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!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8017725" data-attributes="member: 16814">If the Compelled action is limited only to things I've chosen to be important for my character, then I have exercised control over my characters actions.  I can only be Compelled to do things I've already chosen.If I'm Dominated, I have no choice or control over the actions of my character at all.If I am to make sense of your argument, I can only assume that it's because you're arguing that agency over action declaration is a separate thing.  I understand that you've said this, but aside from your assertion I haven't seen the arguments that support it.  On the other hand, I've supported my characterization of agency as having choice and the ability to see that choice implemented in the fiction.  If I use that framework, then a Compel is leveraging a choice I made in character creation and seeing it implemented in the fiction.  That the action proposal comes from someone other than me is only important if we're accepting your argument that there's a special subset of agency that is declaring actions for your character.  I don't agree that this is severable from the concept of agency.In other words, we're approaching this from different sets of premises. No, it's quite firm.  It hasn't changed throughout the thread.  I formed this concept awhile ago, and it's pretty strong.  I have no problem pointing out when agency is denied.  I don't think that's necessarily bad.  Because I'm not arguing from a position that agency=merit, I don't have a stake in defending any given game based on how it treats agency.  I think 5e, for instance, has muddy rules that can lead to all kinds of removal of agency even in good faith play.  I still run it almost every weekend.  I absolutely know that Blades in the Dark severely limits agency.  It does this through play premises and setting and through sharing of authority over characters to some degree.  And many other ways I'm not going to list.  I still love to run Blades in the Dark.  So, yeah, no, I'm not shifting my arguments to defend any particular style of play or game.  That would make agency a useless tool to analyze how a game works.  So, I have no need to shift my arguments.  I certainly do not care that I win an argument with you on the internet.  So, any confusion about my position is on your end.  It's not moving over here, at all.  As I said in the above section, we appear to be operating on different premises.  I also think we're operating on different goals.  I'm trying to fairly analyze games.  You seem to be looking to support a playstyle as having more agency against a different playstyle.  I don't care.  I care why they've limited agency and how that functions.  And that goes directly to the discussion on Compels in FATE.  These are a collaborative tool to use the character as designed by the player to create new issues in the fiction for the characters to overcome.  They aren't Dominate Person, which just strips agency from one player and transfers it to another.</blockquote>

Verification