D&D General What is player agency to you?

[Scott Christian]

Traditionally in a medieval European society, when people travelled nobles would provide lodging for other nobles. But this was because they were of the same social caste and because there was always the possibility of gaining some sort of advantage through trade ties or even just gossip. Ultimately though it was because they had some reason to respect your title if not your family and reputation. Go far enough and that title will be completely meaningless and gives you no leverage.

@hawkeyefan For this one specific example I would also add that it says:

"You can secure an audience with a local noble if you need to."

It could be argued that local means exactly what Oofta says it means in the above paragraph.

 

[FrogReaver]

@hawkeyefan For this one specific example I would also add that it says:

"You can secure an audience with a local noble if you need to."

It could be argued that local means exactly what Oofta says it means in the above paragraph.

You know, i've read that 1000 times and never once keyed in on the word local. That does seem to solve most of the issues around that particular background ability.

 

[Oofta]

Would you agree that all their agency to alter the world is subject to a GM veto? (Beyond just dialogue and direct action declarations)

Their agency to alter the world is through what they say and do. "Beyond just dialog and direct action declarations" doesn't apply.

 

[Scott Christian]

Really? So, for example, a player who has built a Silver Pyromancer, a character whose focus is doing damage with fire spells, isn't going to have any reaction whatsoever to being told, "oh, actually, you're in a space where fire spells do half damage now." I find this difficult to believe; I think this player, and a variety of other players, would respond rather strongly to things of this nature. I think you are severely over-stating your case.

Rather, in order to achieve what you describe--players simply accepting a thing without much comment or criticism--the DM needs to build up the reason why there is or should be a place where fire spells deal half damage. Instead of simply declaring that it is true, or perhaps not declaring it and leaving it as a(n unpleasant) surprise for later, the DM has to metaphorically show their work. Now, they don't have to shout it from the rooftops and give a full Vaudeville show, but either this quirk needs to be called out openly, or the players need a clear and fair opportunity to find out (even if it just ends up being that they didn't do so), or, preferably, a trail of diegetic breadcrumbs leads to the reveal at least a little bit in advance.

I just have to say this seems like a really odd take for you EzekielRaiden. Your takes are normally so grounded in logic. Can we start with paragraph 2:

I assume any experienced DM would give reasons why a place exists. They would also foreshadow it. And many would have a historical component to its uniqueness.

Paragraph 1:

Does that pyromancer complain when they have a combat encounter where the creature has fire immunity? It is part of the game sometimes (not always). A tit-for-tat. A, "Hey, I let you blast things with your fireball three games in a row. It was fun, huh? Now you encounter someone with counterspell."

Again, I never liked that style being the only style. But sometimes, players need to overcome obstacles. And a place where their strengths are not strengths, that should be looked at as a challenge, not something to complain about.

 

[Mort]

@hawkeyefan For this one specific example I would also add that it says:

"You can secure an audience with a local noble if you need to."

It could be argued that local means exactly what Oofta says it means in the above paragraph.

Or it could just as easily mean a noble LOCAL to the area you are in (wherever that may be). Natural language is like that.

Backgrounds are optional, and their features are optional. I think interpreting it the way I am adds a fun element to the game. Your mileage may vary

 

[Oofta]

I thought we were done with this, but ok.

These are ALL just the DM saying "nah, I don't want to..."

The City of Brass Noble could be intrigued by the novelty.

He could easily recognize the massively beneficial trade opportunities in having a direct connection to the material plane.

He could have a task that would best be accomplished by foreign mortals.

There are countless reasons to grant audience. And because of the feature, you pick one of those - easy.



Yet more "I just don't want to..."

The DM can ALWAYS find a reason to or not to make the feature work and ensure it's completely consistent with the politics at hand.



The feature can easily comply with your criteria and still work.

But I get what you are saying, I really do. In which case, your players need to know that the feature is watered down when they are picking options.

