Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7354642" data-attributes="member: 29398">Perhaps, though much of the experience of the game IME that players remember afterwards is what happened to their characters in the game, and what they did, and how.The players in fact probably aren't defining what the game is about, in broad terms e.g. court intrigue or gritty warfare or swashbuckling space marines, once play has started; as that would have been sorted out by all involved before play began.&nbsp; This usually goes something like:DM: Hey, I've got this idea for a campaign - court intrigue, kings and nobles, that sort of thing.&nbsp; Who's in?&quot;Some players: &quot;Yeah, sure - when do we start?&quot;Other players: &quot;No thanks, not my cup of tea.&quot;Yeah, at the limit this would be pretty boring to DM too - kind of the equivalent of &quot;you are in a maze of little twisty passages, all alike&quot;. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />But based on a more normal game my disagreement with pemerton is that it's not so much a question of less agency as a different type of agency, and the argument then becomes which type is more valid.Well, they actually can after a fashion if - when presented with a menu of choices - they choose 'none of the above' and then proactively go looking for something else, thus forcing the DM to think up new things she hasn't thought of yet.We can ask, though I think everyone involved in this thread has at some point by now given a decent and considered answer one way or another.Now we're just arguing about the answers. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Lanefan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 7354642, member: 29398"] Perhaps, though much of the experience of the game IME that players remember afterwards is what happened to their characters in the game, and what they did, and how. The players in fact probably aren't defining what the game is about, in broad terms e.g. court intrigue or gritty warfare or swashbuckling space marines, once play has started; as that would have been sorted out by all involved before play began. This usually goes something like: DM: Hey, I've got this idea for a campaign - court intrigue, kings and nobles, that sort of thing. Who's in?" Some players: "Yeah, sure - when do we start?" Other players: "No thanks, not my cup of tea." Yeah, at the limit this would be pretty boring to DM too - kind of the equivalent of "you are in a maze of little twisty passages, all alike". :) But based on a more normal game my disagreement with pemerton is that it's not so much a question of less agency as a different type of agency, and the argument then becomes which type is more valid. Well, they actually can after a fashion if - when presented with a menu of choices - they choose 'none of the above' and then proactively go looking for something else, thus forcing the DM to think up new things she hasn't thought of yet. We can ask, though I think everyone involved in this thread has at some point by now given a decent and considered answer one way or another. Now we're just arguing about the answers. :) Lanefan [/QUOTE]

Verification