Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DracoSuave" data-source="post: 6500610" data-attributes="member: 71571">I challenge that assertion, actually.  Agency requires meaningful decisions, and if a tactic is always optimal in every situation, such that you'd be a fool not to, you're not making a choice by doing that tactic.Back in 1st edition, I found thieves to be the most dull class, because you existed because the party needed someone to roll that die every 10 feet.  Then if there was a lock, you picked it.  You basically existed because the party's random chance of finding doors and picking locks needed to be on some character sheet somewhere, and you volunteered to be the guy with that piece of paper this time.  You weren't an agent--you didn't make any choices, and you were NEVER designed to make those choices.Eventually, clever DMs and later edition designers abandoned the idea of the non-encounter skill cruft, and moved to enabling a sense of play where real choice and agency could be enjoyed.  Picking a lock on some random door is low agency.  Picking a lock on the chains and muzzle that are keeping the party's captured wizard trapped in a dungeon cell that also has a triggered alarm trap that floods it with water you can possibly deactivate is high agency.Agency requires meaningful choice and meaningful choice requires meaningful conseequence.</blockquote>