NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Shaman" data-source="post: 5336751" data-attributes="member: 26473">Which is only a problem if you disagree with that opinion, or if you assume the designer's opinion is somehow inherently 'better' than the guy's at the head of the table.For <a href="http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaign/le-ballet-de-l-acier" target="_blank">the Flashing Blades game I'm running</a>, I made extensive changes to the rules pertaining to ranks and positions; the designer abstracted different periods of the 17th century, and I wanted to capture more of the feel of the specific period for the game, so that meant changing some of the rules pertaining to Soldier characters. I replaced the fictional knightly orders of the game with historical examples, and added a new category of orders, with new requirements. I added new combat actions, like feinting and taunting your opponent, which the game did not include in the core rules but which are appropriate to the genre and fun for players to use. These are just a few examples from my extensive house rules for the campaign.And yes, it's all my opinion, but I don't see any reason to believe that my opinion is in any way inferior to that of the designer of Flashing Blades. Mark Pettigrew isn't running the campaign - I am. Mr Pettigrew didn't include rules for galleys and Barbary corsairs in High Seas, so should I just settle for never including them in the game I want to run?Running a game involves making decisions and those decisions reflect my opinions. I put time and effort into making informed decisions, and I arrive at my opinions from experience with the system and the knowledge of what I want to offer in the campaign.And anyone who doesn't care for that is certainly welcome to tell me so - once. After that, play or go home.</blockquote>

Verification