Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Gloves Are Off?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 8871588" data-attributes="member: 8461"><p>This entire thread is predicated on that distinction being unclear. It's very often the source of such disagreements with regard to "but that's not what my character did/would have done," which is an argument over agency, even if it's being used to try and avoid consequences.</p><p></p><p>And yet being able to define a character's moral/ethical outlook is self-evidently one of the most fundamental aspects of a player having agency over their character (i.e. it goes to the heart of them saying who their character <em>is</em>). Likewise, the aspects of what constitutes an alignment, let alone changing it, aren't mechanically delineated (though I've seen plenty of third-party supplements try to do just that), hence why there are so many arguments about what constitutes an act being in accordance/violation of a given alignment.</p><p></p><p>That said, changing an aspect of a character against the player's wishes strikes me as being a violation of their agency, even when that violation is well-earned and supported by the game rules. "Violating the player's agency of their character" isn't a definition that only applies when done wrongfully on the DM's part; it's baked into the game rules at various aspects of play, hence why you can't call a PC failing a save against a <em>fear</em> spell "an exception."</p><p></p><p>Sure, but that makes them no less germane to what we're talking about. There are times when it's both right and expected for the GM to override a player's control regarding their character, which to my mind is necessarily an aspect of violating their agency, and that's understood as being part of the central premise of the game. Slicing that between "consequences" and some other distinction (which I think you're making with regard to "wrongful" violations in that regard) strikes me as being artificial in nature.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Alzrius, post: 8871588, member: 8461"] This entire thread is predicated on that distinction being unclear. It's very often the source of such disagreements with regard to "but that's not what my character did/would have done," which is an argument over agency, even if it's being used to try and avoid consequences. And yet being able to define a character's moral/ethical outlook is self-evidently one of the most fundamental aspects of a player having agency over their character (i.e. it goes to the heart of them saying who their character [i]is[/i]). Likewise, the aspects of what constitutes an alignment, let alone changing it, aren't mechanically delineated (though I've seen plenty of third-party supplements try to do just that), hence why there are so many arguments about what constitutes an act being in accordance/violation of a given alignment. That said, changing an aspect of a character against the player's wishes strikes me as being a violation of their agency, even when that violation is well-earned and supported by the game rules. "Violating the player's agency of their character" isn't a definition that only applies when done wrongfully on the DM's part; it's baked into the game rules at various aspects of play, hence why you can't call a PC failing a save against a [i]fear[/i] spell "an exception." Sure, but that makes them no less germane to what we're talking about. There are times when it's both right and expected for the GM to override a player's control regarding their character, which to my mind is necessarily an aspect of violating their agency, and that's understood as being part of the central premise of the game. Slicing that between "consequences" and some other distinction (which I think you're making with regard to "wrongful" violations in that regard) strikes me as being artificial in nature. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Gloves Are Off?
Top