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

[AnotherGuy]

As you've probably worked out, I'm not really a "party goals" guy.

Sure. I'd say our party has a combination of both (party and individual) in my campaign but the one my friend is running is a little more linear in approach but I'm ok with that as I finally get a chance to play a little with my mates and I love exploring other people's imagination/world building.

The example was great!

If I followed it properly, you're using the FR proper names to play a sort-of "anchoring"/"coordinating" role, but not as an independent GM-controlled way of establishing consequences.

Thanks! I'm not sure I understand your meaning about controlled way of establishing consequences?
Could you elaborate on that please?

It wasn't clear whether the stuff with the ward after the skill challenge was player-instigated, or GM glossing of the player's success.
You will easily guess that my preference is the former rather than the latter (though the dichotomy is not always as stark in play as it is when stated like I have here).

So we are not quite there yet where they fully generate content.
I ask questions, and determine what the PCs desire or hope to attain and deliver either exactly that or along those lines. I do like surprising players so I'm a fan of revelations (secret backstory). The ward taking to the character's charm and intellect and revealing the source of the book was indeed my idea in order to bring about the personal/party goal conflict.

I do encourage them to present opportunities where they could do that to, but the table (including myself) is new to it and will take some time with some, less with others.
At all time, I'm attempting to shape the situations that would provide avenues for them to pursue their personal goals, bring about cool roleplaying choices while keeping the metaplot and the larger sandbox in play whether it be in the foreground or background. They are 15th level so the game direction is very much theirs and more than realising my/party campaign goals I want to realise the the indvidual ones, before the campaign ends.

One of the main ways my players create content is by writing a prose on our Obsidian Portal page and I try as best to use that when framing scenes, offering choices and introducing NPCs.

EDIT: Just to add, in the last session one of the players went to visit a FR NPC called the Seer who knows much about the giant kind in the hopes of picking her brain of any new giant developments. Basing it on the time frame since they had last seen her and some other consistency issues I couldn't think of information too critical to offer within a SC. So, on the spot I came up with a curious book sitting upon her messy desk which caught his attention as well as a piece of paper (sticking out of it) which reflected on it several names he recognised and some he didn't. He enquired about the book but the Seer was quite dismissive of it and him borrowing it. So I told him for free (INT) that taking the book would likely point him as the main suspect since his enquiry about it but that taking the half buried piece of paper was a better option. So using Sleight of Hand (Str and Dex - so as not to tear it) as well as Stealth and Deception and some other successes prior he managed to nab the paper.
Now I have some loose ideas in my head about what these names are/mean but nothing concrete - but by the next session, the intention is that this piece of paper will provide leads both for the character's personal goal and some of the party goals but not necessarily about the giants.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I seem to remember that early on in this thread, several people on the more 'GM authority' side made comments that their games were inundated with players and potential players. I find it difficult to reconcile this apparently deep pool of candidates with the notion that 'players can't be trusted and will exploit every small freedom you give them'.

Personally I just play with the same group of old friends, occasionally with new people added, and I've never experienced these difficulties with player overreach.

Me neither, but if we are talking about good game design, especially for a newbie friendly massmarket game, it should probably have more guardrails and not assume that everyone plays with long time veterans with whom they're good friends with.

Also, it is not even about exploits. If we genuinely accept that the GM should not block any player suggestion unless it explicitly contradicts what was established before, then I think using those suggestions to guide the direction of the game and overcome problems becomes a valid gameplay strategy. Which perhaps is something some people might want, but it definitely is not what everyone wants. Nor are D&D rules built on such an assumption, so I'd say it is objectively a bad choice of rules for running this sort of a game.

 

[Oofta]

This is an interesting example worth some discussion!

In what way did the DM “shut it down”? Did they just pause the game and say “yeah, that’s not the way things work”?

Or did he say that “Odin knows all. Long ago when the worlds were young Odin gave his eye to Mimir’s well for knowledge of secret things. Odin knows the cost of knowledge. Do you? What will you sacrifice to know what you seek?”

Something along the lines of it doesn’t work that way, Odin has other concerns. Note that the McGuffin was magically protected from scrying.

How would you handle it? What about in other games?

 

[AnotherGuy]

Something along the lines of it doesn’t work that way, Odin has other concerns. Note that the McGuffin was magically protected from scrying.

How would you handle it? What about in other games?

There are elegant ways of handling it, I haven't always provided them and some of us do not necessarily have the time/quick wit to come up with something suave. And you are right about the shortfall of D&D whether it be in advice or the checks and balances.

I do very much like @hawkeyefan's suggestion though.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Something along the lines of it doesn’t work that way, Odin has other concerns. Note that the McGuffin was magically protected from scrying.

How would you handle it? What about in other games?

I’d use something like a cleric communing with their deity as an opportunity. The player is introducing this relationship… which, in my opinion should be a very important relationship to the character and to the game, but which is often reduced to nothing more than a build choice… they have something they want and some powerful entity that they have a relationship with who may be able to help.

But if the Odin in your game is anything like the Odin of myth… he’s not some warm and fuzzy guy who’s willing to help out of the kindness of his heart.

So like my last post, I’d introduce the idea that Odin may assist, but at a cost. I’d put it back to the player as to the nature of the cost… except I’d make it clear that it would be significant. “The item you seek is warded by powerful magic. It is a deep secret. I gave my eye for such knowledge… what would you give?”

