Player Agency and Planning Autonomy
Player agency in tabletop RPGs is a concept I struggle with for just over two years now, at least ever since my Pendragon campaign, Sunrise Quest, and this struggle has been profitable for myself, as I have reached many thoughts I wouldn't have otherwise, epitomised by these lessons.
I believe I have finally reached the lynchpin of my grief with the concept, which is this: what rankles me isn't a lack of player agency, it is a lack of planning autonomy.
When we talk about agency in these games, usually it is framed around a discussion of decisions. If the decisions the players make, such as taking this or that door, or helping out NPC A or NPC B, if these decisions impact the world and lead to different outcomes, then we say the agency of the players is being respected. If the decisions lead to the same outcome they would have otherwise, many believe this to be a subtle form of manipulation of the player agency; if not when the manipulation is direct and the game's mistress simply reduces the field of play and the potential decision-points against the wishes of the players, forcing them down a specific path for her own reasons.
Under this prism, it is quite difficult for the players not to have agency so long as both are engaging in good faith and the GM isn't being controlling. Thus, in my games, the players have always had agency - what they haven't always had is planning autonomy. That is to say, the safety the players feel in making long and short term plans to steer the game on their own, rather than relying on either the GM to present the next chapter.
In my own games, such as And in the Darkness, Hearts Aglow, the players haven't always had the opportunity to declare where the game would go now. In this specific example, the entirety of the game has been agreed upon: the Heart Engine requires the game to take place week by week, and thus time passes in a nigh-GMless fashion, with each player reacting to the events that come their way, but as the GM I obviously can stop this flow of time and introduce adventure and conflict, like I did in the 20th session. However, the only time a player actually managed to make a plan and execute it independently, putting me the GM in the reactive role of saying what happens based on reckoning, was in the 27th session.
Contrast this to the Arden Vul Weasels' campaign, where the field of play is laid out entirely in front of them from the start and they can plan with accuracy and intent where and how they would like the game to go next. Mind, I am not talking about structure here, it's not the fact that the Weasels can pick what door they will enter and knowing that door will lead somewhere new that gives them planning autonomy, as that would be an exercise of their agency. Rather, it is the fact that the Weasels can, between sessions, make an informed list of their goals and means, and do their best to put it in action when the game rolls around.
In Hearts Aglow this is possible only at the most personal level. Their personal goals and means will be shaped by the world, it is ultimately a reaction to the goings-on of the procedure rather than a plan of action of dubious yet reasonable effectiveness.
I believe most investigative games transit in the twilight between these two extremes, as the players can rarely plan for an investigation which will only be introduced in the session, but once they have the baseline, they can do with it whatever they want - this being why I always tried to brief my players in my Delta Green campaign before the session itself. Yet this only touches on short-term planning, it would only be long-term planning if the players had leads that spiral upward the organogram of a conspiracy or something to that effect, which Delta Green historically very much recommended you to do (and which it tries to emulate through long campaign modules like God's Teeth), but which I didn't in mine.
Lastly, I do not cast any value of judgement in the lack of planning autonomy - like I said, Hearts Aglow is one of my favourite campaigns ever and it certainly lacks long-term planning autonomy - although I do prefer campaigns that have it over ones that don't, and will keep this in mind for my future games.