Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What could possibly go wrong?
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="Janx" data-source="post: 5459400" data-attributes="member: 8835"><p>A study I heard about a while ago, noted there was a difference in males and females in how they play games.</p><p></p><p>males played to win.</p><p></p><p>females played to extend the game.</p><p></p><p>The theory was, boys being competitive were looking to do whatever was expedient to ending the game in victory. And that girls, being more social, were looking to prolong the social experience.</p><p></p><p>The house rule example smacks of this, making rules changes that prolong the game.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think it takes a degree in game theory to design games or change rules (given that >20 years ago, such a degree didn't even exist yet good games were made). But it does take the right mindset for it.</p><p></p><p>I'm wary of any rule that:</p><p>seems complicated</p><p>seems to drastically change the game</p><p>tries to make it "more realistic"</p><p>makes your PC more powerful</p><p></p><p>That said, in 2e, I had a house rule that gave you more arrow attacks (because it was realistic that in 1 minute round, you could fire more arrows). The math worked out based on dex (divided by 3) so that for the most part, you got 2 arrows, but at high Dex (like my PC had) I got 3 shots. It worked out OK, and didn't seem to unbalance or diminish melee weapons (I still used my longsword just as much). My logic at the time was that medieval archers really could shoot a lot of arrows and hit, and that 1 minute couldn't represent a flurry of blows when my inventory clearly showed I only used 2 arrows. Considering that 3e basically gave more attacks per round at higher levels regardless of weapon type, this concept was along the same line. When we instituted the rule, my PC was already higher level, which also minimized the unbalancing nature of a 1st level archer getting more attacks than a 1st level swordsman.</p><p></p><p>The conflict the rule had was really:</p><p>it made my PC more powerful. that was the whole point of the idea</p><p>it was aimed at being "more realistic"</p><p></p><p>These are warning signs when you get any house rule idea.</p><p></p><p>I like somebody's else's point (the guy I quoted I believe), that it should make the game more fun, or simplify, or rectify an imbalance.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Janx, post: 5459400, member: 8835"] A study I heard about a while ago, noted there was a difference in males and females in how they play games. males played to win. females played to extend the game. The theory was, boys being competitive were looking to do whatever was expedient to ending the game in victory. And that girls, being more social, were looking to prolong the social experience. The house rule example smacks of this, making rules changes that prolong the game. I don't think it takes a degree in game theory to design games or change rules (given that >20 years ago, such a degree didn't even exist yet good games were made). But it does take the right mindset for it. I'm wary of any rule that: seems complicated seems to drastically change the game tries to make it "more realistic" makes your PC more powerful That said, in 2e, I had a house rule that gave you more arrow attacks (because it was realistic that in 1 minute round, you could fire more arrows). The math worked out based on dex (divided by 3) so that for the most part, you got 2 arrows, but at high Dex (like my PC had) I got 3 shots. It worked out OK, and didn't seem to unbalance or diminish melee weapons (I still used my longsword just as much). My logic at the time was that medieval archers really could shoot a lot of arrows and hit, and that 1 minute couldn't represent a flurry of blows when my inventory clearly showed I only used 2 arrows. Considering that 3e basically gave more attacks per round at higher levels regardless of weapon type, this concept was along the same line. When we instituted the rule, my PC was already higher level, which also minimized the unbalancing nature of a 1st level archer getting more attacks than a 1st level swordsman. The conflict the rule had was really: it made my PC more powerful. that was the whole point of the idea it was aimed at being "more realistic" These are warning signs when you get any house rule idea. I like somebody's else's point (the guy I quoted I believe), that it should make the game more fun, or simplify, or rectify an imbalance. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What could possibly go wrong?
Top