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

[Micah Sweet]

I never said you had to.

But ignoring the slippery slope argument ("if you let the player do that, he'll suggest the whole map!"), the only reason I see to NOT do it is to actively assert the presence of your pre-generated map.

Which I guess makes sense, since it seems there is a major aesthetic to assert the primacy of a pre-generated setting over the fiction just generated at the table. The primacy of the pre-generated notes helps with this particular style of "immersion".

This is certainly the aesthetic I want, yes. It helps with immersion for me as a player, and is more fun for me as a GM. (note the lack of sarcastic quotation marks).

 

[TwoSix]

This is certainly the aesthetic I want, yes. It helps with immersion for me as a player, and is more fun for me as a GM. (note the lack of sarcastic quotation marks).

To be fair, even without quotation marks, you can assume I'm being sarcastic.

 

[Micah Sweet]

To be fair, even without quotation marks, you can assume I'm being sarcastic.

Oh, I do. Not very respectful of opposing viewpoints IMO, to be honest. I don't agree with everything you say, but I try not to belittle it.

 

[TwoSix]

Oh, I do. Not very respectful of opposing viewpoints IMO, to be honest. I don't agree with everything you say, but I try not to belittle it.

I blame my titanic ego.

 

[Xamnam]

This isn't really a situation that I have experience dealing with in BitD since I usually give players the same advice that John Harper gives (and I am paraphrasing here): "play your characters like stolen cars in GTA."

That, however, is something that is super hard to do for some people.

I do think I'd struggle heavily with this, even if I'm tempted by the active encouragement of the system. Both on a personal attachment to character level, and a not wanting to blow things up for my crew / fellow players. I know it's the point, I know it's a goal, I know it's meant to happen, I know it's what the mechanics work towards, and yet, it's an impulse I feel no impulse towards.

Like, I've only played GTA literally once decades ago at my cousins house, but once I had a car I liked, I didn't want to lose it.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

There is a trivial system that answers this (a) while avoiding alienation for a player around the inner workings of their character's accumulated knowledge and while (b) still maintaining challenge-based priorities. So lets go with that exact exchange between GM and player with the player stipulating "I know there's a settlement of giants in the hills to the east."

GM: That sounds like you're consulting your accumulated knowledge on giant settlements? Cool. Also, there being a settlement of giants in the hills to the east only sounds interesting. It's still on you to endure the perilous journey there and brave the giants to actually make that info useful. So roll +Int and on a 7-9 your memory is fully intact and correct, but it is on you to make that useful and actionable. On a 10+, I'll give you something else about that settlement to make that lore useful and immediately actionable. On a 6-, your memory is somewhat intact, but faulty in a bad way.

Player: <Rolls +Int> 6! Crap!

GM: Alright, mark xp. So yeah...there is a settlement of giants in the hills to the east. That much of your recollection is true. But recall The Tale of Winter's Ill March. The tribe endured a terrible famine centuries ago which led to a fell spirit tempting some of their numbers into cannibalism of their fallen. Now cursed, every winter when forage and game in those east hills falter, the descendants of those cursed go mad and a purge begins...as insatiable hunger causes them to give chase of their non-cursed kin westward down the escarpment...toward here...your village.

Hunters of the east hills returned this morning with a grave declaration...neither fish nor fowl nor belly-filling beast of any kind could be found...

---

The player retains ownership of the inner workings of their character, in this case their memories and accumulated knowledge, and doesn't feel alienated from a setting that should be lived-in for them.

The player has significant agency to drive the gamestate forward in a desirable, interesting way, but that agency isn't remotely unchecked or without risk.

The situation-state of play moves forward in an exciting, dangerous, dynamic way.

Easy peasey lemon squeezy.

Yes, you could do this. It would also be literally a completely different game, and if that is sort of game you want to run, then that is perfectly fine. I don't, or at least didn't at the moment. (Trad approach is my favourite, but I'm fine with dabbling in other approaches.)

 

[Oofta]

There is a trivial system that answers this (a) while avoiding alienation for a player around the inner workings of their character's accumulated knowledge and while (b) still maintaining challenge-based priorities. So lets go with that exact exchange between GM and player with the player stipulating "I know there's a settlement of giants in the hills to the east."

GM: That sounds like you're consulting your accumulated knowledge on giant settlements? Cool. Also, there being a settlement of giants in the hills to the east only sounds interesting. It's still on you to endure the perilous journey there and brave the giants to actually make that info useful. So roll +Int and on a 7-9 your memory is fully intact and correct, but it is on you to make that useful and actionable. On a 10+, I'll give you something else about that settlement to make that lore useful and immediately actionable. On a 6-, your memory is somewhat intact, but faulty in a bad way.

Player: <Rolls +Int> 6! Crap!

GM: Alright, mark xp. So yeah...there is a settlement of giants in the hills to the east. That much of your recollection is true. But recall The Tale of Winter's Ill March. The tribe endured a terrible famine centuries ago which led to a fell spirit tempting some of their numbers into cannibalism of their fallen. Now cursed, every winter when forage and game in those east hills falter, the descendants of those cursed go mad and a purge begins...as insatiable hunger causes them to give chase of their non-cursed kin westward down the escarpment...toward here...your village.

Hunters of the east hills returned this morning with a grave declaration...neither fish nor fowl nor belly-filling beast of any kind could be found...

---

The player retains ownership of the inner workings of their character, in this case their memories and accumulated knowledge, and doesn't feel alienated from a setting that should be lived-in for them.

The player has significant agency to drive the gamestate forward in a desirable, interesting way, but that agency isn't remotely unchecked or without risk.

The situation-state of play moves forward in an exciting, dangerous, dynamic way.

Easy peasey lemon squeezy.

If that's what you want to do, cool. It doesn't work for me.

 

[Oofta]

Do you not see how the giants example required cooperation from the DM?

Do you not see how the DM could have “shut that down” if they wanted? And that could be for any reason.

@Crimson Longinus explained. Giants exist or at least existed in the past, that's been established in the lore. How many are there and where are they? Those are up to the DM as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Oofta]

GM: "Yes, you have heard numerous rumours of a band of giants in the hills to the east. The last story you heard was 2 weeks ago, after they pillaged a farm on the outskirts of the hills. The hills are a day's ride from town, would you like to investigate?"

Almost as if I'm just giving my preference and not telling anyone else how to run their game or treating them like an idiot who doesn't understand the concept.

 

[TwoSix]

Almost as if I'm just giving my preference and not telling anyone else how to run their game or treating them like an idiot who doesn't understand the concept.

I'm glad we're all on the same page, then!

It's so nice to bring peace to the land once more.