Things that are Easy to change vs. things that are Hard to change

When 4E comes out, you'll have a pile of rules and fluff, some optional, some sort of "required" on some level. Some of this stuff will, inevitably, not suit your tastes for whatever reason. So you'll adjust rules and adjust fluff.

What sorts of things are the easiest things to change in an RPG? What sorts of things are the hardest?

I personally think there are some things that are so simple for the DM to adjust that there's almost no point in whining about them. The core rules race lineup is an example -- don't like a race? Don't include it in your setting. Add a race that's missing. Very easy.

Something like turning hit points into a wounds/vitality system, or implementing an Armor as DR system, would be harder to do.

I think there are things in the middle -- things that might seem easy but then result in cascading, unexpected changes if implemented. For example -- let's say you don't like the 4E "magic item slot" system, and you decide to alter how many or what types of slots are available (add rings for lower level characters, or say "only 2 wearable items per character" or whatever). I think that is the sort of change that looks simple but is actually complex. Even moreso if you decide to expand or restrict the kinds of bonuses that can exist in the game.

So what about you -- what are the easy fixes or changes? What are the ones you really don't want to mess with?

EricNoah said:

I think there are things in the middle -- things that might seem easy but then result in cascading, unexpected changes if implemented. For example -- let's say you don't like the 4E "magic item slot" system, and you decide to alter how many or what types of slots are available (add rings for lower level characters, or say "only 2 wearable items per character" or whatever). I think that is the sort of change that looks simple but is actually complex. Even moreso if you decide to expand or restrict the kinds of bonuses that can exist in the game.

Click to expand...

Except given Mike Mearls statement that a newbie DM can reengineer 4e to remove items completely in 30 minutes, I think this will no longer be true for 4e. For 3e absolutely. Removing items is ridiculously complex for that edition.

One of my dislikes in RPGs is setting fluff explicitly tied to mechanics. This is very hard to houserule.

For example, I like some of the basic concepts in Exalted, but I dislike the Limit Break rules.

But those rules are so tightly integrated into the game that removing them requires a massive reengineering of the whole game.

Don't know which things will be in what category in 4E, because by definition the "middle things" are hard to predict. They look fairly easy, you pull a thread, and two months later you realize that your 20 pages of house rules are totally not the answer.

In 3E/3.5, for me, it was the skill system. Add or remove a skill or three? No problem. Revise the thing to model different campaign assumptions, while preserving class balance, etc? Drove me crazy. You can't really tweak it, systematically. You can get it sort of in the right ballpark, throw up your hands, and make GM ad hoc rulings to get the effect you want. Or you can just rip the whole thing out and start over. I'm moderately optimistic that 4E will be better in this regard, because SWSE certainly is. Not perfect, but much better.

By the way, in software design terms, what you are talking about here is largely a result of "coupling". Tightly coupled things cannot be changed without also changing what they are coupled with. Loosely coupled things are easy to change without (too many) side effects. It's why throwing things out and starting over is often the best choice.

An area I'll be curious about is damage types -- if I don't care for "necrotic" damage, how much do I need to go about adjusting various spells, races, monsters, etc.? It would be similar to trying to remove, say, sonic damage from 3.x but maybe even a little harder.

Ok, let me just start an "easy" pile and a "hard" pile for myself and I'll try to keep adding to it as I have time.

Easy: particular races present in PHB, race features; particular classes present; to some extent what spells are present; fluff aspects that aren't tightly tied to mechanics

Not so easy: particular class features, combat systems (how critical hits work, for example); fluff aspects that are somewhat or tightly tied to mechanics (a feat with a fluffy name would need to be renamed and that's a PITA to look up/reference, etc.).

BTW I think a lot of the things that some are saying take power away from the DM will be in the "easy" pile.

economic system : if level and wealth are linked, if spells and magic item use money (material components), it's hard to rework the absurd prices table of the PHB.

So much depends on the implementation, it's hard to say. Magic items for example--their functions are really not all that different between 3E and 4E, yet in 3E they're virtually impossible to uncouple from the rest of the rules, while in 4E it's the work of a few minutes. It's all in the way the game is put together and the specific details. Heck, even the physical layout of the rulebook will play a role. It's a lot easier to remove setting-specific details and fluff if those details are sequestered off in sidebars and the like, rather than mixed in with the rules text.

EXP and level gain. This is such a huge issue with some people in 3E but I've never seen it because it's very, very easy to fix with the info in the DMG.

Yeah, running a No XP game was so easy, it's now my new default. Very slick.

I bet the best 3rd party rule books will be the ones that do a nice job of taking the changes that seem harder than they actually are, and presenting alternatives.