Lanefan
Victoria Rules
In another thread there's been some recent debate regarding just how closely DMs adhere to the rules as written* for the system they are using. The specific example was 5e D&D, but the question can apply to pretty much any RPG: do you stick to the rules as written and treat them more like laws, or do you treat them more like guidelines and change/add/delete rules you don't like. And in either case, why?
* - including errata, Crawford tweets, updates, revisions, etc. depending on system.
Me, I'm 'guidelines' all the way. If something doesn't make sense to me as DM I'll change it to something that does; and if something just gets in the way of playing the game (e.g. 1e initiative RAW) I'll find a way to rebuild and simplify it.
Note that I'm not referring to changing rules on a whim, or to being inconsistent with rulings in an ongoing campaign - those are different issues. This is more to do with how you approach RPG rule-sets in general.
Lanefan
* - including errata, Crawford tweets, updates, revisions, etc. depending on system.
Me, I'm 'guidelines' all the way. If something doesn't make sense to me as DM I'll change it to something that does; and if something just gets in the way of playing the game (e.g. 1e initiative RAW) I'll find a way to rebuild and simplify it.
Note that I'm not referring to changing rules on a whim, or to being inconsistent with rulings in an ongoing campaign - those are different issues. This is more to do with how you approach RPG rule-sets in general.
Lanefan