Why I don't GM by the nose

[Raven Crowking]

Pemerton - I go the other way on this. The whole point of Rule 0 (although it has been used for other things) is to allow flexibility into the system. At it's most basic, it says that what you and your group decides is probably best for you and there's no way a game designer can cover every possible eventuality.

Agreed. This is, IMHO, absolutely correct.

Hussar, I think the difference between page 42 and earlier versions of "rule 0" or "just make stuff up" is that page 42 sets a DC and a damage number such that, if the player makes the roll, then the damage is dealt - and the damage is a meaningful amount for an attack action at the level in question. So it no longer leaves the effectiveness of the player's improvised action to the hostage of the GM's mechanical whims (in the sort of fashion that you've talked about in other posts).

Which makes Page 42 more useful in a particular set of circumstances, but less useful overall than the implied Rule 0 (or the actual Rule 0 in games with that sort of construction).


RC

 

[Hussar]

Agreed. This is, IMHO, absolutely correct.



Which makes Page 42 more useful in a particular set of circumstances, but less useful overall than the implied Rule 0 (or the actual Rule 0 in games with that sort of construction).


RC

Well, yes and no. Personally, I think the strength far outweighs the weakness in this case. IMO, the place where DM's are most likely to start bringing up Rule 0 (or its equivalent) is either in combat or in some sort of physical or mental test. A skill check by any other name.

Yes, there will be times when Rule 0 gets invoked that don't involve some sort of mechanical resolution, but, I think that those will be in a small minority.

The strength of Page 42 is that the DM now has a fairly transparent window into the guts of the system and can make a much more educated decision about how difficult something should be. I think to a large degree, this is just going to skip over the growing pains that a new DM will likely suffer before finding the range (easy to difficult) on his own.

And, why not? After this much time, we should have a pretty good handle on how difficult something should be and still be fun.

 

[Argyle King]

I think page 42 is a good thing. However, I don't feel that it is the end-all be-all of DMing like some people seem to feel it is. It's an ok guideline, but there have been a few times when I was first learning D&D 4E that I felt it created more problems than it fixed. (In particular, there were some improvised actions which turned out to be better than using powers.)

I'm drifting though... I suppose my point is that I feel page 42 is a good idea, but I am not entirely convinced of the quality of the implementation of that idea nor do I necessarily feel that the idea fits together with the rest of the system in a manner which is satisfactory to me.

 

[BryonD]

Which makes Page 42 more useful in a particular set of circumstances, but less useful overall than the implied Rule 0 (or the actual Rule 0 in games with that sort of construction).

The point of rule 0 is: we can't possibly cover every contingency nearly as well as a good DM can.

The point of page 42 is: Sure we can, heck we don't even need more than one page to do it.


People love it and people hate it. The thing is, they are both right. And the only time there is a problem is when someone who hates page 42 tries to play a game built around the philosophy that page 42 is founded upon. (Or someone who exclusively loves page 42 tries to play a game that denies that philosophy)

 

[BryonD]

The strength of Page 42 is that the DM now has a fairly transparent window into the guts of the system and can make a much more educated decision about how difficult something should be. I think to a large degree, this is just going to skip over the growing pains that a new DM will likely suffer before finding the range (easy to difficult) on his own.

And, why not? After this much time, we should have a pretty good handle on how difficult something should be and still be fun.

I agree with this.
It is great for new DMs and when they are ready to move on, then the option to do that is ready.

I'm quite certain that history proves you can come up through the growing pains and end up no longer a "new DM". But there is more than one path to a destination, and finding better ways to get there is a good thing.

 

[pemerton]

The point of rule 0 is: we can't possibly cover every contingency nearly as well as a good DM can.

The point of page 42 is: Sure we can, heck we don't even need more than one page to do it.

I agree with this, except for the implication that page 42 is a substitute for, as opposed to a contributor to, good GMing. The number of problematic skill challenge threads posted on this website is enough to persuade me that poor or middling GMs don't do page 42 particularly better than they do any other parts of the game.

It is great for new DMs and when they are ready to move on, then the option to do that is ready.

And obviously I disagree with this "move on" thing.

Page 42 is aimed at a very different sort of play experience from rule zero. Like I've posted upthread, it is 4e's analogue to HeroQuest's pass/fail cycle. But the idea that 4e or HeroQuest are inferior games from which one eventually "moves on" (to 3E? Classic Traveller? Runequest? Rolemaster? I've got a pretty good handle on these games, and don't feel any great pressure to move onto them - I personally feel more like I've moved on from them) isn't one to which I subscribe.

The sort of game I want to run these days is not an exploration game, but a game in which the action resolution mechanics, both combat and non-combat, are simply via their application pretty much guaranteed to yield a non-predetermined but nevertheless engaging story experience. Page 42, by giveing the numbers that generate challenges at the right level of difficulty and complexity, is a crucial part of this.

 

[Raven Crowking]

The point of rule 0 is: we can't possibly cover every contingency nearly as well as a good DM can.

The point of page 42 is: Sure we can, heck we don't even need more than one page to do it.

Perhaps, but if so, the evidence isn't there. Page 42 cannot cover every contingency nearly as well as a good GM can.

IMO, the place where DM's are most likely to start bringing up Rule 0 (or its equivalent) is either in combat or in some sort of physical or mental test. A skill check by any other name.

My experience varies.

I agree with you that it is nice to have "a fairly transparent window into the guts of the system" to "make a much more educated decision about how difficult something should be."

I disagree that this somehow means Rule 0 isn't a necessity. Yes, Page 42 is designed to make GM rulings easier; No, Page 42 is not the be-all-and-end-all of doing so, nor does it make GM rulings go away.

I agree with this, except for the implication that page 42 is a substitute for, as opposed to a contributor to, good GMing. The number of problematic skill challenge threads posted on this website is enough to persuade me that poor or middling GMs don't do page 42 particularly better than they do any other parts of the game.

Agree.


RC

 

[Hussar]

I disagree that this somehow means Rule 0 isn't a necessity. Yes, Page 42 is designed to make GM rulings easier; No, Page 42 is not the be-all-and-end-all of doing so, nor does it make GM rulings go away.

Oh, totally. And it shouldn't.

What it should do is stop (or at least give DM's pause) DM's from making really egregious errors when making rulings. In either direction really - either too far in favour of the players (thus making things too easy or (probably more likely IME) too restrictive and thus making it so that players never try anything creative because they know that anything creative they try will almost always be less effective than just doing the rules stuff.

Like Pemerton, I also disagree that this is some sort of "training wheels" that good DM's will outgrow. I think this is just good game design. Leaving it for DM's to discover has led to far, far more bad gaming than any Page 42 will.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Hussar, why are you making posts I agree with? Is this really the End of Days?