They actually pulled off the Synnibarr trick?

Quote from: No Rule 0. Yes, GMs can create house rules, but it does not appear that they can make rulings on the spot.

Then the first house rule would be Rule 0, "The GM can make rulings on the spot."

Quote from: EngineThen the first house rule would be Rule 0, "The GM can make rulings on the spot."

I think the thing with house rules is that your players have to agree to them separately from the actual game, whereas if you say "who wants to play D&D?" if they say yes then they're agreeing to that set of rules.

You could easily add house rules to any game (RPG or otherwise) that make it unrecognizable to other people playing the same game.  You don't really need a rule telling you that you can do this.  You just can.  But it stops being the same game.  It's now a new game based on the rules for the original game.

So yes, you could add "Rule Zero" to your D&D game (or monopoly game for that matter) -- but that doesn't change the fact that D&D 4e doesn't (appear to) have a Rule 0 in it.

Quote from: StuartI think the thing with house rules is that your players have to agree to them separately from the actual game, whereas if you say "who wants to play D&D?" if they say yes then they're agreeing to that set of rules.

That definitely appears to be a common presumption here. It's something I've never experienced offline, where people assume any given GM will have made some modifications to the game.

Quote from: StuartSo yes, you could add "Rule Zero" to your D&D game (or monopoly game for that matter) -- but that doesn't change the fact that D&D 4e doesn't (appear to) have a Rule 0 in it.

And I'm still not certain about that. Could someone - oh, ideally Pundit, but someone - tell me what, precisely, the rules need to say in order to include Rule 0?

Engine, you post thicker than you must be in reality. Again, you´ve got the Paul bonus, maybe you are actvely making fun of us.

You must surely know, that your very own take on RPGs has not fallen from the heavens. It´s an output from the texts you read and the games you experienced.

4e changes the learning texts and guiding experiences. DOes it change your game? Of course not if you don´t want to.

DOes it influence the general RPG culture? I betcha!

Quote from: SettembriniDOes it influence the general RPG culture? I betcha!

No one is saying it doesn't effect the general RPG culture.

Asking for Rule 0 to be in a game book is like asking for a constitution to begin with "The people have the right to overthrow previous governments through force of arms and then institute new laws". It exceeds the capabilities of statutes and makes them seem pointless, despite also being true.

Hah! That paragraph is in fact in the German constitution.:cool:

EDIT: but PSeudo, the 4e DMG actively permeates an atmosphere of Rule:0 being not correct, it´s implicitly discouraged.

And the American Declaration of Independence, but I don't believe it's in the laws themselves.

Quote from: SettembriniEDIT: but PSeudo, the 4e DMG actively permeates an atmosphere of Rule:0 being not correct, it´s implicitly discouraged.

Really? I'm reading it, and that's not what I'm getting at all. Do you suppose it's possible that our respective biases are effecting our judgment?

"The GM is the final arbiter of the rules and can disregard whatever he wants in the book as well as make up his own stuff" of something like that is in lots of rpg rules though.  So it's not quite doomsday for any rules that include it.

One example from Keep on the Borderlands:

QuoteThroughout all this - making decisions, playing roles,
handling monsters - the DM must remember that he or she
is in control. The DM is the judge, and it is his or her game.
The DM should listen to the players and weigh their arguments
fairly when disagreements arise, but the final decision
belongs to the DM. The Dungeon Master’s word is law!

Quote from: SettembriniHah! That paragraph is in fact in the German constitution.:cool:

EDIT: but PSeudo, the 4e DMG actively permeates an atmosphere of Rule:0 being not correct, it´s implicitly discouraged.

Good. Then the DMG's totalitarian implications will lead to excess and reaction, embittering an entire generation of roleplayers against excessive obedience to dead rules.

I doubt it will drive them from the hobby. Young players are used to subverting restrictive games - rampages in the Grand Theft Auto games; the constant flow of new gestures with each generation in Rock, Paper, Scissors; new types of Tag; modding FPS's and the like. Excessively rulebound RPGs games are especially easy to subvert because they provide so many angles of attack.

Idiotic literalism is a phase we want them to experience when they're young and new to the hobby, so that they can grow out of it.

Where we are in agreement (I think) is that this more positive outcome won't happen spontaneously, without us helping. Getting new players and enculturating them is important, as is publishing material that constantly tests the boundaries of the game, whether extensive house rules and mods, exciting modules that unexpectedly focus on elements we previously considered unimportant, and in publically available campaign settings so exciting and interesting that chasing monsters seems like the least interesting thing to do in them.

Quote from: EngineReally? I'm reading it, and that's not what I'm getting at all. Do you suppose it's possible that our respective biases are effecting our judgment?

I'm willing to accept this provisionally. The online culture surrounding 3.x, while giving the occasional nod to the unique character of the specific group, mainly pretends that individual DMs exist only to enact the rules as written in the gamebooks, without saying so explcitly. I wouldn't doubt that the same community, having simply cracked open a new book, would change overnight. Whether the 4e books themselves advocate this, I don't know, since I've only read the PHB so far.

As for myself, I am suspicious of any one element in the group holding sole power, whether the DM, the rules, or some dipshit player.

Quote from: wulfgar"The GM is the final arbiter of the rules and can disregard whatever he wants in the book as well as make up his own stuff"

Wait, is that a quote from the German constitution?

:confused:

:mad:



:godwin:

Quote from: PseudoephedrineThe online culture surrounding 3.x, while giving the occasional nod to the unique character of the specific group, mainly pretends that individual DMs exist only to enact the rules as written in the game books, without saying so explicitly.

I'm glad these people aren't sitting at my table.