Let's rant! When house rules get stoopid...

I know there's more of this threads than neurones in any player's (or obviousky DM's) brain but hell, is there ANY house rule that is simply wrong with your current game?

Example:

In my current campaing, our DM stated that we all would start with NPC gear, and being level 11 the start point means that you'll have at best a +2 weapon and +1 armor or other protective items. I mean, seriously, WTF?

Plus, as another issue, one of my fellow players is using 3.0 feats that are gone in 3.5 (namely, Improved Power Attack and that stuff) and is bending PrC requeriments AND mechanics to the munchkinism just because "it fits with the theme". I don't mind a horrible, non-optimized Fighter who tries to dish out Godzilla-size damage (and fails in doing so), but the point of bending that much the rules just for "fitting with the theme" certainly pisses me off.

Among other horrors, this is how our campaing is running, how's yours?

Cryohaggar said:

I know there's more of this threads than neurones in any player's (or obviousky DM's) brain but hell, is there ANY house rule that is simply wrong with your current game?

Click to expand...

I'm the DM; of course not.

But I've seen alot of terrible house rules on the internet, and not every post in the house rules forum really smells of roses either.

In my current campaing, our DM stated that we all would start with NPC gear, and being level 11 the start point means that you'll have at best a +2 weapon and +1 armor or other protective items. I mean, seriously, WTF?

Click to expand...

What exactly is wrong with that? I mean, I can see how it could be really wrong in particular contexts, but in and of itself I don't see what is wrong with it. That's a perfectly valid rule unless you a) don't realize you've reduced the effective level of the party and don't balance challenges appropriately and b) don't put some general limitations on spellcaster classes that keep them in line with non-spellcasters.

Plus, as another issue, one of my fellow players is using 3.0 feats that are gone in 3.5 (namely, Improved Power Attack and that stuff) and is bending PrC requeriments AND mechanics to the munchkinism just because "it fits with the theme". I don't mind a horrible, non-optimized Fighter who tries to dish out Godzilla-size damage (and fails in doing so), but the point of bending that much the rules just for "fitting with the theme" certainly pisses me off.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand the complaint here either. Is the player bending rules or is the DM bending rules for them, and what is the intention and 'theme'. I would think allowing some high powered feats into the game might be a way to make up for taking the magic out (see Iron Heroes, for example).

Among other horrors, this is how our campaing is running, how's yours?

Click to expand...

That doesn't sound too horrible except for one thing; you aren't happy. Care to explain why you aren't happy, because I'm not getting it.

As for mine, I'll tell you Wednesday, since that's when I'm kicking my new one off.

Woot!!!

Well, there certainly are a lot of bad houserules, or at least ones I find distasteful. As a player, you can't help but cringe at the word houserule, because IME as a player, the vast majority of the time said houserule will not be for your party's benefit, or if it is, in such a stupid way that it's still annoying (like a DM who thinks casters need MORE help to be awesome).

Any houserules to "increase randomness" in combat are a sure-fire warning sign of "this game is not for you!" to me. Most such rules end up revolving around more deadly or long-term debilitating crits and/or importing weapon fumble tables. The latter being one of the most abominable ideas to ever be conceived by the likes of man.

On these boards, there's one particular person who posts regularly in the houserules forum who I swear...I completely and utterly disagree with him/her 98% of the time. Obviously not going to say who that person is, but I generally just try to avoid his/her posts whenever possible and hope that groups I could potentially end up joining down the road aren't influenced by him/her.

For my own houserules...I admit it gets to the point at times where I have such exacting or specific modifications to the rules that it is literally impossible to recall with memory, and the best I can muster as the DM is, "I'm pretty sure I had a houserule that pertains to that, give me a second to check." I suppose that's pretty bad, huh?

StreamOfTheSky said:

Most such rules end up revolving around more deadly or long-term debilitating crits and/or importing weapon fumble tables.

Click to expand...

long-term debilitating crits are definitely terrible, but a simplified fumble table that's easy to memorize can lead to amusing situations and is manageable without encumbering gameflow.

StreamOfTheSky said:

For my own houserules...I admit it gets to the point at times where I have such exacting or specific modifications to the rules that it is literally impossible to recall with memory, and the best I can muster as the DM is, "I'm pretty sure I had a houserule that pertains to that, give me a second to check."

Click to expand...

Maybe this will help:
1. Write them down.
2. Use only rules which you see necessary for game improvement, not ones that are derived from "things are like this just because to my personal taste that's how they should be".
3. Categorize and sub-categorize.
4. Sort alphabetically within the categories.

nonsi256 said:

a simplified fumble table that's easy to memorize can lead to amusing situations

Click to expand...

1) These situations are always deadlier than they were before the "amusement" started.
2) I'm playing a heroic epic, not a Buster Keaton movie. If I wanted slap-stick, I'd play one of those games.
3) I've never seen a memorable gaming scene result from a combat fumble. Never. I've seen a lot of character generation that resulted from a combat fumble, but never a memorable scene or interesting story.

From a purely character-ability stand-point, fumbles only make (bad) sense for level 0 and level 1 PCs. After that, PCs are simply too well-versed at combat (yes, even the Wizard) to have a flat chance to stab themselves, drop their weapons, throw their weapons into the river, shatter blades on the floor, swing so hard that they crap their pants, or whatever other nonsense is on the fumble table.

We've seen many funny tales from fumbles. In my games that all are heroic journeys there is room for humor.

We don't have a lot of house rules. I think there is one I use that for others it would seem stupid, but it works for us. No one can gain a level unless the whole party is there. The PCs all gain levels at the same time. They gain levels more when it feels right instead of strictly by XP which I guess is another house rule that people might find stupid.

The biggest things with house rules is they only need to work for the table they are at. I know I can be a little free with the PCs power because no one will abuse it. My players routinely make less then optimized characters and will pick abilities for fun more then the power level of the character.

In a 3.x game, not allowing the clerics to auto convert their spells to Cure/Inflict spells. They had to memorize them as one of their slots, unless they had the Healing Domain.

Nebten said:

In a 3.x game, not allowing the clerics to auto convert their spells to Cure/Inflict spells. They had to memorize them as one of their slots, unless they had the Healing Domain.

Click to expand...

Was this allowing one's domain spells to instead be converted? Or the only spells that could be converted are the healing domain ones if you have the Healing Domain?

StreamOfTheSky said:

On these boards, there's one particular person who posts regularly in the houserules forum who I swear...I completely and utterly disagree with him/her 98% of the time. Obviously not going to say who that person is, but I generally just try to avoid his/her posts whenever possible and hope that groups I could potentially end up joining down the road aren't influenced by him/her.

Click to expand...

"It" is a lot simpler to say than "him/her".

Crothian said:

Was this allowing one's domain spells to instead be converted? Or the only spells that could be converted are the healing domain ones if you have the Healing Domain?

Click to expand...

If you had the Healing domain, you could convert as normal rules state.