D&D General A glimpse at WoTC's current view of Rule 0

[Micah Sweet]

I think it's important to remember that for many players, D&D is as much a setting as it is a rules kit. I generally fall into the "D&D as toolkit" camp, but that is nowhere near a consensus. I don't even think we're a majority.

I don't see how the popularity of "D&D as setting" vs "D&D as toolbox" is relevant to the discussion.

 

[TwoSix]

I don't see how the popularity of "D&D as setting" vs "D&D as toolbox" is relevant to the discussion.

An undercurrent of the discussion is the relative difficulty in finding groups who are amenable to certain preferences and play styles; the relative frequency of different preferences is certainly salient to that particular aspect of the thread.

 

[Belen]

But the responsibility must always be on the DM to get that done, as I said, as part of the pitch. You don't get to get all upset and demanding when I show up to "hey I'd like to run some D&D, you want in?" with the idea of playing a dragonborn sorcerer and only then say "absolutely the hell not, there are no dragonborn in my world and all sorcerers are evil!"

"Let's play D&D" means we use what the core book contains. You have to justify using less.


See above. You are required to justify using less. Now, maybe for some folks that justification is effortless. Maybe you have a preternatural ability to convince a complete stranger that your vision is totally better than anything they could come up with and which you didn't tell them a lick about until after they showed up at the table with character ideas. Color me skeptical, but hey, I've been a skeptic and yet proven wrong before.

For the vast majority of actual groups, though? You have to actually sell your pitch, and that means justifying why it would be interesting, and why basic, core stuff is not available.

In the absence of other information, the PHB is the root of D&D as far as player options go.

The justification is the character generation assumptions document provided to all players that announces a plan to run a new campaign.

As I said before, a player can discuss something not listed but they better be prepared to do the additional work to fit it in. Period.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Well so you are saying that a player won't agree and is being disruptive but won't leave? I find that a bit hard to believe. In high school we'd have gang tackled him and beat him and then forcibly thrown him out. Nowadays, I call the police? I just can't imagine a player defiantly refusing to leave.

Oh, there are all sorts of things adults can do to pull this off that younger people wouldn't be able to. Calling in favors from friends. Exploiting social group dynamics. Whispering the right lies in the right ears.

As soon as we start assuming actual malice from the player, almost anything is possible and quite a few really horrible things are very much on the table. Many of those things can string out a problem like this for weeks to years, and can destroy friendships.

Of course if it is that players house, the group just gets up and leaves.

Do you truly think it's that simple? Because I promise you, the social cost of doing this is something a LOT of people aren't willing to pay.

"...accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed." (Declaration of Independence)

And despite how strongly I'd not want you in my campaign, I do find it incredible that you would have any trouble finding a game that suits your tastes. There are a lot of diverse views within the hobby on all of this stuff.

I spent over a year looking. At first just for 4e, then for 4e-alikes (e.g. 13th Age), then for anything-that-wasn't-5e (e.g. PF1e), then finally 5e because SOME eh-I-don't-prefer-it gaming is better than absolutely no gaming at all. I failed.

The only reason I'm in any games right now at all is because Hussar very kindly offered me a game. I was also in a short-run 4e game run by another user on this forum, but that's long done now.

So...yeah. I tried. I tried quite hard. I scoured forums (including this one). I scoured Roll20. I put up ads. I checked discord servers. Multiple days a week, even. My schedule is very open (other than my weekly DW game), so schedule wasn't an issue. I even went for PbP games, all of which folded within weeks of starting. A year's labor left me with no prospect of an ongoing game, so I gave up.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

In the absence of other information, the PHB is the root of D&D as far as player options go.

But there is no absence of other information! I think everyone who curates things here has said that the information is included in the pitch!

 

[EzekielRaiden]

But you have to see that it is such a big set of options that not every campaign will include everything. I do think they should warn you ahead of time of course but if they didn't I don't see any way to fix the issue. Give you some gas money? I don't expect a DM to change their entire campaign because of one mistake.

Okay so, since folks have been so eager to ascribe wacko crazy positions to me:

Are you genuinely asserting that it is a fundamental and unforgivable violation of every single DM's setting ever, to ask "hey, can I play dragonborn?"

Like, for real. Are you really saying this? The 3rd or 4th most popular non-human race in 5e?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

But there is no absence of other information! I think everyone who curates things here has said that the information is included in the pitch!

Actually, @Emerikol has been quite circumspect on this front and recognizes that many DMs make the mistake of not saying this up front.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I don't know any DMs that would phrase the statement the way you are here,

Really? Several people who post on this forum have said almost exactly that. Perhaps not those words, but certainly that meaning. Some of them would not say it, but would instead enforce it through being crappy to those who violate it until they "wise up" or leave. (Which, to be clear, is significantly worse than saying it outright, even though both things are pretty bad.) Again, I can give you a link for a post saying that very thing if you care for it, and I was one of the only people who called this person out for doing so.

and I also don't think a conversation has to end with the DM changing their mind or allowing things they don't want to allow. It can, however, and if a player wants something I didn't think of or don't want I would certainly listen. They may change my mind, but it's still my call to make.

Then your authority is not and cannot be absolute. If someone can reasonably petition for change and actually have some chance of getting it--even if that change is not at all guaranteed!--then the authority is not absolute. It admits correction from other sources. Yet "absolute authority", a term I have advocated against time and time again and been told no, it really has to be specifically "absolute authority" and nothing less, is what is always used as the line in the sand here.

 

[TwoSix]

It's a nice idea. It just doesn't apply for a significant number of people.

Certainly true. It more speaks to the difficulty in offering advice over social contract when there are so many table variations that exist.

My experiences at a 6 player table with rotating DMs simply won't have applicability to the full-time DM with two players, who only is a player at cons.

And ultimately, finding a group is like dealing with the stark realities of dating; if you can't find someone who matches your preferences, you might have to relax your preferences or accept being single/celibate for a while.

 

[Belen]

I spent over a year looking. At first just for 4e, then for 4e-alikes (e.g. 13th Age), then for anything-that-wasn't-5e (e.g. PF1e), then finally 5e because SOME eh-I-don't-prefer-it gaming is better than absolutely no gaming at all. I failed.

The only reason I'm in any games right now at all is because Hussar very kindly offered me a game. I was also in a short-run 4e game run by another user on this forum, but that's long done now.

So...yeah. I tried. I tried quite hard. I scoured forums (including this one). I scoured Roll20. I put up ads. I checked discord servers. Multiple days a week, even. My schedule is very open (other than my weekly DW game), so schedule wasn't an issue. I even went for PbP games, all of which folded within weeks of starting. A year's labor left me with no prospect of an ongoing game, so I gave up.

I have not played in a D&D game in 20 years. I always get slotted as the DM.

That said, if I looked for a group, then I could probably find one as long as I am willing to bend to what is offered in the area. If playing is important to you, then you have to compromise on what can be found.

@Crothian ran a Vaesen game a few years ago and that was my first playing experience in 15 years. I wanted to play D&D 5e but I joined Vaesen and had a blast.