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

[AnotherGuy]

Why wouldn’t there be any limits on Odin’s power? Or what he’d be willing to do?

If Odin has no limits, he doesn't need the characters to do fetch quests.

I also connected the request directly to lore related about the god. Odin has lore about what he did to gain knowledge of secrets. The request was about knowledge of something secret.

Your idea was beautiful, I gave you XP for it but like @Crimson Longinus said, Pandora's box is now open. (See below)

Who’s to say the next request would be in any way related to Odin?

That is not the point. If it works for Odin, why can it not work for Freya or Thor or Lolth? This is how players think, this is how I think from a world-building perspective.

Sure, I don’t think the example was about how you must always say yes.

And how would you limit it? How would you say no?
I'm curious to see how those with different playstyles would say no.
It has to be something constructive, not Odin doesn't require anything, I cannot think of something creative or only requests about knowledge of something secret work because all this is DM decides

 

[TwoSix]

This. As someone reading along the thread, the sudden finger-pointing at grackless - especially after a mod post warning grackless not to make it personal - felt a bit unnecessary, especially with the rhetorical postering of grackless being unobjective, emotional, etc. That's not the language of someone looking for a productive discussion.

I read it as somewhere above "unnecessary" and more of active, well, feces-stirring.

 

[Oofta]

How many examples do you need? Also, you said the player didn’t care about anything… so why would I offer more examples?

Why don’t you think of a way to make it work?

I stated the concrete examples you gave, disadvantage on perception because of the loss of an eye was the only actual penalty. You never explained why the character having people he cared about mattered and I can't read your mind as to how that would make a difference.

So what? Clearly what I’ve suggested involved the DM not granting the entirety of the request, right? It was a starting point.

It. Was. Not. A. Request. It was stated as fact by the player that Odin did him a solid.

What I meant was treat it as an exercise in creativity. Can you find a way to make it work?

You’ve tried to shoot down every idea. Can you do the opposite? Are you creative enough to incorporate someone else’s ideas into your own?

Could I make a house rule that allows clerics to bypass the rules of the game? Sure. Do I think it's a good idea or broadly applicable? No.

Which is not something anyone has suggested.

I’ll tag @Ulorian - Agent of Chaos here so they can ask you to argue what was said rather than some extreme take on it.



What I know is that when people talk about pandora’s box or a can of worms or a slippery slope, what they are expressing concern about is the future.

If you let A happen, then what about B and C.

Yes, because I have had players that would absolutely abuse it. D&D doesn't have the checks and balances that other games do. EDIT: It's primarily just personal preference no matter which side of the DM's screen I'm on.

The concern, as expressed, is about how things will work going forward. If you allow a player to have their character make a request of their deity, and it results in anything positive beyond what the rules allow, it will lead to further such instances, and this is problematic.

I don't think allowing a cleric to have powers above and beyond the rules is a good thing for the game. Feel free to disagree. I don't care if you house rule that they can do something like that, why do you insist on a different opinion being "problematic"?

Earlier you talked about the structure that the rules and setting provide that allow you to perform as DM… and how you thought things like this would erode that structure.

So no… unless I’ve wildly misunderstood the things you’ve been saying, I don’t think your concern is limited to this one example.

So it's a bad thing that when I play D&D, I expect people to actually play the game by the rules of the game unless we all agree on a house rule?

On a side note, the player was constantly pushing what was allowed both from a rules perspective, RP and narrative flavor. For example his character had the noble background so he had 2 retainers. He decided they were also clerics (a couple levels lower) that went on his initiative. The group eventually told him to get rid of them because it was annoying spotlight hogging, but it's just how he thought. Anything he could get away with to increase his capabilities as a player he would do.

 

[Aldarc]

I read it as somewhere above "unnecessary" and more of active, well, feces-stirring.

That is the reality of the situation.

 

[Oofta]

So here's a question, that's related, but hopefully a new direction.

Your world is very well established.

And from what you've said, many of the players have had prior campaigns in the same world.

What's your stance on players using prior character knowledge?

As in, the player, being fully experienced in your world will know many things they otherwise might not. Can they carry that over to a new character? Is it a strict no? It would require a knowledge check? Something else?

I'm fairly open about world lore. They know the big picture stuff even if sometimes I occasionally refer to events from a previous campaign from the perspective of someone that was not there. So the demigod that was starting to stir was put back asleep and no one knows how. But people know that you need fire to stop a troll from regenerating and have at least heard a bard's story of great deeds of the past in many cases. So there are a lot things that are open knowledge and some that I don't want players to act upon just because of what a previous character knew. If it's uncertain what the player would know, they roll for it.

And what's the view of using that knowledge in game? Since the facts are established, the player isn't narrating any new fiction, they are confirming established fiction. Say John the player, knows Tuesday is Jazz night at the local bar (it was established as such in a prior campaign). His new character takes the group to the bar expecting jazz night, without DM initial clearance (he declares it, without asking if he's right). Cool, not cool? Depends?

Most of the time it doesn't make a big difference. If Tuesday is jazz night it's fine if we just assume they saw a flyer, it's not a big secret. If it is something that really matters I'll simply remind them their character doesn't know that. So they likely don't know that Lady Amberlin is really a silver dragon, although they may have heard strange rumors. It's something we discuss offline and I can't remember the last time anyone didn't simply ask "Does my character know ...".

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

I think perhaps they were responding in kind? Like, you kind of burst in and started pointing fingers, so they responded in a joking manner.

Fair enough. When I see what appears to be unfair behaviour, I am a bit direct and pull off the scabs, which can hurt some feelings. I get it. We all good now? I enjoy a good discussion... you all are pretty intelligent folks. If you want to talk, let's get after it.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Hey guys I still have a post from @pemerton I want to reply to, so let us try not to get this one shutdown (yet).

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

This. As someone reading along the thread, the sudden finger-pointing at grackless - especially after a mod post warning grackless not to make it personal - felt a bit unnecessary, especially with the rhetorical postering of grackless being unobjective, emotional, etc. That's not the language of someone looking for a productive discussion.

Fair enough.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Hey guys I still have a post from @pemerton I want to reply to, so let us try not to get this one shutdown (yet).

Lol. I don't think any post here is attracting a shutdown. Just some honest discussion. Let's go @pemerton ! Brother's waiting for a response!

 

[CreamCloud0]

Lol. I don't think any post here is attracting a shutdown. Just some honest discussion. Let's go @pemerton ! Brother's waiting for a response!

i don't see how pemerton can help that, you may have misread, it's their post anotherGuy wants to respond to.