The Origins of ‘Rule Zero’

Jon Peterson discusses the origins of Rule Zero on his blog. It featured as early as 1978 in Alarums & Excursions #38.

 

[Jack Daniel]

I just checked and I see @pemerton's confusion. The 3e book lays out the steps of character creation from 0 to X, and the step 0(as in before you start creating the character) is the same as 3.5, but 3.5 omits the list of steps. Rule 0 is not part of a "step process" and so the PHB confused him. The 3.0 PHB does not have rule 0.

Except, this is indeed where the phrase "rule zero" came from. The principle, has, of course, existed since the beginning of the hobby; but it wasn't actually called "rule zero" until arguments on the Wizards.com forums started using "step zero" to justify the Oberoni Fallacy.

 

[pemerton]

Except, this is indeed where the phrase "rule zero" came from.

Thanks. It's reassuring that I haven't completely lost it yet.

 

[Maxperson]

Except, this is indeed where the phrase "rule zero" came from. The principle, has, of course, existed since the beginning of the hobby; but it wasn't actually called "rule zero" until arguments on the Wizards.com forums started using "step zero" to justify the Oberoni Fallacy.

Dude, it's not even a rule. It's just "check with the DM." Rule 0 is in the 3e DMG, not the PHB. That's just the order of steps for character creation. I mean, see there under "character creation basics" where it says, "Follow these steps..." It doesn't get more clear than that. Step 0(not rule 0) is check with the DM.

And no, they didn't change the name from "Rule 0" to "Step 0," because it never officially had the name Rule 0 to begin with. Rule 0 is on page 9 of the 3e DMG under Adjudication and also on page 11 under "Changing the Rules. Look them up.

 

[turnip_farmer]

Ultra-simple ex: in D&D etc., many DMs outright say, "Give me a Perception check" on first entering a room. In DW you (at least should) never do that. DW's Perception is called Discern Realities, and is never just "asked" for.

While you're correct about how many GMs actually play DnD, the actual rules of 5e are the same as what you're implying about DW (never read those rules). You ask for a Perception check only when a player describes an action that would require one to resolve. If you need to determine whether or not a character notices something hidden just by walking into a room, you use passive perception.

 

[Jack Daniel]

Dude, it's not even a rule. It's just "check with the DM." Rule 0 is in the 3e DMG, not the PHB

You are missing the point. The 3.0 PHB is still the etymological origin of the term as it's now used. Nobody here thinks that "rule zero" is some sort of "official" term for anything—I'm talking about the common usage in the descriptivist sense.

 

[Ovinomancer]

While you're correct about how many GMs actually play DnD, the actual rules of 5e are the same as what you're implying about DW (never read those rules). You ask for a Perception check only when a player describes an action that would require one to resolve. If you need to determine whether or not a character notices something hidden just by walking into a room, you use passive perception.

Right, so, you ask for a perception check using the mechanical way to do so without asking for a die roll. That's what a passive check is -- it's still the use of the skill, but represents either a continued use of it (so you don't roll all the time) or the GM wishing to check a result without alerting the player. The point is, if there's something in the room that has a DC attached to notice it, perception checks are used.

This is not how Discern Realities works in Dungeon World. There's a fundamental difference in how scene framing works and how play works. For starters, there's nothing the the GM knows about in a scene that the players can discover with a check -- this is a pretty huge difference! So, when a player looks for something in the scene, the GM either can say they find it, or they can challenge that by invoking the move and asking for a check. If the player succeeds, the GM is obliged to narrate something that is useful according to the options the player has chosen with their success -- these things are now true, and where always there in the fiction, but everyone playing just found out about them together at the same time. This is, fundamentally, what "playing to find out" means. If the player fails the check, then the GM complicates their lives with a GM move that is as hard as they want it to be. Which is, itself, a full discussion on what that might mean in a given circumstance.

5e and DW play differently while achieving the same thematic goals.