Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Enrahim2" data-source="post: 8999805" data-attributes="member: 7039850">Hey! Are you saying that the entire &quot;no rule zero&quot; noise was a pure strawman argument?? I think very few would claim that it is impossible to play most rule zero games without making changes to or add rules (the original D&amp;D is the only rpg I can remember having seen a reasonable argument for this to be the case). At best I think they can argue it would be a very rigid and poor experience.And as I mentioned, when I have made any structural changes as a DM it has always been with potential for player feedback. If unilateral, secret structural changes has ever happened at a D&amp;D table, it sound like a good horror-story material. I really don't think rule zero has ever been interpreted and used in such a way at any large scale. The only thing I can think of that is common knowledge of this kind would have been fudging - and if what the no rule zero proponents really tried to communicate was &quot;no fudging in our games!&quot; they really failed to get the message across.I really got the impression the no rule zero voices were trying to express something more than simply &quot;hey, we think our game is good without changing it, while we think those games suck without changing it&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Enrahim2, post: 8999805, member: 7039850"] Hey! Are you saying that the entire "no rule zero" noise was a pure strawman argument?? I think very few would claim that it is impossible to play most rule zero games without making changes to or add rules (the original D&D is the only rpg I can remember having seen a reasonable argument for this to be the case). At best I think they can argue it would be a very rigid and poor experience. And as I mentioned, when I have made any structural changes as a DM it has always been with potential for player feedback. If unilateral, secret structural changes has ever happened at a D&D table, it sound like a good horror-story material. I really don't think rule zero has ever been interpreted and used in such a way at any large scale. The only thing I can think of that is common knowledge of this kind would have been fudging - and if what the no rule zero proponents really tried to communicate was "no fudging in our games!" they really failed to get the message across. I really got the impression the no rule zero voices were trying to express something more than simply "hey, we think our game is good without changing it, while we think those games suck without changing it". [/QUOTE]

Verification