Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="overgeeked" data-source="post: 8336195" data-attributes="member: 86653">I fundamentally disagree. I tend to run sandboxes. The players have full agency. If you mean to push it into pedantry by declaring that the DM choosing to run a sandbox is limiting player agency or the DM picking a world to run the sandbox in is also limiting player agency, then you're clearly taking the piss and there's no conversation to be had.Maintaining the illusion that you're really dwarfs in a fantasy land hacking up monsters, yes. There's literally zero need for the illusion of choice.No, we're not. One is effectively a random encounter. The other is the illusion of choice.Correct.Incorrect. The difference is that in one the DM decided on a random encounter at a location, while in the other the DM decided that no matter what the players do they're going to encounter those ogres.Not quite. The whole point of a role-playing game is to cooperatively play. The players must have input that affects the fiction for that to happen. If the players have no input, it's not a cooperative role-playing game. The DM doesn't create the fiction. You're thinking of novels and short stories. In an RPG, the DM creates the world, puts the PCs in it, and sees what happens. That combination of elements, DM choices + player choices + actual play, that creates the fiction.Again, disagree. It does matter.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="overgeeked, post: 8336195, member: 86653"] I fundamentally disagree. I tend to run sandboxes. The players have full agency. If you mean to push it into pedantry by declaring that the DM choosing to run a sandbox is limiting player agency or the DM picking a world to run the sandbox in is also limiting player agency, then you're clearly taking the piss and there's no conversation to be had. Maintaining the illusion that you're really dwarfs in a fantasy land hacking up monsters, yes. There's literally zero need for the illusion of choice. No, we're not. One is effectively a random encounter. The other is the illusion of choice. Correct. Incorrect. The difference is that in one the DM decided on a random encounter at a location, while in the other the DM decided that no matter what the players do they're going to encounter those ogres. Not quite. The whole point of a role-playing game is to cooperatively play. The players must have input that affects the fiction for that to happen. If the players have no input, it's not a cooperative role-playing game. The DM doesn't create the fiction. You're thinking of novels and short stories. In an RPG, the DM creates the world, puts the PCs in it, and sees what happens. That combination of elements, DM choices + player choices + actual play, that creates the fiction. Again, disagree. It does matter. [/QUOTE]

Verification