The "expectation" of house rules

[diaglo]

even Monopoly has house rules. they even print some of them inside for use that are fairly common.

 

[diaglo]

i'll add pinocle to Chaldfont's list

According to Hoyle has most of the "official" rules listed for many games.

but that doesn't stop people from playing with the rules they think are fun or usable in their house.

 

[ThirdWizard]

I expect all deviances to be acknowleged before the first session.

 

[S'mon]

Which is what rpgs are.

Hm, no. A few RPGS bear similarities to wargames (eg OD&D, 1e AD&D, 3e D&D) but the way they work is very different. Many RPGs bear no resemblance to wargames whatsoever.

 

[Sledge]

Being a bit of a board game player I also have to support the house rules with board games. For certain board games they have actually changed the standard rules to reflect the house rules that 90% of users had. Many games list optional rules. These are just house rules that have been published due to popularity. If a group of people plays on a regular basis they often deviate from the original rules. After a time these new rules become the standard. I'm sure I'm not the only person that has sat down with friends to play a board game for the first time, only to find out that there are 3 different ideas for how the game is to be played.

 

[Henry]

Are RPGs truly unique in how often [and sometimes drastically] the rules are changed (house rules) from the core rule book? Are house rules now an "expectation" rather than an exception?

Do I understand that house rules were an exception to you in the past? Or am I mis-understanding?

In my experiences, house rules were far more common in the past than now. I've never gone in recently EXPECTING house rules, but they also don't phase me if I encounter them. I just prefer to know what they are beforehand, even if the house rule is "DM can change rules at any time." One thing I DON'T like (and have always shied away from) is a DM that was inconsistent with their rules, or were uneven in their application of them. A penalty here or there doesn't bug me, but a total change in how something is handled does.

In previous editions, house rules were not only not exceptions, they were expected, in order to fill in gaps, or help players create the characters they wanted to play. Nowadays, I've played in far more by-the-book games than not, and as long as the DM kept reins on unbalancing rules and supplements, I've had no problems with them.

 

[WayneLigon]

I have never played a game of D&D that didn't have at least a small number of house rules, even if they were just insignificant ones to me, like different means of rolling stats or adding/subtracting races available. I can't say I've played a card or board game that had house rules, though I've done far less of the latter than the former.

I've always gone into D&D expecting house rules to some degree, but not for any other RPG. In fact, I can maybe count of the fingers of one hand the times I've seen another RPG that used house rules - that's really to cover myself because after several minutes of thinking about it I can't come up with any examples at all, though I'm sure there were some done in the many systems I've played in.

 

[KB9JMQ]

I find most house rules are made on the fly to keep the game going rather than set at the start of the campaign.

I have never started a D&D game with house rules but have ended the same campaigns with 5-6 due to making a ruling on the fly and keeping that rule rather than stop the game for who-knows-how-long to look it up and interpret its meaning.

 

[molonel]

What Psion and Thirdwizard said: I expect house rules to be reasonable, and I expect them to be acknowledged before the game starts. In my personal opinion, a good practice is a Word document (or text document, or RTF, or whatever) with all of the house rules in a game. If it's not in the document, then it's not in the game. House rules can be added, but I prefer if the whole gaming group talks about it, first. House rules can make or break a game.

As regarding the original post, there are house rules in all sorts of games. Where does the original poster think the term "house rules" came from? It's not a term that derived from roleplaying games. Often, the rules deviate and another game is formed. Texas Hold 'Em is different from 5-card stud.

I love house rules. I love different variations and flavors of games. I love homebrewed campaigns and different worlds. But I prefer those rules be designed by someone who understands the game. A few examples of the opposite case have already been cited.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

i'll add pinocle to Chaldfont's list

I'll add spades based on one extremely unpleasant expereince where I found out that the group I had agreed to play with used two small but crucially different rules from the way I had always played. I discovered this after the major strategy decisions they effected had already been made, and I now do go into any card game with the expectation (or questions about) house rules (or an open mind to the possibility that the way I was taught was a house rule).

I firmly believe that new players should get an idea of both mechanical and setting house rules as well as major game flavor decisions before they commit to a game. Unfortunately, there will always be disagreements about what constitutes a house rule to begin with, but a general attitude of full disclosure is, imho a good fist step.