Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 5612886" data-attributes="member: 27160">This may be only a personal view, but in my mind the reason people used to houserule extensively was because the system(s) then avaialble did not do what they wanted them to do.&nbsp; In many cases, the rules did not do anything coherent at all, so houseruling to some degree was essentially mandatory.&nbsp; In other cases the rules tried to appeal to all tastes, so to get them to appeal to your tastes specifically you had to change them.For me, 4E was the first D&amp;D edition I didn't feel the need to houserule* because it actually does something well.&nbsp; It's not a &quot;something&quot; that I want in all games, but for other &quot;somethings&quot; I have other games; at least for one &quot;mode&quot; or &quot;style&quot; 4E actually works OK out of the box.The same consideration also means I feel more constrained not to &quot;fiddle&quot; with 4E, however.&nbsp; The fact that it actually does something well means that, if I start changing things, there is something that I might unintentionally &quot;break&quot;.&nbsp; With several older games, they worked so poorly to begin with that the risk of &quot;breaking&quot; something was a sort of &quot;it's already broken in that it does X and Y - how bad could it be if I change it?&quot; deal.*: When I say &quot;houserule&quot; I am really talking about changing the actual rules and character elements, not adding new monsters or traps.&nbsp; To me, those are more comparable to designing adventures or dungeons; there is a set of 'meta-rules' that I follow to design them without actually &quot;houseruling&quot; anything.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 5612886, member: 27160"] This may be only a personal view, but in my mind the reason people used to houserule extensively was because the system(s) then avaialble did not do what they wanted them to do. In many cases, the rules did not do anything coherent at all, so houseruling to some degree was essentially mandatory. In other cases the rules tried to appeal to all tastes, so to get them to appeal to your tastes specifically you had to change them. For me, 4E was the first D&D edition I didn't feel the need to houserule* because it actually does something well. It's not a "something" that I want in all games, but for other "somethings" I have other games; at least for one "mode" or "style" 4E actually works OK out of the box. The same consideration also means I feel more constrained not to "fiddle" with 4E, however. The fact that it actually does something well means that, if I start changing things, there is something that I might unintentionally "break". With several older games, they worked so poorly to begin with that the risk of "breaking" something was a sort of "it's already broken in that it does X and Y - how bad could it be if I change it?" deal. [SIZE="1"]*: When I say "houserule" I am really talking about changing the actual rules and character elements, not adding new monsters or traps. To me, those are more comparable to designing adventures or dungeons; there is a set of 'meta-rules' that I follow to design them without actually "houseruling" anything.[/SIZE] [/QUOTE]

Verification