What makes us House Rule?

[howandwhy99]

One of the few rules of the game is that Referees create or select the hidden rules behind the screen. So house rules in regards to roleplaying are just another way of saying "non-commercially available" rules a specific Referee is using. The more ingenious rules people come up with, the better IMO. An active house rules forum is one of the signs of a healthy RPG community.

 

[N0Man]

Though house rules are not unique to D&D or role-playing games in general, I think that it's deeply ingrained in the culture of D&D and has seeped into the RPG culture in general.

I think it's largely due to the origins of D&D. D&D was treading new ground when it first arrived, and it really took time for both players and designers alike to really get a good feel of what worked and didn't work. There were rules that weren't very well though out, or that some people didn't think were fun, or that didn't account for the vast number of circumstances that a game that allows for such great imaginations could produce.

Really, weren't Gygax and Arneson really making the game up as they went along too? The game encourage house rules, and in some ways really needed them. The fact that the game was mutable was also part of the appeal. It wasn't just a game of imagination in regards to the adventure, but in regards to the system itself. Players of D&D don't just explore dungeons, but explore gaming.

RPGs, especially D&D, appeal to the desire for many of us to tinker. Sometimes our creations are awful, and sometimes they are brilliant (and even sometimes spread and become official).

At least, that's how I see it.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

Though house rules are not unique to D&D or role-playing games in general, I think that it's deeply ingrained in the culture of D&D and has seeped into the RPG culture in general.

I think it's largely due to the origins of D&D. D&D was treading new ground when it first arrived, and it really took time for both players and designers alike to really get a good feel of what worked and didn't work. There were rules that weren't very well though out, or that some people didn't think were fun, or that didn't account for the vast number of circumstances that a game that allows for such great imaginations could produce.

Really, weren't Gygax and Arneson really making the game up as they went along too?

To put it mildly. I can think of at least four RPGs that came about as a direct result of house ruling OD&D. (Empire of the Petal Throne, Chivalry and Sorcery, Tunnels and Trolls and even the original Villians and Vigilantes!) And there are no doubt others. Arduin Grimoire and Runequest, I'm pretty sure, fall into this catagory as well.

So, to put it bluntly, without house rules the history of RPGs would be vastly different than it is.

 

[cattoy]

Of course it is a completely valid justification. Just like in Champions, many people didn't like the way a commoner could fall of a 30ft building and walk away unharmed.

Technically possible, but extremely unlikely. A 30 foot fall will generate 5d6 of damage, a typical normal has a PD of 2 and each d6 of damage will generate 0, 1 or 2 body 16%, 66% or 16% of the time, respectively. Do the math, your example happens far less than one percent of the time.

Granted, the average damage inflicted will be just over 3 BODY per fall and a normal human has between 8-10 BODY, but still...

unharmed?

 

[cattoy]

What makes house rules more or less likely?

Context, context, context.

Games that are played within a larger context are less likely to be houseruled, games that are played within a purely local context are more likely to be houseruled.

Chess is played on an international scale, with rigid stratification and tight controls. There are, consequently, almost no houserules.

Poker, as played in basements and on folding card tables all over the world, is so full of houserules, it would take a lifetime to catalog them all. Contrast this with poker as played in a casino. You will not find houserules in a casino.

Alternately, No Limit Texas Hold-em has become an international phenomenon and has almost no houserules. Everyone wants to play it exactly the same way the high rolling professionals do.

The RPGA LFR allows for one specific set of setting rules which transcend house rules. No other variations are officially sanctioned.

Any random D&D group playing in isolation can houserule as much or as little as they like. The spectrum of possibilities is limitless.

 

[Lanefan]

One of the few rules of the game is that Referees create or select the hidden rules behind the screen. So house rules in regards to roleplaying are just another way of saying "non-commercially available" rules a specific Referee is using. The more ingenious rules people come up with, the better IMO. An active house rules forum is one of the signs of a healthy RPG community.

This.

The game system I run now started as 1e about 30 years ago; had already undergone 5-odd years of major modifications before I got my mucky mitts on it, and has been continually (if perhaps not so shatteringly) modified since by myself and others. It's vaguely recognizable as 1e, but I can't think offhand of a single aspect of our game that is still truly 1e RAW...other than high (as in 6+) level MU spells, which we've still never got around to looking at...

Best part is, people still come to play it every week.

Lanefan

 

[samursus]

I think we house rule mostly the games we are familiar with. D&D happens to be one of the oldest and most popular RPG's in existence, and because the concepts are very familiar to us, even spanning editions, we feel confident that we can mess around with stuff and have it turn out fine.

I know that for myself, I would hesitate in houseruling a game that I have less experience with, especially as the opacity and complexity of the rules system increases.

 

[Treebore]

I think we house rule mostly the games we are familiar with. D&D happens to be one of the oldest and most popular RPG's in existence, and because the concepts are very familiar to us, even spanning editions, we feel confident that we can mess around with stuff and have it turn out fine.

I know that for myself, I would hesitate in houseruling a game that I have less experience with, especially as the opacity and complexity of the rules system increases.

Definitely. I played C&C for about a year before I started implementing my house rules.

I have a lot of house rule ideas for Hackmaster Basic, but I won't implement them until we have more play time AND I see the Advanced rule book.

So I definitely wait until I am sure I understand the rules as written so I am sure I am not house ruling something that actually works, especially better than the house rule I would replace it with.

Then again, I have seen people who will "house rule" something as soon as they read it..

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

Another reason to houserule is "on-the-fly mechanics": You can't find it in the book, but you need a rule ASAP! So you make something up.

 

[cattoy]

Another reason to houserule is "on-the-fly mechanics": You can't find it in the book, but you need a rule ASAP! So you make something up.

I think there is a difference between houserule-ing and making stuff up.

If you add intoxication rules for a game that doesn't have them, you're making stuff up.

If you say that in your D&D game, PCs get max HP for the first 5 levels, then you're houserule-ing.

Then again, if you can't be bothered to know the rules, maybe you're just lazy...