And I’d take it from there. If the player can’t come up with a cost, or is unwilling to pay, maybe Odin thinks less of them. If they do come up with a worthwhile cost and are willing to pay it… something with teeth, though, something that will have an impact on the character going forward… then I’d have Odin tell them where the maguffin is.

I mean… why not? The maguffin seems to be something that’s meant to be sought and eventually found, right? So why not let this player idea work? Why “shut it down” rather than turn it into something meaningful? Why view this as an “abuse of power”?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I’d use something like a cleric communing with their deity as an opportunity. The player is introducing this relationship… which, in my opinion should be a very important relationship to the character and to the game, but which is often reduced to nothing more than a build choice… they have something they want and some powerful entity that they have a relationship with who may be able to help.

But if the Odin in your game is anything like the Odin of myth… he’s not some warm and fuzzy guy who’s willing to help out of the kindness of his heart.

So like my last post, I’d introduce the idea that Odin may assist, but at a cost. I’d put it back to the player as to the nature of the cost… except I’d make it clear that it would be significant. “The item you seek is warded by powerful magic. It is a deep secret. I gave my eye for such knowledge… what would you give?”

And I’d take it from there. If the player can’t come up with a cost, or is unwilling to pay, maybe Odin thinks less of them. If they do come up with a worthwhile cost and are willing to pay it… something with teeth, though, something that will have an impact on the character going forward… then I’d have Odin tell them where the maguffin is.

I mean… why not? The maguffin seems to be something that’s meant to be sought and eventually found, right? So why not let this player idea work? Why “shut it down” rather than turn it into something meaningful? Why view this as an “abuse of power”?

This is good stuff, but one thing I would consider here that there are spells, such as Commune, for this sort of thing, so I would be somewhat cautious about letting a character to do this without the spell. Now if they were using the spell to do this in the first place, then it obviously would be perfectly fine. (And I would definitely be willing to expand somewhat from super limited communication the spell allows, especially for a cost.)

It is feature/flaw of more detailed and codified systems that it might limit how much you can/need to wing it.

 

[Oofta]

I’d use something like a cleric communing with their deity as an opportunity. The player is introducing this relationship… which, in my opinion should be a very important relationship to the character and to the game, but which is often reduced to nothing more than a build choice… they have something they want and some powerful entity that they have a relationship with who may be able to help.

But if the Odin in your game is anything like the Odin of myth… he’s not some warm and fuzzy guy who’s willing to help out of the kindness of his heart.

So like my last post, I’d introduce the idea that Odin may assist, but at a cost. I’d put it back to the player as to the nature of the cost… except I’d make it clear that it would be significant. “The item you seek is warded by powerful magic. It is a deep secret. I gave my eye for such knowledge… what would you give?”

And I’d take it from there. If the player can’t come up with a cost, or is unwilling to pay, maybe Odin thinks less of them. If they do come up with a worthwhile cost and are willing to pay it… something with teeth, though, something that will have an impact on the character going forward… then I’d have Odin tell them where the maguffin is.

I mean… why not? The maguffin seems to be something that’s meant to be sought and eventually found, right? So why not let this player idea work? Why “shut it down” rather than turn it into something meaningful? Why view this as an “abuse of power”?

The player didn't invent Odin. He didn't tell the DM he was asking for help. He declared that he asked and gave the result of asking for Odin's help.

The DM chose to not give them information at a cost for several reasons, primarily because Odin in that campaign (my wife was DMing, it's our shared world) is obsessed with Ragnarok. Hunting down a powerful Lich? That's a mortal concern. Also, the gods rarely interact with the material world. If they do it's through Valkyries or Einherjar.

But the DM responding with Odin being willing to assisting at a cost would have been following the standard D&D play loop. The player states that they ask their god for assistance and the DM decides what happens. In this case? It was basically "Go away kid, solve your own problems. I'm dealing with more important stuff."

There's also a % chance based on cleric level to get this kind of thing or other spells.

EDIT: The % chance is divine intervention, something a cleric gets at 10th level. Also things like commune. The default assumption in D&D is that you can't just declare you have tea and crumpets with your deity and ask them about the weather and oh, by the way, can you give me omnipotence to solve my problems.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I'd still rather play in a fleshed out setting, than some random table generated content.

That is fair, but D&D is full of tables - always has been.

 

[Oofta]

There are elegant ways of handling it, I haven't always provided them and some of us do not necessarily have the time/quick wit to come up with something suave. And you are right about the shortfall of D&D whether it be in advice or the checks and balances.

I do very much like @hawkeyefan's suggestion though.

Unless the sequence of posts is flipped, at the time you posted this I don't remember seeing anything that he had suggested. Also "there are elegant ways of handling it" may be well meant but is also meaningless.

 

[Oofta]

This is good stuff, but one thing I would consider here that there are spells, such as Commune, for this sort of thing, so I would be somewhat cautious about letting a character to do this without the spell. Now if they were using the spell to do this in the first place, then it obviously would be perfectly fine. (And I would definitely be willing to expand somewhat from super limited communication the spell allows, especially fir a cost.)

It is feature/flaw of more detailed and codified systems that it might limit how much you can/need to wing it.

In this case, divination was not working. The McGuffin was in an area protected by the (un)hallowed ground or similar.