Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Water Bob" data-source="post: 6091604" data-attributes="member: 92305">I've been playing RPGs long enough to know that there are errors, omissions, and flat out dumb rules that see print.&nbsp; I tend to think that core rulebooks are more polished and considered than rule supplements (splat books and such), but even then, things aren't worded properly, or stuff was cut for space...yadda, yadda.But, still, I tend to give the rules--the core rules especially--the benefit of the doubt.&nbsp; I figure that it's likely someone put a lot of thought into the mechanics before publishing.&nbsp; Note I didn't say it was definite, but only likely.Therefore, I still think it's a good plan to go with RAW as the default, until I have a damn good reason to change.I've changed rules before and gotten bitten.&nbsp; The worst is when the players like the change, but I, as GM, know its bad for the game in the long run.I've found it easiest to go with what's written, then slowly change what needs to be changed as the campaign progresses.&nbsp; Heck, some of my players, when they GM, will look at a new game and change things in the rules without ever even trying what is suggested.&nbsp; I think that's a bad plan.I also believe in strong DM's and not being a slave to the rules.&nbsp; If a rule, after much thought, doesn't meet my standard or taste, then I change it.&nbsp; But, I always try to keep changes to a minimum.&nbsp; Hodge-podge rules are a nightmare, in my estimation.&nbsp; Those may work from some GM's, but not me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Water Bob, post: 6091604, member: 92305"] I've been playing RPGs long enough to know that there are errors, omissions, and flat out dumb rules that see print. I tend to think that core rulebooks are more polished and considered than rule supplements (splat books and such), but even then, things aren't worded properly, or stuff was cut for space...yadda, yadda. But, still, I tend to give the rules--the core rules especially--the benefit of the doubt. I figure that it's[I] likely[/I] someone put a lot of thought into the mechanics before publishing. Note I didn't say it was definite, but only likely. Therefore, I still think it's a good plan to go with RAW as the default, until I have a damn good reason to change. I've changed rules before and gotten bitten. The worst is when the players like the change, but I, as GM, know its bad for the game in the long run. I've found it easiest to go with what's written, then slowly change what needs to be changed as the campaign progresses. Heck, some of my players, when they GM, will look at a new game and change things in the rules without ever even trying what is suggested. I think that's a bad plan. I also believe in strong DM's and not being a slave to the rules. If a rule, after much thought, doesn't meet my standard or taste, then I change it. But, I always try to keep changes to a minimum. Hodge-podge rules are a nightmare, in my estimation. Those may work from some GM's, but not me. [/QUOTE]

Verification