D&D General What is your default approach to the rules, permissive or restrictive?

[overgeeked]

Which of these two best describes your default approach to handling the rules of the game?

Permissive. This stance follows the principle that if the rules don't explicitly forbid an action, then it is considered permitted. Players operating under a permissive stance often seek creative solutions and enjoy exploring the boundaries of the game mechanics.

Restrictive. In contrast, the restrictive stance holds that if the rules don't explicitly permit an action, then it is considered forbidden. Players adhering to a restrictive stance tend to stick closely to the established rules and may be more cautious about deviating from them.

 

[O-Castitatis-Lilium]

For me, it depends. If it doesn't explicitly forbid an action, and the action isn't going to become exploitative; then I will allow it to happen. If it doesn't explicitly forbid an action but that action could easily be abused or exploited, then it's no. It's the same for the restrictive. If it doesn't permit an action but the action makes sense and can't be exploited, then I will allow it to happen. If it doesn't permit something, the action makes sense, BUT it can be exploited or abused, then it doesn't happen. I don't really like to play too strict, but also the rules need to be there to keep the structure of the game.

 

[Scribe]

Outside of combat, permissive.
Within combat, restrictive.

 

[mamba]

Neither. If it makes sense, then it is fine. If it does not then it still does not even if no rule expressly rules it out.

 

[trACT]

Mostly permissive within rule guidelines, if that makes sense?

So if it's a crazy, broken suggestion, it's VERY difficult.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

Permissive. This stance follows the principle that if the rules don't explicitly forbid an action, then it is considered permitted. Players operating under a permissive stance often seek creative solutions and enjoy exploring the boundaries of the game mechanics.

Definitely this one for me. Restrictive sounds like an awful experience for a player. The whole point of DnD is that you can come up with all sorts of creative ideas for how to overcome whatever challenge is in front of you. If you're restricted to only doing the things specifically coded into the game, play a video game

 

[SableWyvern]

Other than in some situations where you're specifically limiting options for practical reasons (eg, you can do it, but at the level of the abstraction, it has no mechanical effect) restrictive seems to me to be completely missing the point of TTRPGs. If you want a fixed set of options, a CRPRG seems like it will do a better job..

In general, I basically agree with @mamba. If it makes sense, you can do it; if it doesn't make sense, you can't. What the rules say is something you only consider after that initial assessment.

 

[Gradine]

Air Bud Rules. No rule says you can't!

 

[Tonguez]

If I want restrictive I'll play chess.

Players should try anything

 

[Lanefan]

Which of these two best describes your default approach to handling the rules of the game?

Permissive. This stance follows the principle that if the rules don't explicitly forbid an action, then it is considered permitted. Players operating under a permissive stance often seek creative solutions and enjoy exploring the boundaries of the game mechanics.

Voted 'permissive' in that you can almost always try something unless a rule says you cannot; but with the caveat that whatever creative thing you try might not have a chance of working, depending on the situation at the time and-or what it is you're attempting.

I don't forbid anyone from declaring "My character jumps to the moon" as an attempted action, but it sure ain't gonna succeed anytime soon.

And that's a key missing element in these two definitions: the rules aren't permitting or forbidding the action itself, they're permitting or forbidding attempting the action.

Restrictive. In contrast, the restrictive stance holds that if the rules don't explicitly permit an action, then it is considered forbidden. Players adhering to a restrictive stance tend to stick closely to the established rules and may be more cautious about deviating from them.