Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 8017271" data-attributes="member: 6795602">That's such a bad comparison I don't even know where to begin pointing out what's wrong with it.The dice deciding an action fails does the same thing.It is a unilateral decision.&nbsp; But having a unilateral decision maker about the fiction doesn't necessitate player agency is taken away.&nbsp; As [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER] has been saying when this is done incorrectly then a lack of agency can certainly occur but it's by no means a required feature of such a system.Just to be clear, &quot;DM Decides&quot; is a mechanical framework.&nbsp; In such a game the mechanism for resolving actions is the DM.When your premises are faulty you end up at incorrect conclusions.The players have a distinguished role of being able to control their characters actions.&nbsp; What your character &quot;attempts to do&quot; is part of the shared fiction. For that reason I don't agree that players are simply making suggestions in that style of game.&nbsp; More importantly though, the GM isn't so much a monarch as he is an elected president with certain duties and obligations.&nbsp; Those duties include determining success or failure when possible and setting a DC when there's too much uncertainty.&nbsp; But&nbsp; he is obligated to do so in a way that makes sense given the genre, other fictional constraints and anything else pertinent to the situation.And it's easy to see where bad faith play using that methodology can also destroy the agency of the other players and DM in that kind of game.&nbsp; Necessitating a roll with a chance of success for all actions, even those for ruling the world / mass mind control / etc, all tends to destroy agency just as quickly as a bad DM intent on forcing the characters to do something.The issue is one of taking my term at literal face value instead of what I've pretty clearly been stating it means.&nbsp; Character Agency = Agency of the Character = Agency over the character = Agency over the characters actions.&nbsp; You seem to be confusing that with Agency over the fiction concerning the character.IMO in terms of comparing and contrasting RPG's it's more meaningful than that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 8017271, member: 6795602"] That's such a bad comparison I don't even know where to begin pointing out what's wrong with it. The dice deciding an action fails does the same thing. It is a unilateral decision. But having a unilateral decision maker about the fiction doesn't necessitate player agency is taken away. As [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER] has been saying when this is done incorrectly then a lack of agency can certainly occur but it's by no means a required feature of such a system. Just to be clear, "DM Decides" is a mechanical framework. In such a game the mechanism for resolving actions is the DM. When your premises are faulty you end up at incorrect conclusions. The players have a distinguished role of being able to control their characters actions. What your character "attempts to do" is part of the shared fiction. For that reason I don't agree that players are simply making suggestions in that style of game. More importantly though, the GM isn't so much a monarch as he is an elected president with certain duties and obligations. Those duties include determining success or failure when possible and setting a DC when there's too much uncertainty. But he is obligated to do so in a way that makes sense given the genre, other fictional constraints and anything else pertinent to the situation. And it's easy to see where bad faith play using that methodology can also destroy the agency of the other players and DM in that kind of game. Necessitating a roll with a chance of success for all actions, even those for ruling the world / mass mind control / etc, all tends to destroy agency just as quickly as a bad DM intent on forcing the characters to do something. The issue is one of taking my term at literal face value instead of what I've pretty clearly been stating it means. Character Agency = Agency of the Character = Agency over the character = Agency over the characters actions. You seem to be confusing that with Agency over the fiction concerning the character. IMO in terms of comparing and contrasting RPG's it's more meaningful than that. [/QUOTE]

Verification