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

[Lanefan]

Here are two approaches to GMing (not the only two possible):

* "Setting the stage" so that the players can pursue their PCs' concerns, by presenting situations that speak to those concerns, and thus prompt the players to declare actions for their PCs;​

​

* Providing a space and situation (as in, the setting and its backstory) in which people can find or provide their own enjoyment.​

Perhaps the first could be construed as a special case of the second. The second certainly encompasses possibilities that are very different from the first, though.

The first emphases situations and their relationship to player-authored PC concerns. This is the essence of the "conflict" that @Manbearcat posted about upthread. It is the essence of the players brining the protagonism, which as I have said is core to "story now" RPGing.

The second leaves it completely open how setting and backstory (a) relate to situation, and (b) relate to player-authored concerns. The second is quite consistent with a very wide range of RPGing, much of which will not be "story now".

So @Lanefan, I think your preference is actually quite a way off the "story now" approach. Which also came through in last year's thread.

Which is precisely why I said we greatly disagree on how to achieve a fairly similar desired end result.

 

[Aldarc]

Who says I'm not conflating the meanings?

Probably the fact that you don’t seem to believe in consent, safety, and using safewords in tabletop games.

 

[pemerton]

Which is precisely why I said we greatly disagree on how to achieve a fairly similar desired end result.

I do not think we are aiming at fairly similar desired end results.

My impression is that we have very different desired end results, as far as RPGing is concerned.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Here are two approaches to GMing (not the only two possible):

* "Setting the stage" so that the players can pursue their PCs' concerns, by presenting situations that speak to those concerns, and thus prompt the players to declare actions for their PCs;​

​

* Providing a space and situation (as in, the setting and its backstory) in which people can find or provide their own enjoyment.​

Perhaps the first could be construed as a special case of the second. The second certainly encompasses possibilities that are very different from the first, though.

What I think is common in practice in a lot of games (in mine certainly) is that the second is always happening, but the first is just sometimes happening. Ie. the situations are sometimes such that they relate more closely to the concerns/desires/beliefs/etc of the characters, but sometimes they do not. And I think this is perfectly fine, and to me a desirable state of affairs. I've used this example many times, but in Star Trek we can have some episodes that are more character focused and delve into backstories of the characters and challenge their beliefs, and some episodes where it is more about just solving the problem of the week. This is what I want.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Here are two approaches to GMing (not the only two possible):

* "Setting the stage" so that the players can pursue their PCs' concerns, by presenting situations that speak to those concerns, and thus prompt the players to declare actions for their PCs;​

​

* Providing a space and situation (as in, the setting and its backstory) in which people can find or provide their own enjoyment.​

Perhaps the first could be construed as a special case of the second. The second certainly encompasses possibilities that are very different from the first, though.

The first emphases situations and their relationship to player-authored PC concerns. This is the essence of the "conflict" that @Manbearcat posted about upthread. It is the essence of the players brining the protagonism, which as I have said is core to "story now" RPGing.

The second leaves it completely open how setting and backstory (a) relate to situation, and (b) relate to player-authored concerns. The second is quite consistent with a very wide range of RPGing, much of which will not be "story now".

So @Lanefan, I think your preference is actually quite a way off the "story now" approach. Which also came through in last year's thread.

The second approach is definitely far and away my preference, but I'm glad I have a better understanding of the first now.