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

[Xamnam]

In games with a success with a consequence it is pretty tricky to balance things so that the success still feels worth the consequence, because if not, it just feels like a failure. Not that @hawkeyefan's example seemed to have an issue with this to me, but the player probably saw it differently.

Oh, absolutely, framing partial success and complications is absolutely my biggest stumbling block in running Blades or other games that ask that. I think it's just that the potential consequence was framed as not definite, and also, delayed to some point in the future if it did arise, yet still created such a freeze, that caught me.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Oh, absolutely, that is my biggest stumbling block in running Blades or other games that ask that. I think it's just that the potential consequence was framed as not definite, and also, delayed to some point in the future if it did arise, that it still created such a freeze that caught me.

Yeah, that's a bit weird. To me it seemed like a very good consequence given the circumstances.

 

[Oofta]

Is anyone here really . . . telling you that you are doing it wrong?

I mean, I'm skimming the thread at this point, but there seems to be a lot of folks saying "Stop telling me I'm doing it wrong!" and very few (that I've noticed) actually telling anyone, "Hey, you're doing it wrong!"

Disagreement is not the same thing as telling someone their preferences are wrong.

@Oofta, your playstyle and viewpoint does not align with the way I like to engage with D&D (and other RPGs) today. That doesn't mean I think you're doing it wrong, just wrong for me. You seem to have a good gaming group going based on those preferences, so who's to tell you that all that fun you and your friends are having is wrong? I don't think anyone here is doing that.

If I've missed an egregious post in all of this circular back-and-forth, I apologize.

Not sure how to take "But if they let the players introduce anything... it all comes crashing down?" as anything but a negative sarcastic dig at people who don't allow collaborative world building. Because up until then? I had no problem with the post, just like I have no problem who like collaborative world building. It's just not my thing.

It just feels like I, and others, are always "Do what works for you, it happens to be my preference to do it this way" seems to always get the responses like "But why don't you do it my way? What's wrong with doing it like I do? Do you really need to have that kind of ultimate control?"

 

[soviet]

It just feels like I, and others, are always "Do what works for you, it happens to be my preference to do it this way" seems to always get the responses like "But why don't you do it my way? What's wrong with doing it like I do? Do you really need to have that kind of ultimate control?"

This is a discussion forum. What responses do you want? "Oh that's nice'?

 

[Oofta]

This is a discussion forum. What responses do you want? "Oh that's nice'?

Try, "This is what I do and why" instead of saying things like if you don't allow the players to do whatever they want that it's a railroad?

EDIT: this is not a specific accusation about anything you've said, but it basically has been said by others.

 

[Oofta]

No, I don't have a hard time grasping that. If a player and DM have no conflict about this stuff, then there's no issue. So I'm not talking about that... what would be the point? I'm only talking about instances where there may be conflict.



If me stating my preference is telling you yours is wrong, then you stating your preference is telling me mine is wrong, too, Oofta.

Neither is true. You are right that these are preferences. No one is saying any is objectively better. No one is saying anyone is doing anything wrong. Please move past that.

Try not using phrases like "But if they let the players introduce anything... it all comes crashing down?" Because nobody is saying that. Also avoid things like "Why couldn't you".

Or just ignore my comments. After all I'm just some random dude on the internet. I'm not telling you what to say or not say, just trying to provide feedback on why it comes off as a putdown.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Ah, I see! Maybe... You mean these were examples of the participants not being on the same page, not having same expectations what the game was about and how it was to be played? If so, then I get it. I sorta was seeking connection to the larger topic of GM/player role distribution thing.

Yes, it's about mismatched expectations. I think that's related, though not directly, to the idea of conflict over narrative authority between players and DMs. That’s a type of mismatched expectations.

Not sure how to take "But if they let the players introduce anything... it all comes crashing down?"

As bewilderment that you can expect all of that from a DM… but giving some players some authority is “pandora’s box” or a slippery slope.

If I described putting all the worldbuilding on the DM as untenable, I’d expect you’d have some opinions about that, no?

 

[Dire Bare]

Or just ignore my comments.

I was going to give you similar advice.

It's easy to get excited in conversations like this and use language that isn't the most neutral. And of course, tone is hard to judge in text.

Try not to assume offense. If certain comments or posters get you heated, ignore them. Scroll past or actually use the ignore button

Advice I should take myself more often . . . maybe even earlier in this thread!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

but giving some players some authority is “pandora’s box”

Please, stop misrepresenting what I said. I already corrected you once, so there is no excuse.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Please, stop misrepresenting what I said. I already corrected you once, so there is no excuse.

I’m not misrepresenting what you said. You described the example as pandora’s box. Others have described it similarly. That allowing something once creates a problem of having to allow it again and again.

My comment here is not limited to your take. It includes yours as well as sentiments expressed by others.