I hope the three core rulebooks have a "DM's clause".

Geoffrey · Aug 25, 2007

I'd like to see the 4E Players Handbook have on page 1 a short statement similar to the following: "The content of this book is only a starting point for Dungeon Masters. They are encouraged to add to, subtract from, and/or alter any of this book's rules or content to suit their campaigns. Therefore, be sure to check with your Dungeon Master before you create your character about any special additions, subtractions, or changes to this book's content in his campaign."

A similar statement could be included on page 1 of both the DMG and the MM, only addressed to DMs rather than to players.

Why?

Because I do not relish the thought of some players trying to force a DM to allow races, classes, equipment, spells, etc. in his campaign for no other reason than that such things are in the Players Handbook. The DM in such a case could simply refer the player to the very first page of the Players Handbook and say, "Look. Not only is it in the core rulebook, but it's on the very first page. There are no _____ in my campaign. Case closed."

SHARK · Aug 25, 2007

Greetings!

I thought was what "RULE ZERO" was for?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Reynard · Aug 25, 2007

Geoffrey said:
I'd like to see the 4E Players Handbook have on page 1 a short statement similar to the following: "The content of this book is only a starting point for Dungeon Masters. They are encouraged to add to, subtract from, and/or alter any of this book's rules or content to suit their campaigns. Therefore, be sure to check with your Dungeon Master before you create your character about any special additions, subtractions, or changes to this book's content in his campaign."

A similar statement could be included on page 1 of both the DMG and the MM, only addressed to DMs rather than to players.

Why?

Because I do not relish the thought of some players trying to force a DM to allow races, classes, equipment, spells, etc. in his campaign for no other reason than that such things are in the Players Handbook. The DM in such a case could simply refer the player to the very first page of the Players Handbook and say, "Look. Not only is it in the core rulebook, but it's on the very first page. There are no _____ in my campaign. Case closed."

Good luck. 3.5 is a player's game, and I think 4e will be as well.

Whizbang Dustyboots · Aug 25, 2007

Reynard said:
Good luck. 3.5 is a player's game, and I think 4e will be as well.

You missed Rule Zero.

Geoffrey · Aug 25, 2007

SHARK said:
Greetings!

I thought was what "RULE ZERO" was for?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Is this actually in the 3.5 D&D core rulebooks? I never bought them since (to my taste) the game is too complicated. The promise of 4th edition being less complicated is making me think that I might be interested in 4th edition.

marune · Aug 25, 2007

I'm a DM and I don't want a Rule 0, I prefer to talk with my players and build the campaign framework with them.

Thunderfoot · Aug 25, 2007

Reynard said:
Good luck. 3.5 is a player's game, and I think 4e will be as well.

Tell that to my players, I think you'd be shocked at their answers....

If its in the DMG, you as a player have no RIGHT or BUSINESS looking at it. Likewise, if a DM decides that a rule is broken or a ruling better suits the campaign, he/she has the right to pitch, alter it or add to it as he/she sees fit.

If 4E is truly going to be lighter in the rules department, then DMs will have to take back some of their lost power, otherwise, it just won't work. Whether its 'Rule 0 ' or 'DM caveat' or 'Opinion of the Referee' or a new name for the new edition, the DM should/is and always will be (in my games anyway) the last word of rules interpretation.

RigaMortus2 · Aug 25, 2007

skeptic said:
I'm a DM and I don't want a Rule 0, I prefer to talk with my players and build the campaign framework with them.

Yeah, but if it's not written down on the first page stating that the DM is the final arbiter, then when you try to enforce a new rule, the players will say it's not RAW and then they'll be able to 'win'!!! And no DM wants the players to win. No DM...

mhacdebhandia · Aug 25, 2007

Thunderfoot said:
If its in the DMG, you as a player have no RIGHT or BUSINESS looking at it.

Garbage. Some of the reasons why are edition specific, and others are not:

What if you're running your own game?

What if you're playing a member of one of the prestige classes in the Dungeon Master's Guide?

What if you're playing a character with a magic item creation feat, or Hell - even the Craft skill, and need to know about special materials?

What if you're playing a character who knows something about the Inner and Outer Planes?

The Viking Hat-wearing GMing style should die a quick but painful death, if you ask me. It's fine if the group, as a whole, agrees that the GM should be the final arbiter, but it should never ever in a million years ever be the assumed default.

Greatwyrm · Aug 25, 2007

Geoffrey said:
Because I do not relish the thought of some players trying to force a DM to allow races, classes, equipment, spells, etc. in his campaign for no other reason than that such things are in the Players Handbook. The DM in such a case could simply refer the player to the very first page of the Players Handbook and say, "Look. Not only is it in the core rulebook, but it's on the very first page. There are no _____ in my campaign. Case closed."

While the DM is the final arbiter, a written rule really isn't necessary. Optional rules and 3rd party material, or even stuff from Dragon or Dungeon, can pretty easily be denied out of hand. But when you start tinkering with the core stuff of the PHB, you should have a decent reason. As long as you can explain to your players why you're doing it, an actual rule isn't needed.

It may not fit your campaign history or style. You may feel a rule or system is overpowered or underpowered. Whatever it is, just make your case and see if you can come to an agreement. In my last game, I wanted to make some changes to Improved Trip and the metamagic feats. After some discussion, I won over my players on Improved Trip. But, one of the guys brought up some things I hadn't considered on the metamagic feats and I ultimately went with something fairly different than what I started with. If I'd just pointed to the rule and said "so there", I'd have ticked off the fighter player and made a kind of dumb decision on the metamagic rules.