D&D 4E Will Rule Zero be in 4E?

[WheresMyD20]

Including Rule Zero in the core books, explicitly and prominently, would go a long way toward solving these kinds of problems.

In some of the older editions of the game, there were sections of the rules where the author would discuss what to do when players wanted to try something the rules don't cover. I think a section like that should be included in 4e and future editions.

 

[RigaMortus2]

I could maybe see this in the DMG, but what about a list of "suggestions" of rule changes or fudges that a DM could get away with. If only to remove any potential abuse.

Ex of what I mean...

In an instance where the entire party is defeated/killing in an encounter, the DM can declare that the party was captured.

 

[Professor Phobos]

IME, Rule Zero is more about abusing DM than flexibility.

Disagree with all the fiber of my being.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Basically, will Rule Zero (in other words, a foundational rule stating that the DM is allowed to make on-the-fly rulings, change or break rules in creative ways, et. al, in order to make the game more fun) be in the 4E Player's Handbook?

It doesn't need to be. It is, if you will, a self-evident, manifest RIGHT of DM's. Only brainless, unimaginative, weenie SHEEP think that playing any RPG means they are never EVER allowed to deviate from the rules unless they have EXPRESS permission.

I think the answer to this question will tell us a lot about the direction in which D&D is headed.

That much is true, but probably not for the reasons you think.

Pardon me if this is a tad strident. It just happens to be an issue I feel very strongly about, having no sympathy or tolerance for anyone unwilling to put faith in their own creativity over blind submission to written rules or official proclamations.

 

[Kesh]

Seeing as there is no "Rule Zero" in 3e or 3.5 I think we will be okay.

Go check, it isn't there. "Step Zero" of Character Generation refers to the DM being the final arbiter of allowed character creation.

Rule Zero is a metaphor, and a valid and real one in all RPGs. It's a myth that it is on paper in 3.x.

Burning Wheel does what?

Step 0 is Rule 0, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.

 

[Blackwind]

It doesn't need to be. It is, if you will, a self-evident, manifest RIGHT of DM's. Only brainless, unimaginative, weenie SHEEP think that playing any RPG means they are never EVER allowed to deviate from the rules unless they have EXPRESS permission.

For someone who's never played an RPG before, it's far from self-evident. Everyone learns Rule Zero somehow.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Everyone learns Rule Zero somehow.

Usually in kindergarten, when the teacher tells everyone it is okay to use their imagination.

 

[BASHMAN]

It depends on the 4E rules themselves. The more contingencies addressed by the official rules, the less on the fly rulings a DM will get away with. This is why Rule 0 was more like a suggestion in 3.x-- the rules covered so many possible contingencies, that there was no "need" for DM decisions. From what I said, 4.x will be more streamlined, so that would probably leave more room for getting creative with things.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I only want to see rule 0 if 4E comes with a cheque to cover 'time and a half' for the overtime spent on game design. Personally I'd rather pay money for a game where the professionals have done the work, and we can just play.

 

[pemerton]

Just a brief agreement with Skeptic - if Rule Zero is something like "the GM's word is final as to how any action is to be resolved, and/or is actually resolved in play" then I don't think it's an especially good rule.

The notion that this sort of GM authority is integral to all roleplaying is wrong. I prefer the ruleset to be worked out by player agreement and any deviation from the standard action resolution rules likewise to be worked out by agreement among all the players at the table.

More generally, I don't understand why so many people make the inference from "RPGing requires flexibility and imagination" to "RPGing requires the GM to be the final (even sole) authority at the table". The first is true. The second, as Skeptic said, is a doorway to abusive GMing - something from which D&D has been prone to suffer, due to certain peculiarities of the early D&D and AD&D rules (primarily, the almost total lack of action resolution mechanics).