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

[Crimson Longinus]

Probably a few more details, like general ambience and how many people are there.

If I tell you there's 3 dozen patrons, and you ask me to describe them all, I'm not going to be super happy.

Sure. But you would describe whether there are patrons which is all that is required for the example to become moot.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Players declare actions for their PCs. And say what their PCs think, and remember, and expect.

Those various actions rest upon an assumption about fictional position - what is "true" in the shared fiction, and how the PC relates to that "true" stuff.

The players' assumptions about fictional position will often include setting elements or ideas that have not been expressly stated by me as GM. When they declare their actions, those assumptions therefore get incorporated into the shared fiction.

Various examples have been posted by me, from 4e D&D and AD&D play.

@TwoSix also posted some examples, like "I punch the nearest guy" being declared by a player whose PC is in a tavern.

When I GM a RPG, the players are not obliged to ask me for permission or clarification before making assumptions about fictional position. And generally I don't want them to, for the same sorts of reasons as @TwoSix set out way upthread: it makes for a bad play experience.

When I GM an RPG, I reserve the right to provide clarification and permission in regards to player questions about their "fictional positioning", and the right to say no if they attempt something that in my opinion doesn't work, like inventing something that doesn't exist. I don't always use that right (in fact I often dont if the changes and additions are minor), but I still reserve it. I also always want my players to ask questions about the setting. It makes for a good play experience.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why not?

Because a mystery has to exist before you start solving it.

 

[TwoSix]

Yes, sure, but I also don't think that this is actually a thing that is commonly a source of tension or confusion, because people actually aren't as crap in scene framing that these examples assume.

I know there are patrons in the bar. I don’t know what races or ages they are. I don’t know if they have kids. Do any have red hair? Any long beards? Does the one near the bartender have halitosis? Are any of them looking at me funny?

No matter what you detail as the DM, you’re always going to leave 99% of the details out. You just do your best to describe what’s immediately salient.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I know there are patrons in the bar. I don’t know what races or ages they are. I don’t know if they have kids. Do any have red hair? Any long beards? Does the one near the bartender have halitosis? Are any of them looking at me funny?

No matter what you detail as the DM, you’re always going to leave 99% of the details out. You just do your best to describe what’s immediately salient.

Obviously. But once it becomes salient, you do. I just feel that the examples were somewhat contrived.

 

[pemerton]

There's always going to be a large liminal space between "what is described" and "what can we assume, based on that description."

Right.

Because there was not reality for the players to uncover. It was made up after the fact.

After what fact?

I mean, instead of conjecturing, you could ask how the play worked.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Specific secrets? Who knows what? What clues will there be? Even some possible paths? Sure. Enforcing a specific path, action or sequence of steps the players must take? Nah. At least not with any decent DM I've ever had. I'm playing D&D not a video game.

I mean, it doesn't sound that far from a video game. Like there's a quest and you can engage with the quest in the predetermined manner, or you can like go off and kill pigs in the forest!

In play, characters in my games regularly gain loyalty and are owed favors. Enemies too, of course, but if an external power (NPC or organization) can provide a significant benefit to a PC, I want it to be as result of play. Not just because they're a cleric or because they say since they're a rogue they have deep connections with the thieve's guild.

A couple things here.

Do you view character creation as part of play?

Do you see how what you're saying here is basically "all this stuff requires DM approval"? You even tend to attribute this to the worldbuilding or setting or work the DM has already done.

Now, it's fine if you and your players are satisfied with that... but when we're talking about player contribution, let's acknowledge that it's limited in the method you're describing.

In the actual game where this occured? Nope. Player declared "I prayed to Odin and he told me where the phylactery is because he sees all." As far as cost, there's no guidance for it in the game because you're bypassing rules. The only "cost" that actually mattered was losing an eye and having disadvantage on perception checks.

Well, no... there's rule zero, right? I mean... the word rule is right there in the name.

This whole conversation is about finding ways to tweak what exists to make the participants happy. So in that sense, who cares if it deviates from the rules? That's the point!

Players in your games do not call in an airstrike by the Nuka dragon is a limit. The only relationship the character had was that they were a cleric with "Odin" listed on their character sheet.

Maybe that's part of the problem?

I mean, if I had a player who entered "Verbobonc" as his home city, I'd expect there to be some connections there. That the decision mattered in some way.

Did the player pick Odin out of some interest in playing a cleric of Odin? Did he bring Odin to the setting? Or did he simply pick Odin from a list of available deities and their associated subclasses, and go with Odin? Or did he just cover his eyes and plop his finger down on the page and it happened to land next to Odin?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I know there are patrons in the bar. I don’t know what races or ages they are. I don’t know if they have kids. Do any have red hair? Any long beards? Does the one near the bartender have halitosis? Are any of them looking at me funny?

No matter what you detail as the DM, you’re always going to leave 99% of the details out. You just do your best to describe what’s immediately salient.

Wel...yeah. if you want more details, you ask.

 

[Oofta]

Obviously. But once it becomes salient, you do. I just feel that the examples were somewhat contrived.

In any game I've ever played if it wasn't already clarified the player would simply ask for appropriate details. It's never been a big deal.

 

[pemerton]

There's always going to be a large liminal space between "what is described" and "what can we assume, based on that description."

Right.

So do people actually frame scenes like this? Do you? "You're in a tavern" and that's it? Because I sure don't. There would be quite a bit more information.

It might depend. Often, I'm interested to see what the players think is salient or interesting.

But whatever is said by the GM, @TwoSix's point remains true. There is always stuff that is implicit, but that players may wish to foreground via their action declarations.