My Golden Rule

Out with the old

Search for the Golden Rule (also known as Rule 0) for tabletop roleplaying games and you’ll inevitably find some variation of the following:

The Dungeon Master always has the final say.

Which in context is a perfectly valid understanding to establish at any table. It’s almost inevitable that, regardless of system, human ingenuity and imagination will present a scenario for which there’s not a clear-cut set of rules that can be applied. That or two or more different people have different interpretations on how a situation should be handled. For this, the DM/GM is the arbiter; the ultimate authority for that table.

This makes sense. For the adventure to continue there must be some mechanism by which all other problems can be mitigated. It’s a catch-all statement to resolve the vast realm of potential disagreements.

I hold two issues with it however:

1. It can be abused
   Let’s not pretend that everyone sitting down to play is a shining example of what TTRPG’s strive to attract. Nary a day goes by when tales of some power-hungry ne’er-do-well graces the pages of r/rpghorrorstories, showcasing a shocking lack of either system knowledge or social grace. To them this rule is often a draw to power, and if taken, a shield by which to hide behind.
2. It seems largely superfluous
   By definition the DM/GM is the person running the game. Almost all roleplaying games fall into a pattern of ‘Player initiates action with intent > Dice might be rolled > DM/GM determines and describes outcome’. These games fundamentally rely on the DM/GM making the rulings, and while the widely accepted Golden Rule can help smooth any disagreement at a table, it feels like an unnecessary clarification, and therefore one seldom applicable in it’s own right.

This Golden Rule has always rubbed me the wrong way. Over the (too many) years of running tables I’ve introduced a lot of new players to the hobby and have never felt right teaching them this rule. “Remember, I’m always right.” shouldn’t be the foundation upon which all other rules are based. It’s absolutely a principle that can (and arguably should) be applied; but would I consider it the cornerstone to running a successful table? Absolutely not.

So what does make for a good Golden Rule?

In with the new

Around 2010 I realised that I kept writing the same two-word reminder to myself in my notebook and that it had begun to spill over into the new groups I was teaching and the workshops I was running.

I eventually sat down, wrote these two words at the top of a fresh page, and committed myself to trying to work out what I actually meant by it, because looking back through my notebooks I saw this and variations of it strewn throughout a number of rather different places. ‘Set Expectations’ had stealthily become my mantra.

What it embodies

A typical issue with application of the ‘Dungeon Master always has the final say’ rule, is that it’s never a problem for a player until it is. Which is to say, the first x sessions of the game might go by swimmingly until the person running it reveals they don’t like to use death saving throws and roll a d100 behind the screen at the start of each session to see if someone is smitten by a God There might be players that are ok with those rules, but understandably few that would be ok with being blindsided by them.

The issue there isn’t that the application of the classic rule, it’s that there was no shared understanding of what could be expected. Had the DM laid these rules out in advance, it would have saved a lot of strife, with the players free to raise their concerns, the DM free to justify their home-rules, and all parties free to find other tables.

Most problems can be resolved through communication, and most communication would benefit from everyone setting expectation.

Who it applies to

Yes, everyone. This rule doesn’t differentiate between the roles of players and DM/GMs. While each party might employ it differently it works best when utilised by everyone at the table. I encourage my players to consider this rule for a variety of reasons.

Here’s just a few ways it can work:

DM/GMs:

• Let the players know about any homebrew content, table rules, or social rules that might not otherwise be presumed
• Let the players know that sometimes the rules aren’t clear-cut and in an effort to keep the session flowing a ruling might be made that later gets clarified/corrected (aka – advanced classic Golden Rule)
• Let the players know if they’re likely to experience a combat or roleplay heavy session
• Give content warning for an upcoming element

Players:

• Give advance notice of availability
• Let the DM/GM know that there are certain topics they expect to be / not to be present in the adventure
• Provide some basic character details so that other players might not duplicate or otherwise be at odds (unproductively) with their character

Everyone:

• Let the group know they’re not feeling 100% and might be a bit quieter than usual, but that it’s not an in-character change
• Let others know what they’re looking for from the game and how it might be aligning with those desires if it’s already started

Now, you may think that a number of these examples are elements that seem lifted from a Session Zero, and you’d be right! After all, Session Zero is fundamentally about setting expectations. It’s the best opportunity for everyone present at the table to highlight what they’re looking from the experience, what they wish to avoid, how it will run, what the table etiquette is, etc.

