Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8346381" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Rule Zero is explicitly understood to rarely, if ever, actually be written in the text itself, so your challenge is a bit specious to begin with. Very few games that &quot;have&quot; it explicitly say it. 4e, for example, does not include it anywhere in the books--it was first discussed in a magazine article.Edit: That said, having looked into it, while even people who play Burning Wheel admit that Rule Zero is widespread (almost, but not quite, universal) in TTRPGs, some explicitly call BW &quot;the exception&quot; to it. That is, if you try to apply Rule Zero to it, it will break, because it was designed to be run very specifically and exclusively RAW. If you don't enjoy what it's offering, then it's simply not for you, and trying to hack it into something else will fail. Like taking apart your toaster so you can toast ciabatta in it; doing so for the vast majority of people will simply leave you with a disassembled toaster and no toasted ciabatta.So, if you prefer: &quot;Is Rule Zero not a nearly universal part of TTRPGs, such that it's present at least in every PbtA game, such as the one I play?&quot; (And even games that recommend against it cannot make you not use it, which was sort of my point. There are no Burning Wheel hit squads that take away your license to roleplay if you play BW and apply Rule Zero while doing it.)Another way of saying this, which expressly dodges the &quot;you're asking us to prove a negative&quot;:What stops me, the DM, from saying, &quot;I'm not going to abide by that rule?&quot; The players can always walk out, sure, but as long as we're still playing the game and people don't decide to leave, what prevents me from saying that? You're asserting that, by me not having the ability to do as I will, that there is some actual, enforced thing that takes that freedom away from me. You are asserting a positive: a thing that removes the freedom to choose how to play.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8346381, member: 6790260"] Rule Zero is explicitly understood to rarely, if ever, actually be written in the text itself, so your challenge is a bit specious to begin with. Very few games that "have" it explicitly say it. 4e, for example, does not include it anywhere in the books--it was first discussed in a magazine article. Edit: That said, having looked into it, while even people who play Burning Wheel admit that Rule Zero is widespread (almost, but not quite, universal) in TTRPGs, some explicitly call BW "the exception" to it. That is, if you try to apply Rule Zero to it, it will break, because it was designed to be run very specifically and exclusively RAW. If you don't enjoy what it's offering, then it's simply not for you, and trying to hack it into something else will fail. Like taking apart your toaster so you can toast ciabatta in it; doing so for the vast majority of people will simply leave you with a disassembled toaster and no toasted ciabatta. So, if you prefer: "Is Rule Zero not a [I]nearly universal[/I] part of TTRPGs, such that it's present at least in every PbtA game, such as the one I play?" (And even games that recommend against it cannot make you [I]not[/I] use it, which was sort of my point. There are no Burning Wheel hit squads that take away your license to roleplay if you play BW and apply Rule Zero while doing it.) Another way of saying this, which expressly dodges the "you're asking us to prove a negative": What stops me, the DM, from saying, "I'm not going to abide by that rule?" The players can always walk out, sure, but as long as we're still playing the game and people don't decide to leave, what [I]prevents[/I] me from saying that? You're asserting that, by me not having the ability to do as I will, that there is some actual, enforced [I]thing[/I] that takes that freedom away from me. [I]You[/I] are asserting a positive: a thing that removes the freedom to choose how to play. [/QUOTE]

Verification