4e / GSL Rule "Yes"

[Mark]

Rule Zero was often cited in previous editions of D&D as a way for DMs to disallow circumstances or actions that the rest of the rules might support but which the DM felt was untenable. The new edition has a so-called Rule "Yes" default that suggests the DM should allow most things in an effort to promote fun, sometimes at the expense of realism or other concerns. How often has Rule "Yes" come to the fore in your 4E games? (and explain, please.)

[Fallen Seraph]

Rule "Yes" is basically written into my Houserules.

Where a person can use a Power but only certain part of it, if he wishes, ie: only healing part, not attacking part.

Another is having the player being able to use Stunts, Skill Challenges, Pg. 42 during the midst of a Power.

I am also very loose when it comes to how Powers are used, sure it may say a "creature" but you can target anything you want for example.

All of these stem from Rule "Yes" in some way or another.

[Scribble]

I think rule "yes" is an interesting thing. I think it's always supposed to have existed, but wasn't always expressed.

I think a good DM is not only a fair ref of the rules, but also part ad-hoc game designer. It's what makes RPGs special... the idea that I can try to do stuff not nessesarily presented to me by the rules as written.

Unfortunately I think too many times DMs and players forget this. It's why people used to get into arguments about why you need to be a thief in order to climb walls, or try to hide.

3e seemed to try to combat this "you can't do that!" attitude by trying to add rules for every action or idea, then adding the rule 0 idea that if it goes too far, a DM has a rule that says he can limit it.

4e takes I think the opposite approach. Put in rules for the most common actions, and add the "rule" that even if it's not a rule DM's should try to find a way to make it work (or at least let it be attempted) anyway.

[Toben the Many]

The Rule "Yes" is really - the Rule "Yes, and...."

The "and" is very important. It prevents the players from running all over the campaign world, but still allows for PC input.

[Walknot]

This does not seem like an easy rule to implement.

But how sweet to make yes the default answer!

[Wormwood]

Originally Posted by Scribble

I think rule "yes" is an interesting thing. I think it's always supposed to have existed, but wasn't always expressed.

This.

I've been a staunch supporter of the "say 'Yes' or roll the dice" philosophy for some time. D&D may have been late to the party, but I'm glad it showed up.

[KB9JMQ]

I run a very Yes game.
I believe it is the best answer to keep things from bogging down.

[Hobo]

1) Is this ONLY 4e? I used a variation of that rule all the time in 3.5.

2) What do you mean by "game" in terms of how often it happens? Do you mean session? Or campaign?

[Remathilis]

Often, but I do lay my foot down on the sometimes nonsensical actions ("I tell the full-hp, higher-level white dragon to stand down")

[blargney the second]

The party's scout got swallowed by a gargantuan mutant eel, then swallowed by a shark inside the eel. So the revenant blade, who was wearing a cloak of the manta ray asked if he could swim down the eel's throat.

Me: "Okay, roll a swim check." (I set the DC to 25 in my head.)
Revenant blade: "Natural 20, so 30 something."
Me: *gawking* "You dart between its tentacles and swim easily down its throat. You've got a double scimitar, right? Make a free attack as you go down the hatch."

[El Mahdi]

Originally Posted by Wormwood

I've been a staunch supporter of the "say 'Yes' or roll the dice" philosophy for some time. D&D may have been late to the party, but I'm glad it showed up.

Yup. Pretty much used this for some time also (at least the last 10 years). I've seen this concept covered many times (I think I saw it in old issues of Dragon magazine and in articles on WoTC website) long before 4E was conceived. I don't think D&D was late to the party, but 4E seems to be the first time they have codified it in the rules.

I picked at least every game (even though I'm not using 4E). I didn't really DM much during 2E, but with 3E, I used this concept a lot (and still do).

[Umbran]

I haven't played a whole lot of 4e yet, so my experience there isn't useful for your question.

However, I think the point should be made that this isn't a 4e thing, really. It's a GMing advice thing, that has little to do with the edition you're playing. If you ask how often we've applied that precept as GMs, in general, I think you'd find that it has been a common idea for years. I would not be surprised if it shows up in the published advice (in either the rulebooks or Dragon) for prior editions, and even in games other than D&D.

[Jack99]

I have run no-games for many years. Mostly because one of my players is always trying to bend the rules and do weird things, which are just borderline "out there", but not totally breaking the rules. At least thats why I think my games have been "no-games".

But after reading the "Yes-rule", I decided to change that, and I have. And it comes into play during every single session, and I must admit, my games aren't any worse off, while the player has more fun, so all in all, I have been very happy about the change it (the rule) made me do.

Cheers

[Treebore]

I say "Yes" whenever possible. As long as its up to me to decide when "possible" is. Which I agree is whenever it won't ruin the game, or screw up the campaign, etc...

4E didn't tell me that. I realized it was a good practice over 20 years ago.

[jensun]

Originally Posted by Wormwood

This.

I've been a staunch supporter of the "say 'Yes' or roll the dice" philosophy for some time. D&D may have been late to the party, but I'm glad it showed up.

+1

While not specific to 4e this is probably the first version of D&D to explicitly articulate the issue.

Its a common concpet in a lot of indie games.

[Mathew_Freeman]

Originally Posted by blargney the second

The party's scout got swallowed by a gargantuan mutant eel, then swallowed by a shark inside the eel. So the revenant blade, who was wearing a cloak of the manta ray asked if he could swim down the eel's throat.

Me: "Okay, roll a swim check." (I set the DC to 25 in my head.)
Revenant blade: "Natural 20, so 30 something."
Me: *gawking* "You dart between its tentacles and swim easily down its throat. You've got a double scimitar, right? Make a free attack as you go down the hatch."

Wheeee! Awesome stuff.

It's not come up particularly in my games so far, but I'm intending to give my players a bit of a "stunt-rules primer" when next we play to try and encourage them to do this stuff.

[Ander00]

Honestly, I wish my party would ask more so I'd get more chances to say "Yes". I've gone ahead and allowed them some things they did not even ask for, to get the message across, but everyone's probably a bit too used to the default answer being "No" in other games.


cheers

[Fallen Seraph]

I don't think it is so much people would be used to "no" as much as people are still used to the whole DM vs. Players mentally that has been fostered in the past. Rather then DM and Players working together mentality now more at the forefront.

[ProfessorCirno]

I wouldn't even say it's a DM vs the Players issue. It's more of an issue with players purposefully asking dumb things they know won't fly, but ask it anyways just in case.

The "rules of yes" is nice and all, but sometimes you do have to say "No, you cannot dual wield great crossbows that are two sizes bigger then normal."

Also, was the rule of yes the one in the 4e book that had the example of the DM being told what to do? Because that was like the worst argument ever for that rule

[questing gm]

Is this the legendary rule on pg. 42 of the DMG?