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

[Mort]

An example of a module that largely has a sandbox approach would be Dragonheist as far as I can remember (it's been a while). I skimmed through the module after we played but unfortunately the DM we had didn't really understand that and it just kind of fell apart. The thing is that it tells you about a treasure hunt of sorts where multiple factions are pursuing the same treasure. It lets you know different factions, what their goals are, how they are likely to react to the PCs, but that's about it. It gives you various plot hooks but that's it, there isn't really a linear path and if the PCs faff around enough a specific organization gets all the money. But our DM didn't really understand that or how to make it all work. I've heard the same complaints about Rime of the Frostmaiden.

So yes, some modules are designed to be settings, not linear adventure paths. They don't work for some people.

Actually Dragon Heist has whatever the term would be for a fake sandbox (I guess that would be a railroad?). It LOOKS like the group has choice in how it wants to Maneuver, order of approach etc but in reality the order things must happen is completely fixed.

In fact, Dragon Heist has one of the worst, most irritating examples of railroading I have ever seen in a public module:

Spoiler: Mild spoilers for the module

The PCs are in search for the McGuffin. IF the PCs find it early (early bring defined by the McGuffin itself, so the DM) through smart play, luck or whatever, the McGuffin will LITERALLY erase the PCs memories of them having found it and set them back, until the McGuffin (aka DM) thinks it is the right time to be found.

I will be surprised if ANYONE here would think this is a good way to do it!

 

[Oofta]

No. When the player says "I am looking for so-and-so" that is declared entirely from the character's perspective.

That the resolution is done by (say) rolling a Streetwise check rather than (say) rolling a random encounter table doesn't change the preceding sentence, which is independent of the resolution procedure.

It's fine to say they're looking for someone. It's up to the DM to determine if so-and-so is there and how that is determined. The resolution procedure is up to the DM in the games I play.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Why? What you mean? To me it would be unimmersive to able to spawn reality around me at will, if that is not what the character can do.

Let’s explain this a slightly different way. My barbarian has just found out that his detested cousin has taken advantage of his absence to usurp his position. He enters a bar looking to let off steam.
The DM briefly describes the bar. Large mirror, wood panelling, halfling barman on a stepstool.
I, as player, have an image in my mind’s eye as to what this bar looks like. The image is more detailed than the description: that’s how humans work, and without that RPGs probably wouldn’t be possible.
In game:
My barbarian is spoiling for a fight. He walks up to the big guy at a table with friends and rudely knocks off his hat.

The DM didn’t establish that there was a big guy at a table with friends. He didn’t establish that he was wearing a hat to knock off.

The alternative, which would break immersion for some posters, would be to interrupt their action declaration.
1. Ok, is there anyone in the bar?
2. What does he look like?
3. Um, does he have a hat or something I can knock off?

 

[Oofta]

I think I need a better definition of what you mean?

If the DM hasn't thought of it yet, is asking "Is there a taxidermist in town?" world-bending? I mean, would the DM have included one if not asked? Or do you only mean to count it if the player gets to guarantee there is one by asking? I would guess that things akin to the former happen in most games and are almost impossible to avoid. If asking always makes it so, then it feels like an in demand alter-reality to me.


Tangentially...
Another one in my head is what happens if the DM has "completely" designed the castle but ignored something like air circulation, or adequate water supply, or water disposal -- and if, after exploring the contents of every room, the player asks about it because any of the three would work for their plans.

Haven't multiple people already answered this? If a PC asks if there's a taxidermist in town the DM determines if there is one. Same with any other detail. What the player won't do in my D&D game is declare that there is a taxidermist in town, which is a perfectly normal move in some other games.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Let’s explain this a slightly different way. My barbarian has just found out that his detested cousin has taken advantage of his absence to usurp his position. He encounters a bar looking to let off steam.
The DM briefly describes the bar in two lines. Large mirror, wood panelling, halfling barman on a stepstool.
I, as player, have an image in my mind’s eye as to what this bar looks like. The image is more detailed than the description: that’s how humans work, and without that RPGs probably wouldn’t be possible.
In game:
My barbarian is spoiling for a fight. He walks up to the big guy at a table with friends and rudely knocks off his hat.

The DM didn’t establish that there was a big guy at a table with friends. He didn’t establish that he was wearing a hat to knock off.

The alternative, which would break immersion for some posters, would be to interrupt their action declaration.
1. Ok, is there anyone in the bar?
2. What does he look like?
3. Um, does he have a hat or something I can knock off?

