D&D 4E Will Rule Zero be in 4E?

pemerton said:
The notion that this sort of GM authority is integral to all roleplaying is wrong.
The foremost job of the DM is to instigate and direct the adventure and to adjudicate the rules. SOMEBODY needs to have the final word. That somebody is the DM. It is what he/she is there for. That some DM's abuse that position doesn't mean that nobody must ever BE IN that position. Declaring the DM as "final authority" doesn't preclude players letting the DM know just how far they can reduce the practical reach of that "final authority", or from IGNORING what is otherwise the DM's rightful authority.

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).
A DM who tends toward abuse of authority will do so even if he is expressly forbidden to do so. The DM is indeed the "final authority" but that authority is exercised only so long as players agree to submit to it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Imperialus said:
Rule Zero allows for a great deal of flexibility if used appropriately, something that BW lacks.

What does flexibility mean? Are you talking about changing rules to make the game more fun, I assume that that's true, if it is then yes you brought the game, unfortunately for all of the rule modifications that I have seen suggested to far, including my own, and even the creators attempts at modding are not too successful (he once tried to make a three statted simpler version of the game that I once ran Full Metal Alchemist under, the players like a well run original version better) Most of the time, the mods to fix problems in BW are not as good as the original rules themselves.

Buring Wheel rule set is an interdependent assimilation. All the pieces are assimilated to make one mass, you can play part of it, but changing it means that you have to change the core of the system, every rule made depends on the rules coming before and after it. Rule Zero is there, but not in the place player's recognize. You can make your own monsters, lifepaths, traits, spells, pieces of equipment, and even races if your really able to put all of the previous stuff together. Changing rules entirely, well you can, you just have to be really really good, which some us must admit (at least I can humbly say), we are not that good at designing games. Luke and Co. are, and they play test relentlessly, with transparency. The attention to detail, fan-base, and design standards are intense.

I have seen aikido techniques added to fight mechanics, 3e feat-like martial arts rules from classic, new life path set that suggest radically different settings including starwars and wasteland post-apoc homebrews, action movie style gun fight systems for people playing a serenity game, hundreds of spells generated, playtested and discussed with fans and creators in a matter of week's, given away mind you not charged for, and monsters, monsters, monsters!

There is some validity of the flexibility problem, because if you have an idea and go on the site, you will get a official ruling on it, good or bad from the authors mouth more often than not. And they know their game, they know why it's good and if they don't think what your doing is going to work out, they'll tell you. And they are usually right. I think it's what kept the game thriving so well, the insight as to what to do with it is so thorough, and perhaps constricting.

I have seen some terrible paths RPG's have gone down, being house ruled to death with implicit votes of no confidence by wanna-be game designers. The Marvel Universe RPG, which no one understood and everyone modded into the grave and beyond.

I mean a game that can do Frank Herbert and JRR Toliken for $25 USD can't be all that rigid right?

Also: BW game was made in NYC in a vacuum, some influence was made after listening to the forge, but it didn't really change what the game was about, it just got... cleaner, and when to the gym.
 


pemerton said:
The notion that this sort of GM authority is integral to all roleplaying is wrong.
Sure. But that sort of GM authority is integral to certain modes of play.

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".
A game where the lions share of narrative authority is in the hands of the GM helps me feel immersed in the 'fictive dream' (fan-fictive dream?) generated during play. The rules melt away and the game's mechanics are reduced to "OK, here's what I do next. What happens?". It's helps me focus on my character and give the illusion that I've taken control of a protagonist in a novel. Having too much ability to act on the narrative outside of my characters actions, or worse, having to focus on rules-y things like the minutiae of the task resolutions system can get in the way of my enjoyment.

Mind you, I don't always enjoy that playstyle, and I actually prefer not to DM that way, but there are benefits to the 'strong GM' style of play, so long as you trust the GM.
 
Last edited:

Gentlegamer said:
Interestingly enough, "rule 0" is not in the Burning Wheel, of which I've heard much praise.

You have to know and understand that BW is built with far more powerful rules than what D&D ever got (changing a bit in 4E).

Not only conflict resolution, but thing likes stakes setting, "Say yes or roll", "Let it ride", etc.

These severly restrict DM autorithy (a good thing IMHO).
 
Last edited:

skeptic said:
Not only conflict resolution, but thing likes stakes setting, "Say yes or roll", "Let it ride", etc.

These severly restrict DM autorithy.
And as a DM please allow me to say, "thank goodness".
 


Mallus said:
Is that always a good thing?

IMHO yes, if the kind of rules pointed aboves are available.

To make it clear, I much prefer a less-powerful DM with powerful tools available to him, than the opposite.
 


Remove ads

Top