Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1032142Also, "player agency" is not limited to having control over your will.  I'd say that is not even the main focus of player agency. Rather, player agency is being allowed to make decisions.  Those decisions don't have to succeed.  If you are in a game that has a mechanic where your character can succumb to a flaw, then it is not losing player agency to sometimes roll against that mechanic and lose control.  It is losing player agency, for example, if the GM just decides that you don't get to roll against the normal mechanic.*  It is not losing player agency if you decide that your guy just fails.  You made the decision whether or not to fight the temptation--agency.  Then the dice decided you failed.  The character lost agency; the player did not.

Bada boom bada BINGO!

Quote from: Skepticultist;1032150You both appear to be describing character agency.  Player agency has more to do with exercising control over the fiction of the setting.

An example of player exercising player agency would be a player saying something like "I reach out to my street contracts and find someone who will sell me a map of the secret sewer entrance to the castle," when the GM has not established that any such entrance exists.  If the GM allows this action, then they are encouraging player agency.   If the GM disallows this action, then they are limiting player agency.  Another example would be a player creating a character that is a member of the Order of Assassins, when then GM has established that any such Order exists.  Essentially "player agency" means that players are able to contribute facts about setting to the game, which has traditionally been the purview of the GM.

Nope.  Player agency has nothing to do with exercising GM powers.

And now comes three hundred posts of "definition bingo" and goal-post moving.

I agree with Big Green, personally.  But this thread is done for.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1032212And now comes three hundred posts of "definition bingo" and goal-post moving.

I agree with Big Green, personally.  But this thread is done for.

Eh, this came up not all that long ago, everyone just said "Nope, Agency is choice, PERIOD" and we kind of all just moved on.

I guess it is about the Gamest / Simulest divide.
=

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1032142To answer the main question in the subject:  Because games aren't real life. ... player agency is being allowed to make decisions.

Pretty much this. I do this for entertainment, and quite rarely am I looking for catharsis.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;1032180If there are obviously good and bad choices, they aren't really choices.

You would think so. But, amazingly, some people do make a habit of choosing poorly.

(Imagine the scene in Scary Movie where Carmen Electra is looking at the signs saying "Safety" and "Death".)

Quote from: CRKrueger;1032188Nope.  Player agency has nothing to do with exercising GM powers.

Well, you're wrong. So...I don't know what else to say.  I've been in plenty of arguments with the storygamer types who whinge constantly about player agency, and that's what they are talking about.  I mean, you can say "Nope" all you want, but you don't know what you're talking about.  The whole concept of "player agency" is meant as a challenge to the very assumption that "GM powers" belong exclusively to the GM, so saying it has "nothing to do" with exercising GM powers only demonstrates that you literally have no understanding of the issue and your entire frame of reference is useless.

Have fun with that.

Quote from: Skepticultist;1032294Well, you're wrong. So...I don't know what else to say.  I've been in plenty of arguments with the storygamer types who whinge constantly about player agency, and that's what they are talking about.  I mean, you can say "Nope" all you want, but you don't know what you're talking about.  The whole concept of "player agency" is meant as a challenge to the very assumption that "GM powers" belong exclusively to the GM, so saying it has "nothing to do" with exercising GM powers only demonstrates that you literally have no understanding of the issue and your entire frame of reference is useless.

Googling "player agency" turns up a slew of discussions, articles, podcasts, etc with many different ideas about what "agency" means. There is no one agreed definition, except at the high level of "what players can or can't choose to do and affect".

Here in this thread, Greentongue the OP spelled out the context he was asking about pretty clearly, and it was not about storygaming or players having "agency" over traditionally-GM-domain things.

Quote from: CRKrueger;1032215Eh, this came up not all that long ago, everyone just said "Nope, Agency is choice, PERIOD" and we kind of all just moved on.

Good enough.  Personally, just hearing terms like "player agency" tends to give me explosive flatulence.

SPLUURRRRRKKKK!!!  sorry

* wrings out underwear *

Quote from: Skepticultist;1032294Well, you're wrong. So...I don't know what else to say.  I've been in plenty of arguments with the storygamer types who whinge constantly about player agency, and that's what they are talking about.  I mean, you can say "Nope" all you want, but you don't know what you're talking about.  The whole concept of "player agency" is meant as a challenge to the very assumption that "GM powers" belong exclusively to the GM, so saying it has "nothing to do" with exercising GM powers only demonstrates that you literally have no understanding of the issue and your entire frame of reference is useless.

Have fun with that.

Crom DAMN it, we need that fucking popcorn smiley back!!!

I like the breakdown between "character agency" and "player agency". That makes much more sense and allows for better discussions. Unfortunately, I have generally seen them convoluted as the same thing when clearly they are not.

To me, "character agency" is all about roleplaying. If you choose to play a drunk gunfighter, then your PC has a hard time resisting the juice. If your PC gets charmed, you get to play a charmed PC. If your PC belongs to a culture who hates elves, then at bare minimum, you get to play a PC with a bias against elves.

What's the appeal of roleplaying if the dice dictate what you feel and do?

"Roll to care about the quest-giver's request"

"Roll to be brave enough to enter the dungeon"

"Roll to contemplate your life decisions as the ogre bears down on you"

Wouldn't it be more interesting to, y'know, roleplay that stuff? Make decisions about who your character is? Define your character through those choices?

Why give your agency over to the idiot-god of the dice? Do you routinely flip coins to make major life decisions like Two-Face?

Games have rules for exhaustion, dsisease, death, curses... Do we really need rules to dictate impulse control? Cortisol levels?

Like I'm all for realism and grit but come on

I understand you might get tired of your players always being like "I stoically choose the difficult and heroic option because GOOD GUY" and it's not actually hard for them in real life. Stop running for boring assholes. Find a player who's like "My character is addicted to opium and has poor impulse control" and have yourself a ball. It worked for me!

Quote from: Skepticultist;1032294Well, you're wrong. So...I don't know what else to say.  I've been in plenty of arguments with the storygamer types who whinge constantly about player agency, and that's what they are talking about.  I mean, you can say "Nope" all you want, but you don't know what you're talking about.  The whole concept of "player agency" is meant as a challenge to the very assumption that "GM powers" belong exclusively to the GM, so saying it has "nothing to do" with exercising GM powers only demonstrates that you literally have no understanding of the issue and your entire frame of reference is useless.

Have fun with that.

Nope, you are wrong.  Though given your source material, it wouldn't be the first time that an overly narrowed definition was hijacked by that crowd to try to mean less than it is.  Have fun with that, if you can call what that is fun.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1032307Good enough.  Personally, just hearing terms like "player agency" tends to give me explosive flatulence.

SPLUURRRRRKKKK!!!  sorry

* wrings out underwear *

The only thing I find more cringey than intellectual wankery over elfgames, is mocking intellectual wankery over elfgames. There's a sweet spot.

If a person is a GM worth their salt, why shouldn't they put some skull work into how they can make their games more cool and fun? Or is that overthinking things?

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1032328The only thing I find more cringey than intellectual wankery over elfgames, is mocking intellectual wankery over elfgames. There's a sweet spot.

I have to agree here.  It may not be the intent, but posts mocking give the impression of "ONE TRUE WAYISM!" and in my experience, t'ain't no such animal.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1032328If a person is a GM worth their salt, why shouldn't they put some skull work into how they can make their games more cool and fun? Or is that overthinking things?

In my experience if everyone is having fun, and adding more detail just adds to it?  I don't think it's a bad thing.

But that's just my experience, which is purely anecdotal and not claimed to be fact in any way.