When is it too much?

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

One of the things that always says 'Stop!' to me is when I find myself having to change Z because I had to change Y because I changed X. The chain reactions triggered by even seemingly innocuous rules changes can suck the joy out of the process pretty quickly. Having a couple of rules-lawyers or munchkins makes that 10 times worse. Gripe as we do about how well D&D 3.x was playtested (I happen to think they did pretty well, all things considered, but then again, I work with software for a living), but for the most part it works. But man, making one little change and having to constantly defend it and reign in the powergamers can make me regret it real quick.

OTOH, I've been seriously considering running a Deryni campaign with gestalt X/psions, so maybe I'm just a glutton for punishment.

 

[Mercule]

When you can't meet your own deadlines, when it interferes with actually running the game, or when your players get irritable.

Let me relate my "line". In getting ready to run my current game, I thought I'd adjust all the things I disliked about D&D, or those that just didn't fit my setting. I loathe fire-and-forget magic, so I decided to remove that -- which led to needing to change any class that cast spells in any way (which excepts only Barbarian, Fighter, and Monk) -- including making the Cleric more religeous and less martial. I wanted to add a class defense bonus. I wanted to create an entirely new pantheon of gods -- and a cosmology to house them. I also wanted to have a rather large continent or two (Eurasiafrica). Plus I wasn't entirely happy with any of the core races besides humans (some only needed minor tweaks -- elves have a favored class of Ranger).

I putzed with it for six to eight months, but without hurry. Then, the RtToEE game we were playing ended up a TPK for the second time, and was ended. So, I had about a month and a half to get things going.

Well, with a 40+ hour a week job, a wife, and two kids; I discovered that I just don't have the time like I did in high school and college. I started figuring out what had to change and what didn't. I also looked at what could be done after the start of the game.

With the spell point system in Unearthed Arcana, I added that and ditched sorcerer as a class. I dropped the Cleric and used Hong's Priest class. I also converted both the Priest and Druid to spontaneous casters.

I copped the Defense bonus from Wheel of Time, and adopted a few other options from UA. Basically, I found that -- without delaying my game way too long, quitting my day job, or selling off my wife and kids -- I just didn't have the time to rewrite the rules. I've effectively left that part of my brain to handle the selection and management of published variants from other sources.

To sum up, the "line" come whenever the banes outweigh the boons. Those banes can be lack of interest, frustration, or simple lack of time (I certainly still enjoy tweaking the rules, I just have other priorities).

BTW, if anything I've done can help, feel free to swipe it. <pimp>http://www.users.qwest.net/~burkettjd/Gaming/index.html</pimp> Right now, it's just the compilation of classes modified for my house rules, but I'm in the process of posting more stuff.

 

[Wombat]

When it comes to laws, histories, maps, legends, colours NPCs and the like, I can almost never get enough. I dole out a section at a time to my players and allow them, encourage them to add in material themselves. In the end the world has a very "live in" feel, much like Hobbiton in the LotR movies.

When it comes to rules, well... I do a lot of culling. Restrictions on types of spells, restrictions on PrCs available, only these books in use, and only those sections with my initials by them, etc. We have a general set of very streamlined combat rules and suchlike.

How can you determine when it is too much? When your players complain about too much material to read, in my case Other than that, when it feels like you are putting in more effort than is really worth it. The point of the game is to have fun. Yes, I put "work" into my worlds, like other people "work" on their golf game -- you want a better experience. When you become obsessive you have gone too far; if you are shy of that point, you are doing alright

 

[argo]

My question is: where do you draw the line? When do you say that it's too much work to modify the rules for the flavour you want?

I'd say just about the time you stop and seriously ask yourself that question for the second time.

Listen to your gut.

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

When it becomes a job and not a hobby. Now, if you're getting paid for it, then by all means let the hobby become a job! But we all know that for most of us, DMing is a thankless job with no material reward (though this is not always the case).

 

[ConspiracyAngel]

It officially becomes too much for me when I am scheduling the rest of my life around the game. That includes scheduling any part of my life around it to any significant degree.

