Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7359163" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Yes.A wall in a dungeon can be illusory or can contain a secret door or may have a message carved into the stone. It may do much more than simply block the PCs' progress. The only way to know is for the PCs to interact with the wall. Same with the guards. Why would the bribeability of the guards be broadcast to the players, but a secret door would not? I don't see the distinction here within the context of your analogy.Now, having said that, I would almost never have totally unbribeable guards in a game, unless there was some really compelling reason for it (I mentioned earlier that Modron guards on Mechanus would definitely fit this description). Especially if the players want an intrigue-laden, caper type campaign along the lines of the Gentlemen Bastards series. But let's say there is some compelling reason for bribery not to work. Modrons, per my example above, or magically compelled guards, or whatever the case may be. Why offer this information? Why not make the players work for it in some way? The players can find themselves in a situation where their normal solution won't work. Can't that be an interesting scene that goes where the action is?I don't think I see the fear of keeping secrets from the players that seems to be a major concern. Yes, I get that such secrets can be used poorly by the GM. But I also think they can be interesting complications to the players' plans, and what courses of actions are available to the characters. Pemerton would likely dismiss this as not being interested in this kind of "puzzle solving" but I don't really see it that way. So I'd like your take on it, if you care to share.So if I pre-establish in my GM notes that the guards may be open to bribery, but it will depend on the results of the PC's check, then how is this different from Story Now? I mean in the result at the table and the impact on the players' agency in this instance? This was my point. I see Framing as limiting agency to an extent. It puts a choice to the players and is compelling enough that it must be addressed. So their choices of what to do are now limited to what is possible to address the situation before them. The fact is that the player is accepting of the limits placed on his agency. And I don't have a problem with this....this is fine. But it's interesting that you agree with me, but Pemerton does not. My point being that Framing acts as a limit on player agency. It says "here is the situation...what do you do?" and in any situation, there are a limited number of actions. For some, probably [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION], forcing such a situation on the players is likely seen as a limit on agency. A game like that would likely begin with "what do you do?" and then determine the action in response to the players actions and the results thereof. I'm not advocating for either approach....I think I utilize both, but I tend to always have the players' interests in mind. But I think as you hint at above, a GM can take a LOT of leeway with what the player has offered as their interests in the game. The character who wants to prove his father wrong? You provided several different takes on it, and we ca come up with more, many of which would likely be very different from one another. I think I agree with most of this. I don't necessarily think that the GM should have no agenda at all, nor that a story now game is entirely free of such, but other than that, I think the rest makes perfect sense. The players are accepting of the limits placed on their agency, because they know it will drive the game in a way that they've expressed interest. I don't know if I see it as all that different in that basic way from a sandbox style game where the GM has pre-determined all the nearby areas and the threats and challenges they contain, as long as the players have expressed interest in this style. In that sense, they're accepting of the limits that are being placed on their agency because they know the game that will result is one in which they're likely to be interested.Again, I think so much of this goes back to the player and GM's expectations, and what the style or methods being used will bring to the game</blockquote>

Verification