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

[hawkeyefan]

Yep, I am; because most speed limits were set decades ago assuming older cars and less-developed roads and are nowadays a joke.

Okay, Lanefan. Productive talk.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sorry, I got my searches confused.

@Micah Sweet, the posts are these:
Given that it is now agreed that some people find having to frequently go back to the GM for information and permission at odds with immersion, I think we can see that the notion of "living in a fantasy world like we live in the real world" has no general connection to only the GM can ever establish anything about the shared fiction other than the PC's bodily or mental movements.

It certainly doesn't have that connection for everyone, but it does for me and at least some others here. There's no accounting for taste.

 

[Vaalingrade]

"Dearest, most powerful DM, who art the Lord of All Worlds, are the Van der Whols forces keeping my molecules from phasing through all adjacent matter still intact since the last time I checked? Is gravity still keeping my anchored to the planet? Is my heart still beating at a rate typical for my current level of activity? I'd hate to assume something that's I'm not allowed to."

 

[pemerton]

I inferred there's no individual actions in the specific circumstances noted in the rule you posted; to wit, characters can't enter or leave a town, camp, or adventure independent of the party. I then gave some examples of reasonable character actions that this rule would ban.

If you want to start a thread about Torchbearer, by all means do so and I will post in it.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

BTW: What do you guys in this thread hope to achieve by writing the same things over and over?

 

[pemerton]

It is such a wild and bizarre claim though. The world will be full of stuff regardless, a lot of which can be used and engaged with in countless different manners the GM cannot possibly predict.

Is there a nearby dude to punch? Is there a band to interact with? Is there a fireplace to take a brand from?

The fact that there are many other things to which the GM might say yes is not the key point; it's about who has the power to establish salience.

 

[Oofta]

Once we accept that it is obvious that players might want to foreground and make salient stuff that is only implicit background - the most recent example is @soviet's discussion of the band not far upthread - then the question becomes, what process is used to handle this?

Here are two options (they are not the only ones):

(1) if a player declares an action that renders salient some such implicit thing, the GM rolls with it and finds out what happens.​

​

(2) If a payer declares an action that renders salient some such implicit thing, the GM tells them the thing doesn't actually exist/obtain.​

I think the relationship between process (2) and railroading is obvious.

I think you should recognize how railroading is one of the most insulting terms that can be used to describe how a game is run and has nothing to do with the standard D&D play loop. It's rare that I have to provide additional information about a scene and even then it is never, ever 20 questions. Meanwhile the players can do what they want, go any direction they please. They have very free reign over the direction of the campaign and how they overcome obstacles.

Railroading: when the GM constrains players' choices, requiring them to follow a specific, predetermined path in the story.

How the players interact with and impact the world has nothing to do with railroading.

 

[Oofta]

Thanks for answering.

You had said earlier that a player doing this could "interfere" with something. What did you have in mind?



Sure, I'm just trying to find out what would be problematic for you about the kind of stuff we're talking about.



That's cool. As always, as long as everyone at the actual table is happy, then everything is all good.

I'm trying to focus less on what constitutes a preference, and get to the reasons for the preferences.

Like, I can elaborate on why I like to give players more leeway with this stuff. I can also explain why I used to have a more traditional mindset... but I don't want to assume anyone shares those reasons... they may be very different than mine.



Why?

I am genuinely asking. I'm curious why you prefer it that way beyond "because that's my preference" or "that's the default process per the book".

We're talking about different ways to play the game. So let's talk about them instead of just perceiving questions as attacks.



Okay... now this is like a tangible thing we can discuss. This seems to be a reason for your preference, which is what I'm interested in discussing. How would you expect players to abuse it? What are you concerned about?



This seems like a reasonable response and not an agenda-driven one at all!

@Lanefan clearly knows more about Torchbearer than the guy who's written a 14-page actual play summary! Good call!



I personally love it when players give me gifts like this. To me, this is very much an opportunity. An entire session (at least) could be based on this.



I don't know if railroading requires intentionality. I would describe my earliest DMing as railroading for sure... but that's because I didn't really know there was any other way.

I wasn't intending to limit anyone or to shut down player contribution... I just thought that's how the game had to work.

This is also why... when I see people say things like "this is how the game has to work" it resonates with me.

At a certain point, asking the question repeatedly and not accepting any answer becomes sealioning after a while. I've explained why I do what I do and it seems that no amount of explanation will suffice. The only other thing I can point out is that while I'm good at extemporaneous creativity, a lot of people are not. Put them on the spot and ask them to describe the person they're talking to and it will be incredibly stressful and unfun.

The immersion factor applies to both DM and player for me. As a DM I'm immersing myself in the world, picturing it and figuring out how the different pieces are interacting and how they're going to respond to what the players say and do. Yes, sometimes I'll fill in the picture a bit based on players asking questions, but that's different from players regularly adding to the picture and then trying to figure out how to add it in. Especially now because I have to figure out what it is exactly they're adding. Is there a band? If I add it, I can decide certain details as needed and riff off of it. If the player does it, is it a bluegrass band? Jazz equivalent? Perhaps a sultry lounge singer? Or are we going with Renaissance Festival folk music? Now it's 20 questions to the player, it's just flipping who needs to add details. I can't just run with my image of the band and characterizations of the band members, I have to fit it to the player's imagination. Maybe I imagine a Willie Nelson as main singer and they're envisioning ye' old version of Taylor Swift.

As a player I want to focus on my character, what they're thinking and feeling. I want to experience the world not create it.

But it really comes down to an agreement on what game we're playing. I can't explain why I like the standard style of D&D other than "it's a preference" any more than I can explain why I prefer the taste of whole wheat bread to white, I just like the flavor better. Why do I put grape jelly on my toast instead of strawberry? Because it's a preference. We like what we like and sometimes there's no deeper meaning.

 

[Oofta]

BTW: What do you guys in this thread hope to achieve by writing the same things over and over?

I have a bad habit of responding to direct questions when I assume they're being asked in good faith.

I have never once questioned anyone on the other side of the argument of why they prefer games where players add to the world directly through narration. I did have some misunderstanding at one time of how some collaborative world building games worked a while back so I read up a bit and watched some podcasts for Dungeon World. I understand it, it's not my thing, if it works for someone else good for them.

Why people keep asking about a game they must be familiar with? Got me.

 

[Oofta]

Is there a nearby dude to punch? Is there a band to interact with? Is there a fireplace to take a brand from?

The fact that there are many other things to which the GM might say yes is not the key point; it's about who has the power to establish salience.

It's not about power it's about roles of the game the player .... ugh. I've explained this a dozen times now. You know the answer. It's not about power.