Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7496779" data-attributes="member: 4937">I used to be the self-appointed monitor of the 'house rules' forum back when we had a specific house rules forum.  It didn't get much traffic, but it was more interesting to me than most of the rest of the site (which I mostly ignored at the time).  There were tons and tons of bad house rules offered up for the approval of the people in the forums, often with the most earnest sincerity and even occasionally with the best of intentions.House rules are hard to get right.  I happen to think I'm pretty good at it, but I've known plenty of very good DMs that couldn't rulesmith themselves out of a paper bag.  So yeah, as long as you are talking "red flags", I'd probably consider myself a red flag at least until I read my own rules.  I certainly wouldn't nerf something until I had solid evidence that it needed nerfing - 3.5 era shape changing spells for example are almost universally broken across the board and worse the brokenness invites their frequent use which in turn drastically slows down play using the finnicky highly detailed rules that they are written in.I totally hate adversarial DMing as well.  I'm not that DM, although I will accommodate a player that wants to 'step on up' and treat the game as if it was a competition, it's a competition that is rigged in his favor (and part of keeping that player happy is not letting him in on that fact).The tightest system I've seen was 4e.  It was not conducive to house rules, though I've seen some real masters of that system offer up some that seemed good to me.  I'm just not conversant enough in that system to really offer up suggestions, especially considering how inflexible it is.  5e... I'd have house rules I'm sure within just a few weeks of experience with the system - if that long.</blockquote>

Verification