Concerns about House rules in my first DnD group.

[Aacriil]

Hey guys, well, I've been playing RPGs and RPing for years and years, but only in online games and MuDs via the PC. So, recently a friend of mine said he used to play DnD and DM for a group and wanted to start up another one. He invited me to play so I said sure I was going to roll an Elf sorcerer, but he wanted me to do somthing a little more out of the ordinary, so I ended up rolling an elf Shadowcaster (PrC from Tome of Magic.)

Anyways, the way he runs his games concerns me a bit, though, I'm not sure if it's my place to say anything, or even bring up my concerns.

He's decided that the whole movement system is too much of a hassel, so, he's just gotten a Die and given us each a number, he rolls the die and then the NPC/Creature/whatever attacks whoever's number got rolled. Now, this isn't too bad for the Melee classes, but it's really a pain pain for me, with my whole 6hp. >.> I've got no way to avoid being clobbered.

On top of which, he's altered the levelling system, and levels us up like one does int he video game Final Fantasy Tactics, 1k exp = 1 level, and he just adjusts Creature/NPC exp awarded (He's never given quest exp as of yet. ) Which is fine with me, but it concerns me that after two 8 hour sessions, I'm sitting at lvl 1 with ~150 exp, because my guys is always unconcious XD.

Now, I have fun with them But these things are kind of frusterating. Is there anything I can really do? Or should I just leave it be?

 

[Ltheb Silverfrond]

Thats a problem that might be tricky to deal with. First of all, what about the other players? Do they enjoy the game at least? If not, your best bet is to sit down, as a group, outside the context of the game and discuss & courteously debate what you like and dislike in a roleplaying game. You don't like his Movement & Xp houserules, which can be something to bring up. I stress being considerate and talking about these things without arguing, because some people are very opinionated about these things, and keeping things civil and reaching a middle ground are top priorities. Plus, as a DM, I would like to see my players do this more often as constructive feedback is the best tool for a DM.

Another option that I find might work is to wait until the current game is over, and then propose to run your own. Use the rules as you see fit, and see if you can subtly sway the other players or your friend into using a ruleset you prefer. (Just run a game the way you would like to see one run) I would also stress NOT trying to get 'revenge'. IE weighting the game against the friend because of bad things he did to your character. It just leads to escalation and interferes with the roleplaying.

If running a game yourself is too much of a hassle, try to talk it over and express your concerns. I had a DM once who uses a super unfair critical fumble rule in 3.0/3.5 (if you roll a 1 on anything, you auto-fail, fumble in a horrible and crippling manner, and your turn is over automatically) that despite our group talking it over with him and explaining how that wrecks game balance and super-nerfs certain characters, he would not budge. I left and started running for the other players who also felt this rule was unfair. Talk it over with your friend, possibly running a game yourself. If he won't budge or change to a favorable rules set, you can adapt, or simply choose not to game with this person. (Probably not a preferable option, but in my above example, I note it is a possibility)

 

[Aust Diamondew]

If you enjoy the game keep playing. Possbily bring up your suggestions to him after a session.
But I can see your anoyance at his houserules, don't sounds like the kind I would enjoy.

I find it ironic though that he completely removes the tactical movement aspects of DnD, then borrows a mechanic from final fantasy tactics.

 

[iceifur]

I find it ironic though that he completely removes the tactical movement aspects of DnD, then borrows a mechanic from final fantasy tactics.

QFT.

To the OP, if your DM refuses to yield on the whole tactical combat issue, try suggesting an option that doesn't completely nerf the non-melee types. Perhaps a front row/back row system similar to the other final fantasy games, wherein party members designated as "front row" (melee bruisers) are treated as normal for the Who's-Gonna-Get-It (or "WGGI") die roll, and those designated as "back row" have 1/2 the normal chances of getting hit and/or deal and take 1/2 normal melee damage.

Example 1: In a party of 3 meleers and a squishy (AKA your shadowcaster), the meleers would be in the "front row" and the squishy would be in the "back row." To split up the aforementioned WGGI die roll, a d8 roll of 1-2 would hit meleer A, a 3-4 would hit meleer B, a 5-6 would hit meleer C, a 7 would hit you, and an 8 would be a re-roll.

Example 2: In a party of 2 "front row" meleers and 2 "back row" squishies, a WGGI d6 roll of 1-2 would hit meleer A, a 3-4 would hit meleer B, a 5 would hit squishy C, and a 6 would hit squishy D.​

Needless to say, you're probably better off trying to get your DM to ditch their "lookee! not my fault your character went splat! the random WGGI roll did it!" house rule and use the default combat system. If not, you could always roll up a melee beatstick.

 

[Slapzilla]

Sounds obnoxious! The DM hasn't made it in any way interesting for a player to try to play a fragile spellcaster who should be able to lurk behind a meatwall, because death could find you at any unlucky moment. Tactical movement is a part of the game and is what allows the fragile one to advance. (Also a big part of FFT, that tacitcal movement) I am curious how range increments are handled. How about full attacks, charges, flanking etc.. I like the front row/back row idea as a solution that changes as little as possible for the DM. Don't be afraid to suggest that xp will help against being unconscious a lot. Be constructive about it to be sure but if you think you're right, be firm about it too.

 

[Sigurd]

You can always just stop doing whatever doesn't earn experience maybe stop asking about motives, or position in non violent encounters and just roll a die too?


Eh, maybe not.



I'd explain your questions to him maybe show him this thread and ask if you shared the situation fairly. Tell him you care about his feelings about the rules and don't want to be inaccurate. The other have given really good advice is to find out how the other players like the house rules.

His rules seriously hinder any tactical element and make having any strategy toward conflict meaningless. The first rule really makes the strange second rule much worse. Remember if its just a random draw - touch spells always and area spells - I assume those just hit everyone.


Sigurd

 

[Arkhandus]

Agreed. Talk to your friend, and let him know that his houserules don't work so well with the spellcasters and other folks with poor hit points, who need a chance to stay out of melee reach in order to survive.

At least propose that he try a simplified version of normal movement, without worrying about exact positions or distances but at least using general positioning in combat. PCs should be able to use cover and positioning at least a bit.


Like the others, I find it odd that he borrows anything at all from Final Fantasy Tactics, but doesn't want anything to do with tactical movement or positioning. It's like supreme irony....

 

[iceifur]

It's like supreme irony....

[Frenzied Berserker joke] ... except you can't even take a 5' step between irony attempts. [/Frenzied Berserker joke]

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

It sounds like your DM has a few favoured concepts that he’s trying to use as the basis of the game without due regard to the balanced mechanics (which have been thoroughly playtested). The result is advantageous to melee characters because he is taking the focus from RP and making it into more of a hack’n’slash game, which is what will occur any time you limit character options and emphasize mindless combat.

Why does your DM want to avoid tactical combat?

If it’s because he thinks there’s too much work involved for him, then the best solutions have already been offered. That is, sit down and have an honest discussion, or better yet, run a game yourself with more balanced rules.

If it’s because he doesn’t want people metagaming, then it’s a completely different story and there is plenty of hope. There are many ways a DM can run combat and describe the situation without using a combat grid and minis that all the players can clearly see. Alternatively, you could have a game or system that has much more emphasis on RP and much less on combat. Such as World of Darkness (WoD).

Whatever way you look at it, it sounds like some things need to change to give you a more enjoyable game. Otherwise, why not just stick with the MuDs. At least you know they’re fair!