Those questions at the end of your post is how I'd want it to go, yes. Your preference and mine are different, not better or worse.

 

[Oofta]

Actually Dragon Heist has whatever the term would be for a fake sandbox (I guess that would be a railroad?). It LOOKS like the group has choice in how it wants to Maneuver, order of approach etc but in reality the order things must happen is completely fixed.

In fact, Dragon Heist has one of the worst, most irritating examples of railroading I have ever seen in a public module:

Spoiler: Mild spoilers for the module

The PCs are in search for the McGuffin. IF the PCs find it early (early bring defined by the McGuffin itself, so the DM) through smart play, luck or whatever, the McGuffin will LITERALLY erase the PCs memories of them having found it and set them back, until the McGuffin (aka DM) thinks it is the right time to be found.

I will be surprised if ANYONE here would think this is a good way to do it!

I only skimmed through it so maybe I had the wrong impression and I definitely missed the spoiler. I would have looked at the spoiler and said ... nah, that's dumb. There may be some other result if they get the McGuffin such as being robbed themselves. But while that may be a (stupid) fixed point, that alone doesn't make it a railroad. Just a poorly written plot point.

As you can probably tell, I don't usually use modules other than to mine for ideas.

 

[TwoSix]

Let’s explain this a slightly different way. My barbarian has just found out that his detested cousin has taken advantage of his absence to usurp his position. He encounters a bar looking to let off steam.
The DM briefly describes the bar in two lines. Large mirror, wood panelling, halfling barman on a stepstool.
I, as player, have an image in my mind’s eye as to what this bar looks like. The image is more detailed than the description: that’s how humans work, and without that RPGs probably wouldn’t be possible.
In game:
My barbarian is spoiling for a fight. He walks up to the big guy at a table with friends and rudely knocks off his hat.

The DM didn’t establish that there was a big guy at a table with friends. He didn’t establish that he was wearing a hat to knock off.

The alternative, which would break immersion for some posters, would be to interrupt their action declaration.
1. Ok, is there anyone in the bar?
2. What does he look like?
3. Um, does he have a hat or something I can knock off?

Exactly this.

For some players (raises hand), having to ask if the guy in the hat is there breaks my immersion, because I can no longer trust my internal picture.

For other players, NOT asking (or inventing a non-declared detail at all) breaks immersion because it reminds them that they have agency outside of their character.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Exactly this.

For some players (raises hand), having to ask if the guy in the hat is there breaks my immersion, because I can no longer trust my internal picture.

For other players, NOT asking (or inventing a non-declared detail at all) breaks immersion because it reminds them that they have agency outside of their character.

I would say it gives them agency outside of their character, but otherwise, yeah.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Let’s explain this a slightly different way. My barbarian has just found out that his detested cousin has taken advantage of his absence to usurp his position. He encounters a bar looking to let off steam.
The DM briefly describes the bar in two lines. Large mirror, wood panelling, halfling barman on a stepstool.
I, as player, have an image in my mind’s eye as to what this bar looks like. The image is more detailed than the description: that’s how humans work, and without that RPGs probably wouldn’t be possible.
In game:
My barbarian is spoiling for a fight. He walks up to the big guy at a table with friends and rudely knocks off his hat.

The DM didn’t establish that there was a big guy at a table with friends. He didn’t establish that he was wearing a hat to knock off.

The alternative, which would break immersion for some posters, would be to interrupt their action declaration.
1. Ok, is there anyone in the bar?
2. What does he look like?
3. Um, does he have a hat or something I can knock off?

Think the original description of the bar should have included how crowded it is, but besides that the steps the player takes seem reasonable to me and do not require further confirmation. If there are people at the bar, it can be assumed that some are sitting at the tables and some are bigger than others, and unless it is culture where hats are not worn, it can be assumed that some of them wear hats. Now, next it is the GM's turn to decide who this big guy is and how he reacts.

And this is now like third or fourth time I've said I was fine with the bar example, and these things are implied and can thus be assumed.

 

[Cadence]

Haven't multiple people already answered this? If a PC asks if there's a taxidermist in town the DM determines if there is one. Same with any other detail. What the player won't do in my D&D game is declare that there is a taxidermist in town, which is a perfectly normal move in some other games.

In part, I was clarifying that the characters' actions often have a sizeable impact on what the DM puts in the world. Sometimes by merely asking questions.

The big thing, as you note, is if the DM gets to vett it first.

(I just wish the DM of the real world would instantiate a wider selection of porters and stouts when I ask, instead of just more IPAs).