Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tburdett" data-source="post: 813716" data-attributes="member: 4714">I don't know if it's always arrogance.  Some people just don't like the way that a particular game mechanic is handled, so they change it.I think that the designers made a lot of their decisions to keep the game fast and simple.  House rules can add a bit of realism, but at a cost, that cost being an additional level of complexity.  For players and DM's who are willing to accept the burden, house rules can be great.I don't like the way that 'casting defensively' works because it makes no difference who is threatening you.  It could be a 20th level fighter or a 1st level warrior and the DC is the same.  That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.The same goes for tumbling.  It doesn't matter if your tumbling past a 20th level fighter or a 1st level warrior, the DC is the same.  That doesn't make any sense to me either.Would it be arrogant of me to change these game mechanics to reflect my personal preference?  I don't really think so.Just wanted to add that I feel a lot of sympathy for you if your DM is really heavy handed about his house rules and is not willing to accept player input.  That can be pretty rough.  I discuss all of the changes that I'm considering with my players and get their input before I make any decisions.</blockquote>