Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fenris-77" data-source="post: 8013759" data-attributes="member: 6993955">1. I did no such thing, I was just using a holistic example. I have no idea how that ended up offending you. 2. If you wanted to ask someone who hadn't read this thread to describe the level of player agency in their game, that's the kind of question you'd ask. That's important because the nuts and bolts are, one, not interesting to everyone, and, two, pretty obviously easy to get all tangled up in.3. It is low agency, not that that's a bad thing, and you missed the descriptor 'old school', so OSR style play, which is very low agency (by design, and that's not bad). I also defined agency in no such simple way, and in fact have gone out of my way to index just how non-single source the idea is. You also seem to be using fictional in place of narrative, which isn't helpful, narrative goes places, fiction is just made up stuff. Also, if you think D&D allows no agency to players over the narrative you have somehow badly misunderstood the last many pages of this thread.4. Dubious. Huh. I don't even know how to respond to that. 'Fictional outcomes' is a very different thing than narrative control, or, more precisely, control over the diegetic frame. In other words, control over the unfolding of the shared story. It's way more granular and nuanced than just outcomes, which seems from your post to mean, for you, something more like action adjudication. I'm not sure though, you've got your own set of vocabulary going here.5. Yeah, I did, specifically about control over character relative to the use of persuade type skills, which is very different in some other games than it is in D&D. What's your point?</blockquote>

Verification