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

[Crimson Longinus]

It's not. That's the point I'm making. It simply is not the same. You can insist it is all you like. That does not make it so.

But that banning PHB species due the setting literally was part of my examples...

I already did. "Things present in the PHB." It would be like complaining that a person couldn't be a Sith (species) Jedi in Star Wars, or a Gorn science officer in Star Trek, or a female dwarf warrior in Middle-Earth, etc.

I finally think I get what the confusion is. You're mixing up two different things. D&D is not a setting, it is a rule system. It can be used to play in various settings, all of which might not contain everything that exist in the D&D rules. Just like we could play in Star Trek setting using GURPS, but then limit the options to just those that are appropriate for Star Trek.

 

[dave2008]

I have seen very little evidence that there are "milder opinions." It seems very clear to me that there are two camps: "Shut up and obey the DM or leave and never darken my door again," and "alright, let's have a talk and figure out how we can both enjoy this."

Every time I have presented these two things, the consistent refrain is, "Yes, that first option is absolutely required," and almost always with the "and if the second thing doesn't work, what then? Huh? How do you fix that? You don't. That's why the first one is mandatory."

Like I said, I thought you would see it that way. I don't and that is not my experience (nor my view of some of the responses I have seen you get). I wish you luck in finding more accommodating DMs. They are out there!

 

[Oofta]

An "evil" player, as you put it, cannot be boxed in by Rule Zero either.

The DM asks them to leave which effectively does box them in. Just like a player in a game with an evil DM can leave which. If the DM has no players they have no game.

 

[Oofta]

It's not. That's the point I'm making. It simply is not the same. You can insist it is all you like. That does not make it so.

Why is it not the same thing? Astra is @Crimson Longinus' creation, he is the creator of the campaign world. It happens to use the D&D rules for running the game but D&D does not dictate the fiction of campaign worlds. It never has, the rules just give us some default lore if we want to use it.

Thraes, my campaign world, is not Astra. Nor is it Middle Earth, Forgotten Realms, Eberron or Dark Sun. It's my own creation that has had it's history shaped in part by player decisions of decades of campaigns. A happy-go-lucky tinker gnome artificer by the name Sprocket might be a fun character for my game but they wouldn't fit in a Dark Sun campaign where gnomes don't exist.

 

[Emerikol]

And it is totally impossible for players to think that way?


Do DMs always choose what is best long-term? Note, I am not even considering bad-faith behavior here. Do well-meaning DMs always choose what is best long-term?

No one on the planet is infallible. No one. DMs though will outperform players by a wide margin at ensuring what is best for the campaign overall.

 

[Emerikol]

After high school we decided that our time was now worth something. So when we all got together for this thing we wanted it to be fun and engaging. We wanted to create those moments that you will (and we do) talk about for years to come. We never argued about rules because the rules were always secondary. The DM had the authority he needed because that was implied as part of the role.

Our rule 0 was "is this fun?" and does this contribute to the narrative?

I get that people play different ways and by all means have your fun your way.

I think practically my games operated this way but I attribute that to a shared consensus on rule 0 and the role of the DM. There was also a commitment to playing in the campaign the DM had designed.

 

[TwoSix]

Why couldn't there be Wookies in Star Trek? After all there are unexplored regions of space, wormholes, different dimensions. Why are you so limited in your imagination that you can't imagine an alternate universe where Wookies exist?

Is it because Wookies don't fit the theme and style of the game you want to play when you're playing a Star Trek game?

To my mind, there's a clear distinction in playing a game based on an IP of shared familiarity and one in which the DM is the originator of the setting.

Knowledge of the IP empowers the players to make character facing decisions without the guidance of the DM.

And as a tangent, using "Wookiee Jedi" as an example of someone who doesn't care about consistency of setting lore is now weird since there's a canonical Wookiee Jedi.

 

[dave2008]

Inclusivity--unless you like 4e. Inclusivity--unless you like those icky dragonborn and tieflings. Inclusivity--unless you like Warlords.

Etc., etc., etc. Time and again I see such friendly spaces, except for people like me. Which, not gonna lie, really makes the "inclusivity" seem pretty hollow and disingenuous.

I allow all those things in my games (and I love 4e) and most DMs a know (including these forums) do as well (except maybe the 4e part). Will there be some DMs that don't. Yes. Is that OK? Yes. Should you play with that DM? No. Find the DM that works with you and for you. Just as you are not required to submit to the DMs whims, the DM is not required to submit to yours. We are all people trying to have fun. What is fun is different for different people and it is always important to find a group that shares your views on what is fun.

I mean, when I have seen time and again people doggedly insisting on specific terms like "absolute power" despite my every effort to persuade them to consider literally anything else...I'm not really sure what else I could go for.

Go for the people who are already on your side?

 

[Emerikol]

An "evil" player, as you put it, cannot be boxed in by Rule Zero either.

I think he can so long as he accepts rule 0. If not then he is booted. Of course in my games he never shows up because he would see rule 0 clearly explained in the session 0 packet and not choose to play. Another good reason for that session 0 packet. I recommend it for all playstyles. It would save me time as a player too.

 

[TwoSix]

I finally think I get what the confusion is. You're mixing up two different things. D&D is not a setting, it is a rule system. It can be used to play in various settings, all of which might not contain everything that exist in the D&D rules. Just like we could play in Star Trek setting using GURPs, but then limit options to just those that are appropriate for Star Trek.

I think it's important to remember that for many players, D&D is as much a setting as it is a rules kit. I generally fall into the "D&D as toolkit" camp, but that is nowhere near a consensus. I don't even think we're a majority.