's both character and player agency. If the character is streetwise then it is both character and player agency.

The whole concept remains unreasonable.

 

[Mort]

For me one of the key roles of the GM is determining whether such things exist when players ask based on his knowledge of the location and his common sense. It is certainly a reasonable request on the part of the player, and I think a short cut is likely to exist unless there is a reason it shouldn't. But for me the key thing that keeps this example outside the realm of narrative control is whether the GM has final or whether it boils down to the roll. Nothing wrong with either approach but I prefer the first option where the GM decides first if there is in fact a shortcut and the skill roll decides how well the pc can act on that.

Bingo! I'd give experience but have to spread some more around.

The truth of the matter is though, that often it makes little difference. Say the player wants to find an alternate route. the DM had not planned for one, but suddently changes his mind and allows (through a roll or not) the player to find one.

Does the player have narrative control? No - because the DM decided there was a route; the player just found it. Is it basically the same thing as the player having narrative control? pretty much.

 

[Nagol]

Those are made up terms that carry very little weight. You can't split character and player agency. You can't divorce yourself from the decision making process but I digress, If a character is a local then it's both character and player agency. If the character is streetwise then it is both character and player agency.

The whole concept remains unreasonable.

I'm having trouble teasing out the meaning. I have no idea about the character being local or character is streetwise means.

I certainly can split character and player agency -- in fact I find it trivial. If the character can conceive of it and can take action, it is character agency.

It the effect cannot be initiated by the character and is occurring because the player wants it to happen it is player agency. A good example is the playing of a Whimsy Card by the player to affect the scene. from the character's viewpoint, something marvelous may just have happened, but it wasn't caused by him. another example would be the player expecting a short cut to appear that otherwise does not exist.

From the original example, it is character agency to ask to see if I know of a short cut and if I do for the character to take it.

It is player agency to expect, feel entitled to have, or negotiate with the DM for such a short cut to come into existence.

 

[Nagol]

Bingo! I'd give experience but have to spread some more around.

The truth of the matter is though, that often it makes little difference. Say the player wants to find an alternate route. the DM had not planned for one, but suddently changes his mind and allows (through a roll or not) the player to find one.

Does the player have narrative control? No - because the DM decided there was a route; the player just found it. Is it basically the same thing as the player having narrative control? pretty much.

Although the net result is the same, it is only the same because the player's hope meshed with the narrative controllers desires. The player never had narrative control any more than the winner of a lottery had the ability to pick winning numbers.

 

[Hungry Like The Wolf]

I certainly can split character and player agency -- in fact I find it trivial. If the character can conceive of it and can take action, it is character agency.

No you can't. You can't make a cognitive decision with out the player influencing the character. The character exists in the player's mind, you can't split the two. So it's okay if a character can conceive it...like being a local/streetwise dude who knows the alleyways?

 

[Mort]

Although the net result is the same, it is only the same because the player's hope meshed with the narrative controllers desires. The player never had narrative control any more than the winner of a lottery had the ability to pick winning numbers.

I defy you to find a lottery anywhere where the prospective player can look at the number picker/machine and say "hey I'd like you to pick these numbers (which conventiently are on my ticket)" and the number picker/machine can say "ok your numbers are picked, you win!"

It is not the same because the DM can be influenced by the player (the big difference between narrative control or no is the DM as filter, but the size of the filter matters!) the picker/machine cannot be (or should not be, you hear stories).

 

[Nagol]

No you can't. You can't make a cognitive decision with out the player influencing the character. The character exists in the player's mind, you can't split the two. So it's okay if a character can conceive it...like being a local/streetwise dude who knows the alleyways?

Please stop telling me I'm lying. As I just said, I find it trivial to split player agency from character agency.

"I want X to happen. Can the character make X happen? No? Can I as a player make X happen anyways? Yes. OK X happens."

"I don't want X to happen, but it is in character to do X. OK I guess I'll do X."

There you go. Two examples of separation of player and character agencies.

Do I as a player have complete knowledge that my character has? No, of course not. That why asking someone who controls the situtaion if my character knows if X exists is character agency. That request may request in yes, no, or maybe roll some dice. If instead of asking I am suggesting/expecting the item to exist, I am trying to exert player agency.

 

[Nagol]

I defy you to find a lottery anywhere where the prospective player can look at the number picker/machine and say "hey I'd like you to pick these numbers (which conventiently are on my ticket)" and the number picker/machine can say "ok your numbers are picked, you win!"

It is not the same because the DM can be influenced by the player (the big difference between narrative control or no is the DM as filter, but the size of the filter matters!) the picker/machine cannot be (or should not be, you hear stories).

I can point to a lot of lotteries like that, but they are all out of business now since the laws got tighened up! Typically they worked in reverse -- see these numbers they won't come up!

Sure, the DM can be influenced, negotiated with, and otherwise influenced -- that's using player agency in a less formal manner.

You are engaged in affecting the world in a way your character (despite the number of prayers he may utter) cannot.