D&D 5E Help me understand & find the fun in OC/neo-trad play...

[Vaalingrade]

I just don’t understand how an RPG is functional without rule zero

Depends on how you read rule 0:

1 The DM is Daddy and gets their say at all times
2 Any rule can be changed at the will of the group
3 No one can criticize the game's design because the real job of designing the game is up to the DM.

1 and 3 can be dropkicked into the Abyss.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I always thought "the DM arbitrarily screwing over the players" was Classic style-- using Tomb of Horror-style trap dungeons and stating that X number of spells just don't work for no discernable reason other than it would make it too easy for the players to get through all the DM's Saw-like traps that they expected the players to stumble through with no way of knowing how they were supposed to get past them other than trial and error.

 

[Aldarc]

I just don’t understand how an RPG is functional without rule zero, and the fact that its ostensible absence is written off as “self explanatory” is particularly baffling. It certainly didn’t explain itself to me!

I disagree that a TTRPG is disfunctional without Rule Zero, but I have spilt far too much ink on that matter in other threads dedicated to discussing Rule Zero. I think that the basic idea, however, is that the table should first play the game by the rules as written before deciding to tinker with it. I don't think that a Rule Zero is needed for this process anymore than Rule Zero is needed for a table to decide to alter the rules of a card or board game to their prererences. I view Rule Zero in this regard as Dumbo's magic feather.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Depends on how you read rule 0:

1 The DM is Daddy and gets their say at all times
2 Any rule can be changed at the will of the group
3 No one can criticize the game's design because the real job of designing the game is up to the DM.

1 and 3 can be dropkicked into the Abyss.

Well, the rest of us will read Rule Zero a little more charitably where we aren't looking to find reasons to consider Rule Zero completely bad. Your mileage may vary.

 

[Charlaquin]

Humans are psychologically incapable of making that distinction. Truth is black or white, there is no room for grey.

You are wrong, labels are harmful.

Speaking as someone who’s mental health was greatly improved by finding a label to put to the feelings I’d had and been unable to articulate all my life? No, you are wrong. Labels can be life-saving. They can also be used to demean and bully. Labels are not good or evil, they are tools.

 

[Charlaquin]

I disagree that a TTRPG is disfunctional without Rule Zero, but I have spilt far too much ink on that matter in other threads dedicated to discussing Rule Zero. I think that the basic idea, however, is that the table should first play the game by the rules as written before deciding to tinker with it. I don't think that a Rule Zero is needed for this process anymore than Rule Zero is needed for a table to decide to alter the rules of a card or board game to their prererences. I view Rule Zero in this regard as Dumbo's magic feather.

If you’re tinkering with the game, you’re employing rule zero, whether it’s written as a rule in the book or not.

 

[Neonchameleon]

There are as many playstyles are there are players - more, since someone's playstyle will change depending on who they are with and what mood they are in. Trying to label them is like trying to name every grain of sand on the beach.

I'd disagree. One player on their own isn't playing (unless it's a solo game). And I DM 4e very differently from the way I MC Apocalypse World; I have more than one playstyle on my own.

What there is is as many playstyles as there are tables. And trying to label them is an attempt for compatible players and tables to find each other. Which is far from worthless even if perfection is impossible.

 

[Aldarc]

If you’re tinkering with the game, you’re employing rule zero, whether it’s written as a rule in the book or not.

I respectfully disagree but this is not the thread for that discussion.

 

[overgeeked]

I'd quibble and say that's when Trad started.

Neotrad evolved as the general media landscape changed to more character-focused stories over plot focused stories, ttrpg players followed that trend.

I think that might be a better description: plot- vs character-focused gaming. And far easier to understand at first blush. But before anyone takes it to the absurd extreme: no, that’s not implying plot to the exclusion of character nor character to the exclusion of plot. Though both extremes clearly exist in the wider world of RPGs.

 

[Umbran]

Humans are psychologically incapable of making that distinction. Truth is black or white, there is no room for grey.

You are wrong, labels are harmful.

With all respect, no. "Banana" is a label. "Dog," is a label. Every noun is a label. The human mind cannot manage treating every single thing in existence as a distinct and separate entity assuming no similarities to any other thing. Humans must use labels, or we would be paralyzed with having to examine each individual blade of grass to consider whether we must cut it when mowing the lawn.

Which is not to say that we shouldn't be careful with our use of labels especially when applying them to other humans. It is not to say that we should not be open to accepting when our label is inaccurate, or needs an exception. But we need them for the brain to function.

This is highly relevant to the OP - the reason they are having trouble seeing the fun is because they are being presented with a very extreme, exaggerated version. Because that’s what the definition says.

If you view the definition as descriptive, rather than prescriptive, as inclusive rather than exclusive, then there are fewer issues. But you have to be open to considering genres of games to be open sets, with fuzzy edges.