Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jmartkdr2" data-source="post: 8046665" data-attributes="member: 7017304">1. I am having that conversation when I propose the rule. It's not like the houserule gets accepted without any consideration&nbsp; It's a lot easier to change a rule than it is to add a quest to the game, or start everyone with a free magic item, or make players change the concept of their character, or get them to think about the game in a whole new way. Especially when I disagree with the change in thinking being proposed (because those numbers have a big effect on the feel of the game.)2. Yes, because the result of the discussion will probably be &quot;let's change the rule, so they can play what they want, rather than make them change what they're playing to to fit the existing rules.&quot;3. Yes, because sometimes - usually, in my experience - people already have a clear concept of who they want to play before they start assigning rules. If the rules don't allow for the concept, the easiest option is to change the rules. If by &quot;your idea&quot; you mean tell people to not care about the 2-point change in the score - I've tried that. It doesn't work, because while changing rules is easy, changing people is hard.4. I'm not in charge of 6e, and I'm not advocating for taking away people's PHBs to edit them. I'm advocating for a houserule because it solves a problem a lot of people have and does a great job of solving it. If the majority of players of Dungeons and Dragons overall like the houserule, then maybe it should be the base rule and having racial ASIs should be the variant. I don't know how the statistics for that break down, but WotC seems extremely interested so I suspect they'll get the numbers and make a call based on that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jmartkdr2, post: 8046665, member: 7017304"] 1. I am having that conversation when I propose the rule. It's not like the houserule gets accepted without any consideration It's a lot easier to change a rule than it is to add a quest to the game, or start everyone with a free magic item, or make players change the concept of their character, or get them to think about the game in a whole new way. Especially when I disagree with the change in thinking being proposed (because those numbers have a big effect on the feel of the game.) 2. Yes, because the result of the discussion will probably be "let's change the rule, so they can play what they want, rather than make them change what they're playing to to fit the existing rules." 3. Yes, because sometimes - usually, in my experience - people already have a clear concept of who they want to play before they start assigning rules. If the rules don't allow for the concept, the easiest option is to change the rules. If by "your idea" you mean tell people to not care about the 2-point change in the score - I've tried that. It doesn't work, because while changing rules is easy, changing people is hard. 4. I'm not in charge of 6e, and I'm not advocating for taking away people's PHBs to edit them. I'm advocating for a houserule because it solves a problem a lot of people have and does a great job of solving it. If the majority of players of Dungeons and Dragons overall like the houserule, then maybe it should be the base rule and having racial ASIs should be the variant. I don't know how the statistics for that break down, but WotC seems extremely interested so I suspect they'll get the numbers and make a call based on that. [/QUOTE]

Verification