D&D General What is player agency to you?

[pemerton]

Why does it matter? It can happen as a general thing wherever a DM has discretion, so we don't need a specific example.

Various. It doesn't matter. All that matters is that DMs of that system are able to be played just as in any other RPG that has a DM.

Until you provide me with an example, or at least a hypothetical illustration, why should I believe you?

It's an empty claim with no basis in actual knowledge of the play procedures of the game.

 

[Maxperson]

Until you provide me with an example, or at least a hypothetical illustration, why should I believe you?

Because it's a fact of being human. Any human that is a DM with discretion can in fact be manipulated(played) into using that discretion to the advantage of the player doing the manipulation. Are you claiming that humans cannot be manipulated?

It's an empty claim with no basis in actual knowledge of the play procedures of the game.

The exact procedures aren't relevant. Only whether or not the DM has discretion over portions of the game at any point. If yes, then he can in fact be manipulated(played) during those times. Are you saying that there's never a point where the DM of Burning Wheel has discretion?

 

[Old Fezziwig]

The exact procedures aren't relevant. Only whether or not the DM has discretion over portions of the game at any point. If yes, then he can in fact be manipulated(played) during those times. Are you saying that there's never a point where the DM of Burning Wheel has discretion?

I think the point is not that the GM doesn't have discretion, but that the processes of play matter. In Burning Wheel, they would make it somewhat difficult for the players to manipulate things to their advantage.

 

[Maxperson]

I think the point is not that the GM doesn't have discretion, but that the processes of play in Burning Wheel make it difficult for the players to manipulate things to their advantage.

Difficult is not the same as impossible. Discretion = the possibility of such manipulation. I'm not saying it's common in Burning Wheel. I've never played it and don't know the rules, but if discretion exists, then at least some percentage of Burning Wheel games have involved a player or players gaming the DM.

 

[pointofyou]

I think the point is not that the GM doesn't have discretion, but that the processes of play matter. In Burning Wheel, they would make it somewhat difficult for the players to manipulate things to their advantage.

It would be pointless to manipulate the GM to the characters' advantage in Burning Wheel. It'd be missing the point of play and missing all the ways players can use the game's rules to manipulate things to the characters' advantage.

 

[Maxperson]

It would be pointless to manipulate the GM to the characters' advantage in Burning Wheel. It'd be missing the point of play and missing all the ways players can use the game's rules to manipulate things to the characters' advantage.

Since when have players always played without cheating or missing the point?

 

[pointofyou]

Since when have players always played without cheating or missing the point?

I honestly can't remember the last time either of those happened in a game I was involved in.

 

[Maxperson]

I honestly can't remember the last time either of those happened in a game I was involved in.

It does happen, though. There are a non-zero number of Burning Wheel games where the DM is gamed. It may not happen often. It may be missing the point. But it does happen.

 

[pointofyou]

It does happen, though. There are a non-zero number of Burning Wheel games where the DM is gamed. It may not happen often. It may be missing the point. But it does happen.

I'm not sure what it'd look like. "Please don't direct play to challenge my character's beliefs never mind that challenging my character's beliefs is what this game is supposed to be about?"

 

[bloodtide]

That's it. It's not complicated.

That's it though? A player says "I want to do this", the GM says "ok" and it's "just" a high player agency game after that point? Ok.

Well they look like typical sessions to me too! But given the visceral response they seem to generate from various ENworld posters, apparently they are not typical. The idea of the GM framing scenes, and narrating consequences, having regard to something other than the GM's imaginary conception of the setting and situation evokes a lot of controversy.

Well....I guess you'd say you DON'T do that........but you DO! I don't see how you separate the two. If a character walks into a store and the player asks "what is for sale"....you as the GM will then give your imaginary conception of the setting and situation. I guess you can say you are making a "frame" and just "narrating"...but you are giveing your imaginary conception of the setting and situation.

hope that provides a clear illustration and account of high player agency D&D play.

Well, based off this....you are saying High player agency is where EVERYTHING in the game is "in play" because the players requested it to be and the whole game revolves around only the players and their actions. So, going by your example, a GM must never create, do or add anything ever to the game...unless the players bring it into play.

Though I really don't get how you have a world that does not make sense. To me that just sounds like a random mish mash of random stuff....that by your defination will never, ever make sense. Again, your saying here the GM does nothing. The GM only acts when the players or the dice or the rules tell them to act.

