Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Exception-Based Design in D&D: When Rules Enable Rule Lawyers
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 9518568" data-attributes="member: 93670"><p>I agree with [spoiler="this section so much"]</p><p>In 5e 2024, it seems that Rule 0 has been replaced by a well intentioned and good sounding version “Rule 0 of D&D is simple: Have fun. It’s fine if everyone agrees to change the rules as long as doing so means the game is more fun for everyone.” and this works fine for many groups. However, for games with rules lawyers problems, it fuels the fire of delays and arguments over rules interpretations. First, fun is subjective so it jumps right past the idea of a conhesive experience and the DMs role in managing that to a sort of palementary process. Second, it abandon’s the idea of making quick rulings to keep the game moving and directly sets the expectation of stopping everything for a debate whenever someone wants to. Third, it firmly enforces the idea that D&D is a game or rules, not rulings, and that things run like a computer program, not like a story unless the entire groups stops and debates every single thing. Last, it flips traditional games on it’s head and establishes for the DM to be overruled by the players, which is a powerful and dangerous idea</p><p>[/Spoiler]</p><p>2014 was already setup to encourage that with do much of the FM's toolbox stripped bare even before they needed to start invoking rule0 hard just to create <em>a</em> challenge for all but the most <em>deliberately</em> inept parties. All of the "RAW is not in player favor here but it seems cool" was stripped away and replaced with "RAW bends over backwards and buys shares in KY jelly to make sure it couldn't possibly be at all in the way of player whims"while maintaining strict exception based design for PCs to further hope out of things if the gm went above and beyond.</p><p></p><p>Changing rule zero so it invites any one player to call for a debate or dig in while largely maintaining that "rules that matter for thee but not for us" design is just an invitation for problems</p><p></p><p>When the game's design philosophy is "rulings not rules", the person making those rulings needs more (not less) room to make those rulings. 2014 reduced that wiggle room by generally ensuring that the vast majority of rulings are either Mary Sue "yes you couldn't possibly fail" wish fulfillment or a straight up & obvious nerf". 2024 doesn't seem to have changed that but added yet another obstacle in the path of actually making any rulings over rules of consequence.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tetrasodium, post: 9518568, member: 93670"] I agree with [spoiler="this section so much"] In 5e 2024, it seems that Rule 0 has been replaced by a well intentioned and good sounding version “Rule 0 of D&D is simple: Have fun. It’s fine if everyone agrees to change the rules as long as doing so means the game is more fun for everyone.” and this works fine for many groups. However, for games with rules lawyers problems, it fuels the fire of delays and arguments over rules interpretations. First, fun is subjective so it jumps right past the idea of a conhesive experience and the DMs role in managing that to a sort of palementary process. Second, it abandon’s the idea of making quick rulings to keep the game moving and directly sets the expectation of stopping everything for a debate whenever someone wants to. Third, it firmly enforces the idea that D&D is a game or rules, not rulings, and that things run like a computer program, not like a story unless the entire groups stops and debates every single thing. Last, it flips traditional games on it’s head and establishes for the DM to be overruled by the players, which is a powerful and dangerous idea [/Spoiler] 2014 was already setup to encourage that with do much of the FM's toolbox stripped bare even before they needed to start invoking rule0 hard just to create [I]a[/I] challenge for all but the most [I]deliberately[/I] inept parties. All of the "RAW is not in player favor here but it seems cool" was stripped away and replaced with "RAW bends over backwards and buys shares in KY jelly to make sure it couldn't possibly be at all in the way of player whims"while maintaining strict exception based design for PCs to further hope out of things if the gm went above and beyond. Changing rule zero so it invites any one player to call for a debate or dig in while largely maintaining that "rules that matter for thee but not for us" design is just an invitation for problems When the game's design philosophy is "rulings not rules", the person making those rulings needs more (not less) room to make those rulings. 2014 reduced that wiggle room by generally ensuring that the vast majority of rulings are either Mary Sue "yes you couldn't possibly fail" wish fulfillment or a straight up & obvious nerf". 2024 doesn't seem to have changed that but added yet another obstacle in the path of actually making any rulings over rules of consequence. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Exception-Based Design in D&D: When Rules Enable Rule Lawyers
Top