So someone wants to have a meeting with the President of the United States. They claim they "deserve" an audience because they are the Prelate of Alpha Centauri B. Would that work? Let's take another example. The group is lost in the underdark. Everyone they've encountered is hostile and tries to either kill or enslave them. One of the PCs has the criminal background that has the feature that they can get a message to their criminal contact. I'm not going to invent a (relatively) friendly smuggler just so they can pass a message along. Perhaps once they figure out how to survive and somehow establish at least a temporary truce and relationship with the locals it can happen. But when every time they encounter other humanoids it's quickly followed by "Roll for initiative"? No.

I'm not going to twist world building lore that way. If that means I'm not the right DM for you, so be it.

 

[SteveC]

Yet more "I just don't want to..."

The DM can ALWAYS find a reason to or not to make the feature work and ensure it's completely consistent with the politics at hand.

I absolutely agree with what you wrote here, and it really does get to the heart of agency for me. If a player has an ability like you're describing, I would absolutely expect it to function in the City of Brass or on Olympus or pretty much every other realm. Maybe that's because I'm reading fairy tales and mythological stories to my daughter, but the social dynamics of the "real world" do seem to be reflected in higher planes.

Beyond that: it's a character taking some initiative to turn the game session in terms of their character's background, and that's something I want to encourage. Beyond even that: it's going to make for an exciting encounter that the players might be talking about years later. It's going to make for a more interesting game than: no, you can't do that. Go back to what the adventure is telling you to do next.

I can't imagine a GM who wouldn't be chomping at the bit to make the character's lives more interesting and dangerous with such an experience. Especially if most of the group has neglected social skills and graces. It could make for a very interesting experience indeed.

Just saying "no" is a cop out. At the very least, I'd give the player a skill check in situations like this where you could determine if they could proceed or not. And not at some insane super-human difficulty level either, that's just masking saying "no."

We're not at the level of Fate or PbtA here, we're just letting a character make the game more interesting and wonderous by using one of their character's abilities. Now I would argue that introducing some of the elements from those games into D&D makes it better, but it also makes it a different game, which is not to everyone's tastes.

 

[FrogReaver]

I don't find these claims plausible. I've read lots of posts and discussions - mostly pertaining to 3E/PF - about issues with using undead-heavy scenarios when a player is a rogue, about issues around blocking certain sorts of spell approaches, etc.

I think that was and still is an issue but not the same issue we are discussing here.

Intra PC balance for spotlight reasons tends to be important to players but have nothing to do with agency.

Some solutions to this problem - tell player upfront about the campaign so they can pick an appropriate character. Another one is simply let them change their character mid campaign if it’s not working out for them.

How does the GM force the players to follow whatever it is that they've prepped?

As I know you are aware, there are many techniques to ‘force’ players in a particular direction. Should we really be going down that rabbit hole?

 

[Mort]

So someone wants to have a meeting with the President of the United States. They claim they "deserve" an audience because they are the Prelate of Alpha Centauri B. Would that work?

The Noble feature isn't a con, they ARE the prelate of Alpha centauri. And if that's the case, you better believe the president would take that meeting (and of course have the Men In Black Ready for action....)

Let's take another example. The group is lost in the underdark. Everyone they've encountered is hostile and tries to either kill or enslave them. One of the PCs has the criminal background that has the feature that they can get a message to their criminal contact. I'm not going to invent a (relatively) friendly smuggler just so they can pass a message along. Perhaps once they figure out how to survive and somehow establish at least a temporary truce and relationship with the locals it can happen. But when every time they encounter other humanoids it's quickly followed by "Roll for initiative"? No.

I'm not going to twist world building lore that way. If that means I'm not the right DM for you, so be it.

Yes, if you deliberately set up a situation where the PCs literally can't even open their mouths without a fight breaking out - then really nothing but fighting can get done.

You can ALWAYS set up a situation where something doesn't work. And used as a fringe case - sure why not - variety and shaking things up is the way to spice up adventures.

But if the guy with the criminal background ALWAYS (or even often) encounters these situations, where his picked ability doesn't work? Why even bother writing it down?

 

[FrozenNorth]

interesting, so it is not predefined what the cupboard contains? Schroedingers container...

If the DM instead rolls on a loot table, would it still be Schroedinger’s container? If not, why not? If so, does it mean that Schroedinger’s container isn’t a bad thing?