A scale for house rules

[Warbringer]

Now there is a loss of "realism" but I personally think that ship sailed long ago when we started playing a game that assumed a 20' lizard could open up a flamethrower on me and I would casually react to that by deducting an appropriate number of hit points instead of ... you know ... acting like I was on fire.

This issue will be addressed in 4e where the mandatory use of D+D minis will allow DMs freely use on table special effects. A dragon breathes - hairspray and lighter at the mini; you are hit by a frost giant - hammer... There by driving the sale of minis in relation to the roleplay (cough* ha *cough) game...

 

[Umbran]

Should *any* change, minor or major, be just called "house rule"? Or should we have a scale?

There is such a thing as over-specifying. In some instances, having a framework upon which to hang ideas can help discussion and aid creativity. This is not one of those instances. What purpose would be served if we define an arbitrary scale of house-rulesiness, about which we could argue and quibble endlessly? How would slapping a name, number, or arbitrary ranking enhance our understanding or enjoyment of the games?

Games are complicated enough. Giving a framework for meta-game arguments is just asking for trouble....

"Oh, that's only a Grade 3 house rule, or if you're using the Geneva scale that's a 2nd rank Gygaxian hack. We don't need to consider that here."

 

[Quasqueton]

Well, I was thinking more like:

House Tweak
House Rule
House completely-rewrote-a-major-part-of-the-game/need-a-name-for-something-this-major

I wasn't thinking of a numerical scale.

Quasqueton

 

[CRGreathouse]

House Tweak
House Rule
House completely-rewrote-a-major-part-of-the-game/need-a-name-for-something-this-major

How about:
Tweak
House Rule
New Subsystem

 

[Peter Gibbons]

I'm one who uses several "minor" house rules (as well as several major ones, but thats for another discussion).

[snip]

not keeping track of zero cost spell components: Honestly, I dont think I've ever been in a game where this "house rule" isnt in effect.

That might be because it isn't one. Check out page 174 of the PHB...

 

[Umbran]

I wasn't thinking of a numerical scale.

What the names are doesn't matter. You'll still get ceaseless arguments about whether a thing is a tweak or a house rule, and so on. If the definitions are important, they'll get argued over. If they are unimportant, they shouldn't be there at all.

If the classifications rank anything, they might as well be numeric. I this case, you seem to want to rank severity of deviation from the core, or severity of resulting in-game effects, or the like. "Tweak, House Rule, New Subsystem" maps pretty well to "1, 2, 3", doesn't it?

And personally, I don't think the severity of a change is nearly so important as the nature of the change. Worrying about exactly how severe it is would get in the way of the interesting parts of the discussion.

 

[IronWolf]

Trying for a scale is apt to cause people to spend more time categorizing the house rule than talking about the importat part, the rule itself. What is a minor house rule to one may be a larger issue for another. As a player I prefer to see the house rules up front and then decide if they fit within *my* realm of reasonable, which is going to be different from what everyone else considers reasonable.

 

[genshou]

I'm so tempted to put this in my sig, if it wasn't that it would make my sig too long...

I can fit it in mine!