How much control should players really have over a pre-written story?
I've been thinking about a game setup where the main story beats are locked in ahead of time, but players still get to nudge certain things along the way.
Things like
- who ends up allying with whom
- what resources the group has on hand
- whether some private conversations even happen
- how ready a character is for the next big event
- which short-term plan gets picked
But the overall narrative arc stays authored.
The design question that keeps bugging me is if the ending is set in stone, doesn't player agency eventually start to feel like an illusion?
But if you let players change the ending completely, then pacing, character arcs, and story coherence get a lot harder to keep together.
So where would you draw that line?
Would you rather let players alter the actual ending, or let them shape the journey, relationships, resources, and fallout in meaningful ways while keeping the big picture intact?
I'm especially curious how people here draw the line between meaningful agency and just throwing in more dialogue branches for the sake of choice.