In my experience a good Session Zero is essential to running a successful table, and while much of the community still treats it as cumbersome, ignorable, preachy, and ultimately in the way of rolling dice and yelling “Fireball!”, I can honestly say I haven’t met a single campaign group that hasn’t benefited from some semblance of running it, and most other professional DM/GMs agree.

For instance, take a look at Sly Flourish’s short article on Running Session Zeros. It’s my go-to link to share for it’s short but comprehensive description as to what a Session Zero is and why you should do one (with some nifty tips thrown in). What particularly drew my attention however is this penultimate paragraph:

Setting Expectations

When everyone’s on the same page about a game and a campaign, campaigns run much smoother and everyone has a great time. If players come to the table without any expectations defined, they’ll bring their own and a mismatch in expectations isn’t fun for anyone.

It’s true.

Think about what you’re about to start. Whatever epic adventure you might have planned, no matter how amazing, no matter how fantastical, it surely pales in comparison to the reality of what you’re going to be doing: Sitting and interacting with other people for hours on a regular basis while pretending to be other people.

Nothing about that is normal, and it can get as intense or silly or weird as your collective imaginations will allow. Setting expectations with each other doesn’t necessarily mean setting boundaries, think of them as guiding signs to make sure you all end up at roughly the same destination.

Applying the rule

Unlike most of the rules you’ll find in your rulebooks, this one lacks any definable area of use. There will certainly be times when repeating the words ‘Set Expectations’ to yourself will not make anything clearer, just as there will be times when you realise that setting expectations was fundamentally what improved a situation.

By setting expectations you’re not dictating the actions of others, nor should you feel immediately compelled to fulfil the expectations of others. The important part is that the expectations are shared, acknowledged and managed as you collectively see fit. Roleplaying games are inherently built on trust and the capacity to rely on one another to not abuse that trust, to ‘play fair’.

Remember: There’s not too much difference between what we do with character sheets and dice, and what kids do in the summer holidays with sticks and shouting “Bang! I got you!”

Getting meta

The rule can be employed in other ways too. In the literary world there are countless rules that are employed to adhere to or defy genres and tropes. You shouldn’t be setting expectations to the nth degree – i.e. revealing to the table who the main villain is with no just reason, but you can play with a tables expectations by hinting at, misleading, and ultimately (pleasantly) surprising them.

One sticking point I’ve noticed, especially with newer DM/GMs, is that playing by the rules it’s easy to sometimes blur the line between player and player character. In these scenarios it can be easy to forget that the player will have certain expectations of their own character and their capabilities, and in response a good DM/GM will give them the opportunity to explore and demonstrate them (within reason, obviously).

For instance, the party is walking through the town and they are rudely stopped by a figure that demands they pay a road tax to pass through. It’s been firmly established that there is more than one anti-authoritarian character in the group that won’t take too kindly to this. Their purses are laden with coin from a dragon’s lair they just cleared out and looted, and they’re on a bit of a high right now. Trouble is, this figure isn’t your average commoner, in fact you reckon they could single-handedly take on the entire party without much risk.

How could you set expectations?

• Pre-face this figures appearance in earlier sessions by mention of some undefeatable brigand that has achieved shocking feats and give them an identifiable mark
• Ramp up the description of this character and give them a demeanour, perhaps an arrogant confidence that might give the more astute party members pause
• Outright tell the players (ideally during Session Zero) that not all threats come in increasing sizes with more talons and tentacles than the last and just as they can someday hope to punch mountains to dust, there may be some they encounter that are further along that journey than they are

Perhaps this stalwart tax-collector is itself a means of setting expectations? For should he beat them he’ll simply take his due and allow them to continue, but now they’ll be much more wary when the next less-forgiving threat darkens their path.

Overall

‘Set Expectations’ has become my Golden Rule. It’s the first thing I think of when considering how to improve a situation or dig myself out of a hole. It’s worked it’s way into my personal life, improving how I interact with others and instilling some added consideration to how I conduct myself when not at the table.

I’d recommend trying it on the understanding that it’s not going to immediately revolutionise your games, but it might provide a different perspective from which to appreciate this crazy, delicate, incomprehensible thing we do.

Share your thoughts on this, or let everyone know your Golden Rule in the comments below.