 

[Samothdm]

However, there is such a thing as over-producing. What I mean is that about 3 months ago I realized that I was putting off campaign building because the rules weren't COMPLETE. While we were doing one-nighters for the sake of playtesting, the "main" campaign groups (i.e., the ones with a plot) were at a standstill waiting for me to complete rules that weren't actually applicable to those groups to begin with (i.e., if no one's playing a Divine Caster, why is the game waiting for rules only used by Divine Casters?).

I have this problem a lot. If you find yourself doing this (putting off playing to write rules that no one is really going to use) then it's time to put down the pencil and pick up the dice!

You can always go back between sessions and work on the stuff that you think is fun and adds depth to the world (a new class or combat feat or what-not).

You might also think about asking your players about their expectations. No use redesigning the whole combat system if they intend to focus on a more role-playing, diplomacy-type campaign and want to avoid combat.

 

[eris404]

I've had lots of suggestions for other systems in other threads, so I'm not necessarily looking for advice on what ruleset to use. My question is: where do you draw the line? When do you say that it's too much work to modify the rules for the flavour you want? And what do you do then - run the game with rules you've got, or try to think up a new idea for a game that's easier to run without modifications?

I usually go with the simplest route and use the rulesets I've already got, but that's just because I'm not a game designer and I don't have a desire to be one. If I'm going to put in a lot of work, it's going to be in the "fluff" details like history, NPCs, things like that - I might make some new races and PrCs, but usually that just means modifying existing ones to suit the world and campaign. There's so much good d20 fantasy (D&D) material out there that I can just cobble together things from different sources that I like.

Granted, I really don't have any problems with the d20 rules as is (no matter what the campaign flavor), and I realize that what works for me doesn't work for a whole lot of people. The good news is that there is a whole slew of people out there, many of them on this message board, who may have already designed something that you are trying to create now. Even if it isn't the complete system you're looking for, you might be able to find some good ideas that will save you a lot of time effort. Maybe ask around about some specific change and see if anyone has made something similar?

 

[Dyntheos]

We just stopped a campaign being run in middle earth using the old Iron Crown books from way back when. The DM came up with all new manner of rules and idea for character creation and races skills magic system etc. We said we would give it a go.

I'm talking spreadsheets here pages long of work. Anyhoo, we did give it a go then found we hated it. Told the DM ( in a dipomatic fashion ) and went straight back to core rules to continue. We later dropped the whole thing entirely as we were having style issues with the way the game was run. The point is, no matter how much work you put in, when rule mastery becomes hard for players because you have changed so much, be prepared for them to "have a look" but reject it later on. Not saying they will, but don't put too much effort into something you can't put down, because your players aren't having fun.

 

[scourger]

here's a handy link to free Skull & Bones material

KISS (Keep It Simple/Stupid)

I'll echo a couple of points from S'mon & Henry with my own example. I have a small game that I call Pirate D&D going right now. I decided to keep it as simple as possible by making it work within the rules presented in the core rulebooks. All I told the players was that they could use the base classes with no "flashy" magic. I use the renaissance firearms rules from the DMG. Craft (shipmaking) and Profession (sailor) skills cover anything nautical they do. Weapons don't change; I just use scimitar stats and call it a cutlass. They wanted armor, so I decided leather or breastplate was probably still available. They understood and made 2 fighter/rogues and 1 priest. That's pretty much it.

For the first adventure, I downloaded free Skull & Bones material from Green Ronin's website. There is a free adventure and a bunch of maps that I used. I just ignored parts of the NPC's stats that didn't gel with the core game and went on with the game! Here's a link:

http://www.greenronin.com/cgi-bin/product.cgi?prodid=1018

The little game was such a hit that I bought the book. It really is good, even if--like me--you don't plan to use a lot of the "crunchy" new rules. I'll probably just use the setting information and some of the rules for naval warfare. The next adventures will be published modules adapted as painlessly as possible, so the game needs to stay as close to the core as possible.

Good luck with yours.