Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tequila Sunrise" data-source="post: 6321768" data-attributes="member: 40398">My own personal history of messing with the game rules matches your perception, but the sense I get from others is that I'm very atypical. In my naivety as a young 2e gamer, I assumed that there was a good reason for each and every rule, despite how hair-brained 2e is in retrospect. It seems that every time a pre-WotC edition comes up, those who played it agree that you almost have to house rule it due to contradictions and vagaries.I went through a sort of rules-awareness awakening during my 3.x years, and ended up with a truly massive set of house rules. And you're probably right that groups who follow all of the RAW are rare, but I never met a DM who did 1% of the rules tinkering that I did, and even most forum-goers seemed to be happy enough with the RAW to mostly stick to it.I certainly agree that 4e is much more transparent than any previous edition, though that doesn't stop a lot of DMs from thinking that it's difficult to house rule. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused    :confused:"  data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" /> I myself only had 2-3 house rules before I began DMing C4, and that's more than any 4e DM I know.So anyhow, I wouldn't take my own data points as evidence of any larger trend. Even if everyone could agree that X% of gamers follow Y% of the rules, pretty much everyone could use the numbers to defend their own position.</blockquote>

Verification