Lincoln Hills |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nice summary, Deadmoon. In fact, that ought to appear verbatim on the first couple pages of the Core Rulebook's next printing!
As far as my games...
If the characters are attempting to do something that is not covered by the rules, I make a quick judgement on whether what they want is A) possible within the game-world but not covered by the book (and move on to apply an ad-hoc houserule to keep things moving), or B) not possible within the game-world (in which case an existing houserule, No Whining, comes into play). So I guess you can file me under Not Forbidden = Permitted, with the proviso that Permitted doesn't necessarily mean Possible.
PCs in my game cannot make the sun go supernova by staring at it, even though nothing in the rules says they can't.
PCs in my game can go blind from staring at the sun in an attempt to make it supernova, even though nothing in the rules says they will.
Yora |
If it's not covered by specific rules, it's an ability check.
Even almost everything that is covered by official rules is basically an ability check with situational modifiers added to it. It just happens that for lots of things (attack, AC, saves, skills), most of these modifiers are always the same, so it's just convenient to write them down somewhere for fast reference anytime you need them.
Arnwyn |
Just curious what the default assumption is for most people's games. Do you assume that if something isn't allowed in the rules, the player can't do it? Or do you assume that if something isn't denied in the rules, the player can do it?
Neither. Deadmoon put it well, above. Outside of what's in the rules, everything else is handled on a case-by-case basis.
If the simpler question is "Do you allow actions outside of what's in the rules?", then my answer is "Yes".
darkwarriorkarg |
1st part:
If the simpler question is "Do you allow actions outside of what's in the rules?", then my answer is "Yes".
Answer: yes.
2nd part:
Can it be extrapolated from existing rules? (if no, go to part 3)
3rd part:
Does it make sense in the context of the game world (not the real world, the world with fire breathing spell casting lizards, fireballs, lightning bolts and teleportation.)
Jiggy RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 |
I start with an assumption that PCs have some basic physical parameters within which they function. If a player wants to do something, then all I have to is determine whether it's something any healthy member of that race could attempt, or not. If it is, then it's my job to translate the player's "I want to do X" into the most applicable rule subsystem I can think of and ask for any checks that might be needed. If it's not, then they'll need something outside their basic physical parameters (such as class abilities, spells, magic items, etc) to enable it.
For instance, the ability to lean a heavy stone coffin lid against a door at the top of a stairway so that it'll fall down loudly if someone opens that door (a crude alarm) is not something that any rules explicitly cover. But it IS something any healthy human could attempt, so it would be stupid to simply say you can't do it. The GM should come up with one or more fair check(s) to see how well you rig it up and go from there.
On the other hand, flying is NOT something every healthy human possesses, so no, you don't get to fly unless something explicitly grants you that capability.