Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 9087684" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Yeah, the way I interpret this is that there is a GAME going on here. It has rules, and a 'process of play' which are necessary in order to construct a session of play at the table, otherwise you have just a GM fiddling with dice and telling a story (or whatever). The players know the rules, and the rules are designed to precipitate conflict, to make it so that the players will DO stuff. There's no 'lack of agency' here whatsoever, the game is simply played a certain way. It would be equally pointless to say that in chess the Checkmate rule removes some player's agency because they can't ignore it and keep playing! Agency isn't "do anything you feel like" its empowerment to make meaningful choices. This is why the choices have to be informed and they have to produce genuinely distinct outcomes, the stakes need to be explicit, etc. Without all that you have performance, but not agency. Without rules you have performance, but no game, and without game to give structure to stakes, its hard to have agency either! I will say that PRINCIPLES can operate like rules though, so not everything must be pure mechanics, games like Dungeon World have GM principles that also structure conflict.</p></blockquote><p></p>