I mean it makes sense that the only way for players to have any agency is for the GM to willing give up all their power....but you seem to take that to 11, as the GM just sits there want waits for the rules, rolls, or players to tell them what to do.

if you read my actual play posts, you will see that they talk about the use of prep.

Though to be clear your not talking about traditional game prep where a GM utterly and totally independent of the players, rolls or rules simply preps whatever THEY feel like having, making and using in the game world. And then have those people, places, things, events, and such happen independent of the actions of the players, any rolls or any rules.

You are only talking about the GM making prep the players want or things that were determined by rolls and rules.

This is why Burning Wheel tells players that, if the situation doesn't interest them, it's their job to make interesting situations. And I've posted actual play examples upthread: as a player, I have made Wises checks (thus making Evard's tower a focus of play) and Circles checks (thus bringing NPCs who are interesting to me into play).

Now that is interesting. Not really the rules....but the idea. Telling a player to make something they find uninteresting into something interesting. But I do see why there are rules...as most players idea of "interesting" would just be "I attackss!" And this where you get the "I'm bored...I attack the king yuck yuck yuck" kind of play...rules for action would prevent that.

But even where a game doesn't have such rules, it's not that hard in my experience to come up with stuff that speaks to player-authored goals and aspirations for their PCs. The first Torchbearer dungeon I wrote up included the dream-spirit of a banished Dwarf, locked within an Elfstone. I was fairly confident that this would speak to the two players - whose PCs were a Dwarven Outcast and an Elven Dreamwalker - and I was correct.

This is a fairly basic idea in any but the most simplistic fiction. Consider, for instance, Rick in Casablanca, or Han Solo in Star Wars.

Right, if you keep the game or fiction very tightly focused and simple...then you have no problem making stuff up. Your not even trying to come close to a game reality world simulation....you just have a spotlight on the characters. It's all about focus.

It's also very Cinematic. It's exactly what hollywood does for 75% or more of it's movies: simple, straightforward, easy to follow and understand entertainment for everyone. Star Wars is the perfect example: anyone from 5 and up can understand "empire bad, other people good, death star bad, death star must go boom" and watch the movie.

This also fits in perfectly...as SO, SO many players try this: they watch endless simple Hollywood stuff...then think reality...and the RPG game they play is just like the stuff they saw in the movies.

And that is EXACTLY the problem I have. The players encounter some sort of problem. They don;t even try to think about it or do anything close to reality. They just come up with a wacky, goofy idea.....and automatically expect it to work. JUST like in that type of Hollywood movie. The movie character encounters a problem....just says a random thing(that they writer thought of), and then are able to just "do the thing". Though sure the movie will have like ten minutes of "action" where you might think that maybe the character will fail (but you KNOW they will auto make it).

Just compare Star Wars. The Movie is written as an adventure for your type of game. Things just happen, a LOT and almost ALL of them make no sense. There is not even a hint of "simulated reality" or a "larger world" outside the very limited focus of the main characters.

Star Wars as a plot would never make it in MY game....there are way, way, way, way to many plot holes and just plain "unreality" and "no focus on the larger world". To just mention a FEW:

*So does a Star Destroyer have no landing craft to deploy on a planet? As far as the movie shows us...some stormtroopers come down to the planet and get some dewbacks to ride around on and...um..."look for the driods". I my fiction...I'd say...um does the star destroyer not even have ONE speeder in it? Probe droids? Tie fighters? they could have found the droids in minutes with any type of aircraft.

*Gee sure is nice the two droids get captured and sold to the dad of the main character....

*And Lukes family gets killed RIGHT ON QUE so he can take the Call To Adventure

*Gee sure is nice the "only" people in the bar with a ship were Han and Cheewy

*Sure is a good thing they get captured as it's the ONLY way they could have saved the Princess. This really is a good one. They don't set out on a quest to save the Princess....they just randomly stumble upon her and are like "oks, lets save her!"

*In the classic Star Wars move....it SURE is a good thing the Death Star drops in "way over there" that is "far away from the rebel base" and then they must "orbit?" the planet to blow up the base. This is beyond simple and beyond dumb space physics. Like if the Death Star came out of hype space ANYWHERE else except "right behind the planet", they could have blown up the base in less then a minute.

But see that's the difference. Your game has the troops on dewbacks hunting the drioids as the players/rolls/rules trigger that action.

In MY game....I have the fully detailed description of The Avenger(that's Vader's Star Destroyer here) so I know the ship has tie fighters, shuttles, speeder bikes, walkers and such. So in my game the two droid Player Character would be caught VERY quickly....