Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Is house ruling fair to the game or gamers when first introducing it?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mesh Hong" data-source="post: 5280469" data-attributes="member: 73463"><p><em>It really comes down to how fit for purpose the rules deviation is, and how radically it moves away from RAW.</em></p><p> </p><p>I might be missing something here but surely the ability to compare and analyse two interpretations of a specific rule (i.e. RAW and Houserule) can only properly be achieved through experience of the system as a whole and the specific rule in relation to it.</p><p> </p><p>If the above is true then I don't think it really matters which version of the rule is presented first. As long as the rule does not seem suspicious or inappropriate at the time it will be accepted readily as a "rule of the game". At a later point an interested participant might come across a different interpretation of the rule that might lead to a rules discussion. But this is surely a good thing, all rules are open to discussion (out of game) and any such discussions are a good sign that a player is invested and involved with the campaign.</p><p> </p><p>One interesting thing here is that many things that are technically house rules come from either not reading a rule or power correctly or just assuming a particular element works in a specific way. Later (sometimes much much later) the RAW is stumbled upon and a decision is made to either stick with the initial interpretation or revert to RAW, I cannot see how these sort of mistakes can be classified as unfair, but under the tenant of this thread they may be perceived as giving an unfair introduction to a system.</p><p> </p><p>examples:</p><p>Warlord - Commanders Strike - somehow (like many people) we thought this was a line of sight effect so that the warlord with a standard action could make an ally take an immediate basic attack. This was completely wrong and the power states that it is an adjacent ally that can make an attack.</p><p> </p><p>In this case we had it wrong, discovered the fact, had a brief talk about it and prefered it the way we had been running it so didn't revert back to RAW.</p><p> </p><p>Grapple - you are meant to use a minor action to maintain a grab, I have never bothered doing this with monsters partly through ignorance and then through simplicity. When we discovered I was doing it wrong we had a brief discussion then carried on.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mesh Hong, post: 5280469, member: 73463"] [I]It really comes down to how fit for purpose the rules deviation is, and how radically it moves away from RAW.[/I] I might be missing something here but surely the ability to compare and analyse two interpretations of a specific rule (i.e. RAW and Houserule) can only properly be achieved through experience of the system as a whole and the specific rule in relation to it. If the above is true then I don't think it really matters which version of the rule is presented first. As long as the rule does not seem suspicious or inappropriate at the time it will be accepted readily as a "rule of the game". At a later point an interested participant might come across a different interpretation of the rule that might lead to a rules discussion. But this is surely a good thing, all rules are open to discussion (out of game) and any such discussions are a good sign that a player is invested and involved with the campaign. One interesting thing here is that many things that are technically house rules come from either not reading a rule or power correctly or just assuming a particular element works in a specific way. Later (sometimes much much later) the RAW is stumbled upon and a decision is made to either stick with the initial interpretation or revert to RAW, I cannot see how these sort of mistakes can be classified as unfair, but under the tenant of this thread they may be perceived as giving an unfair introduction to a system. examples: Warlord - Commanders Strike - somehow (like many people) we thought this was a line of sight effect so that the warlord with a standard action could make an ally take an immediate basic attack. This was completely wrong and the power states that it is an adjacent ally that can make an attack. In this case we had it wrong, discovered the fact, had a brief talk about it and prefered it the way we had been running it so didn't revert back to RAW. Grapple - you are meant to use a minor action to maintain a grab, I have never bothered doing this with monsters partly through ignorance and then through simplicity. When we discovered I was doing it wrong we had a brief discussion then carried on. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Is house ruling fair to the game or gamers when first introducing it?
Top