Do your players hate your house rules?

[Nyaricus]

One of my players HATES that I use Charisma for Willpower Saving throws, and not Will. When this gets mentioned, it always screeches the game to a hault while we debate for a quater-hour.

Other than that, most of my house-rules work pretty well in my games, and most of my players agrees with them. Stuff like my Weapon Group system is a big hit.

 

[babomb]

If my players hated my house rules, I wouldn't use the house rules. Simple as that.

 

[Crothian]

We like our house rules, that's why they are our house rules.

 

[Brimshack]

I've always tweaked the materials I use A LOT. In my first edition group my players generally gave everything I threw at them a try. Sometimes they expressed disapproval when I presented ideas, and sometimes they were eager to try it. Either way, we would let things ride awhile and then make a decision. Some of my best house rules were unpopular at first but widely accepted on down the road. In other cases the players let me know a rule wasn't working and it got revised.

These days with 3.5 I find more players seem to have precondistions and pre-emptive concerns. Some won't play multiple characters; others don't want splat books; others hate evil being allowed in a campaign, some really want to play in this setting while others hate it, etc. Some object to any form of house rule whatsoever. We have few gamers in the area, so it's frustrating, not just for me, but for others as well. We can't get a game going because we can't get 3-5 players to all agree on what rules to use. The best I could do was for awhile was to set up a round robbin campaign where all the players took turns and DMed as they thought appropriate. It worked for awhile, but when my schedule changed and I dropped out, the whole thing fell apart.

As a DM I have no problem when players tell me something isn't working. If they're willing to give something a try, I am happy to change and alter what I do based on how it plays out. But I find it very frustrating when players won't try something new at all. I figure if players will give me a chance I have a decent shot at setting something interesting up. If I can't get enough leeway to create the setting I want, then I would much rather simply be a player myself.

 

[maggot]

One of my house rules is that you don't complain about the house rules. When a campaign starts, players read the house rules and make comments. If after tweaking the house rules a player still finds them unacceptable, that player should not play that game. Having one player complain about the rules just slows the game down and ruins everyone elses fun.

Later after the campaign has started, there might be need for new house rules (or removing/revising existing rules). At this point we have an "anyone can veto" rule. If you don't veto, you can't really complain.

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

If my players hated my house rules, I wouldn't use the house rules. Simple as that.

Quoted for truthiness.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

hay hong, I win

any house rule that helps the dm "win", i say fudge that.

I also think that "if the dm used this rule on all his npcs, the world would implode" is not a good reason ether. Some rules are only appropriate for pcs, and some rules only appropriate for npcs

house rules can be good though, but i think house rules should not exist just to subdue a dms tast poor for 3.5 (but runs anyway because its the only way to find players), and that is the most common use of house rules i have experienced. However i do know house rules can be good and are, but i also know they have dark and detestable side.

 

[DreadArchon]

When my players object reasonably much, I dump the rule, simple as that.

The only exception is Action Points. I got a lot of protest implementing Action Points, but I left it in, the logic being that they can ignore it if they're bothered by it, since only PC's use it.

 

[Arkhandus]

.....Though I'd rather not touch your various negative/bleaknik/derisive polls with a 10-foot pole, this is one I feel obliged to answer simply because I do houserule a lot.

My players generally love my houserules. Most of them exist only to make the game more interesting and fun; some just clarify rules matters though, and some are purely flavor-related. Like the tweaks to core races for Rhunaria or Aurelia, most of which is cosmetic.

Many of my houserules are purely developed from questions and requests of players, who wanted a particular flavor or fighting style or the like for their character; that's where my sorcerer variants for Rhunaria, addition of a Samurai feat equivalent to W. Spec. for daisho swords but a bit weaker, revised planetouched races as templates for Rhunaria, and other houserules have come from. I devise and design to fit my players' PC concepts when needed, so they can enjoy whatever cool ideas they come up with; but I'm still the one who hammers out the designs and bearer of the Uber DM Hammer of Absolute Judgment.

Feliex enjoys the extra bennies I've given Fighters in Rhunaria, and likes the couple of things I gave Samurai too, since he plays one (Kai Isawa) in the side-campaign we've run lately. Donovan appreciates the extra feats his Sorcerer gets and the improvements I made to Dragon Disciples, since he's heading for that PrC; his side-campaign PC is Gabr'el the druid and recently gained access to 2nd-level spells, including the couple of new ones I've added for Rhunaria. My Rhunaria houserule for humans getting a free re-roll once per day (for attacks, saves, and skill checks) has been quite welcome.

I abandon any houserule I think about implementing if the players object to it, like when I decided I should finally solidify some houserule for slowing down level advancement in Rhunaria past level 5 (just a bit slowed then, on to moderately slowed past 10th, then very slowed past 15th), to better emphasize and reinforce the rarity and difficulty of individuals growing so phenomenally powerful beyond the norm. But I got objections when I mentioned working on it, so I just tossed that idea out the window. So while NPCs beyond low-level remain uncommon (the PCs have only ever met 4-6 NPCs higher than 10th, and about the same number of NPCs between 6th and 10th; the PCs have traveled through parts of half the known territories in Rhunaria, dealing with several important folks), the PCs continue to advance normally in XP and levels. And that's why I have the conundrum of a 14-year-old spirit sorcerer in the main Rhunaria campaign who's already 11th-level just because he's been adventuring a lot. -_-

 

[was]

My players and I go over each house rule seeking a consensus before implementation, so there is usually no problems with them later. I find the best way to get feedback on rules and procedures is to be straight with your players and ask them directly. Only a few of the core concepts used imc are rigid, the rest are flexible enough to be modfied.