Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Water Bob" data-source="post: 6024697" data-attributes="member: 92305">Absolutely.&nbsp; Some are.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The majority of the rules in RPGs are well-thought-out with intention behind their design.&nbsp; The default should be not to change the rule with the acknowledgement that somebody out there put a lot of thought into that rule before publishing it.&nbsp;For example, let's say a DM doesn't like the Flatfooted rule.&nbsp; Two gladiators enter the ring from their bunkers.&nbsp; Initiative is thrown.&nbsp; One of them is considered flatfooted.&nbsp; That doesn't make sense to a lot of people, so a DM removes that rule.&nbsp;...Without realizing that he's also removed opportunities that the rules have for theives to shine, or characters that get benefits to being flatfooted early in the way of class abilities or Feats.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;In the Conan RPG, if you remove the flatfooted rule, or tweak it so that it's not used as designed, then you inadvertantly remove one of the Barbaraian class' benefits--that, at 4th level, the Barbarian gains the Uncanny Dodge Feat that allows him to Dodge anytime he's considered flatfooted.&nbsp;So, if you change rules willy-nilly, you're really more likely to cause other problems for yourself in unforseen parts of the rules.&nbsp; When the hypothetical GM in the Conan game removed the flatfooted rule to serve his sense of what should be, he had no idea that he was also nerfing the Barbarian class in an area and removing opportunities for characters in the Thief class to shine.&nbsp;No, I'll stick with what I know to be true after decades of gaming:&nbsp; Consider any rule change at length before making a change to the game.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ever thought of writing a book of Dandu-isms?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Water Bob, post: 6024697, member: 92305"] Absolutely. Some are. The majority of the rules in RPGs are well-thought-out with intention behind their design. The default should be not to change the rule with the acknowledgement that somebody out there put a lot of thought into that rule before publishing it. For example, let's say a DM doesn't like the Flatfooted rule. Two gladiators enter the ring from their bunkers. Initiative is thrown. One of them is considered flatfooted. That doesn't make sense to a lot of people, so a DM removes that rule. ...Without realizing that he's also removed opportunities that the rules have for theives to shine, or characters that get benefits to being flatfooted early in the way of class abilities or Feats. In the Conan RPG, if you remove the flatfooted rule, or tweak it so that it's not used as designed, then you inadvertantly remove one of the Barbaraian class' benefits--that, at 4th level, the Barbarian gains the Uncanny Dodge Feat that allows him to Dodge anytime he's considered flatfooted. So, if you change rules willy-nilly, you're really more likely to cause other problems for yourself in unforseen parts of the rules. When the hypothetical GM in the Conan game removed the flatfooted rule to serve his sense of what should be, he had no idea that he was also nerfing the Barbarian class in an area and removing opportunities for characters in the Thief class to shine. No, I'll stick with what I know to be true after decades of gaming: Consider any rule change at length before making a change to the game. Ever thought of writing a book of Dandu-isms? [/QUOTE]

Verification