PDA

View Full Version : Games that ask you not to change them



Totally Guy
2012-09-10, 05:16 AM
Regardless of how you feel about it can you think of any examples of RPGs that explicitly recommend you play it as written? What about authors, after the fact, expressing the same notion when talking about thier game.

I think there was an example of Gygax saying it about Dungeons and Dragons. Luke Crane says it too about Mouse Guard and Burning Wheel.

Anyone else?

Ashtagon
2012-09-10, 05:54 AM
Regardless of how you feel about it can you think of any examples of RPGs that explicitly recommend you play it as written? What about authors, after the fact, expressing the same notion when talking about thier game.

I think there was an example of Gygax saying it about Dungeons and Dragons. ...

Cite? Because iirc the core books has him explicitly defining Rule 0, which says the exact opposite.

Totally Guy
2012-09-10, 06:10 AM
Cite? Because iirc the core books has him explicitly defining Rule 0, which says the exact opposite.

It was in a recent old-school discussion. Here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13812093&postcount=130)

hamlet
2012-09-10, 08:01 AM
Yes, that particular quote is fairly famous.

Gygax is infamous in all circles for having a somewhat . . . schizophrenic public persona at times. Especially when it came to his own product.

On the one hand, he was trying very hard to defend his product and his intellectual property which was, at the time, being poached mercilessly. Can't say that I blame him.

At the same time, AD&D was, for all intents and purposes, designed to be "the D&D which people play at tournaments" and so "standardization" was really the key to the concept. It had to be the same from table to table while in the same tournament for obvious reasons. Gygax himself, actually, did not play it but stuck with the original three little brown books and the supplements until the end even, with his own houserules. It amounted to, about, the same thing, but don't look at it too closely or you'll make yourself unhappy.

Actually, I think when it came right down to it, as long as you weren't trying to sell it or to broadcast it as "the official version" or something like that, Gary wouldn't really mind what you did to the system as long as you were having fun with it. Change what you wanted/needed to change to suit your needs. But when you arrive at the tournament table, you have to be prepared to play by the same rules as everybody else.

In a lot of ways, the tournament changed dramatically the way people play RPG's and expect to play RPG's.

NikitaDarkstar
2012-09-10, 12:20 PM
I haven't actually played it but Exalted strikes me as one of those games.

Hiro Protagonest
2012-09-10, 01:59 PM
I haven't actually played it but Exalted strikes me as one of those games.

Depends, really. For me? I hate it when they make big changes to the base setting because rule of cool. There are superhero and generic systems out there if you want a game that runs off rule of cool.

However, when Shards hit, I loved it. Alternate History, Modern, and Space Opera. Three settings, two of which are completely divorced from the original, and even Alternate History is pretty much entirely different (including being set in a different 'verse, although it still has the fundamentals of being made by Primordials, Autochthon, Gaia, and the Incarnae plotting against them and forging the exaltations... and that's where the similarities end except for the three universal truths of Exalted. No resurrection, no time travel (although temporal weapons which distort the flow of time exist), and only one exaltation per soul per lifetime).

So to me, it's more like you can't change the setting of Exalted based purely on awesome factor. If you want to give Lookshy a Royal Warstrider as a gift from the Lunars (who didn't reveal themselves, of course) so that they would be better at holding off the Realm, that makes a decent amount of sense. If you want to put a kingdom full of magitech right in the middle of the Scavenger Lands and expect it NOT to pretty drastically change the setting's history from the time it was founded... not so much.

Arbane
2012-09-10, 03:12 PM
I haven't actually played it but Exalted strikes me as one of those games.


Depends, really. For me? I hate it when they make big changes to the base setting because rule of cool. There are superhero and generic systems out there if you want a game that runs off rule of cool.



I think Nikita might have meant mechanical changes? Exalted's system is complex enough that adding houserules or new powers can seriously break some things (even more than they're already broken).

wadledo
2012-09-10, 03:32 PM
I think Nikita might have meant mechanical changes? Exalted's system is complex enough that adding houserules or new powers can seriously break some things (even more than they're already broken).

Though as a counter to that, some of the more prolific homebrewers are now the people in charge of making the next edition of Exalted.

Hiro Protagonest
2012-09-10, 03:49 PM
Though as a counter to that, some of the more prolific homebrewers are now the people in charge of making the next edition of Exalted.

There's also a list of common houserules. A few free Excellencies (exact number depends on exalt type), extra health levels, and sometimes reduction in bonus point cost of Essence raising.

Exalted invites the homebrewing of new artifacts, though. The emphasis of First Age artifacts (like, say, the ones your Solar find in his predecessor's tomb) being stronger and more unique than their Second Age equivalents means you're going to have to figure out a custom power for your Daiklave to raise it up to a three-dot artifact if it was forged at the middle or late point of the High First Age (if it was forged during the War, a regular old Daiklave is perfectly plausible). Noble and Royal Warstriders are also unique, and at the least, requires you to pick some stuff from a list, if you don't want to come up with new stuff.

Also, Colossus, Municipal, Yozis other than the Reclamation conspirators, all those need charmsets. Recently, someone posted some Colossus Charms on the White Wolf forums. Many Yozis have had charmsets made by homebrewers.

Ink Monkeys is also semi-official homebrew.

Andreaz
2012-09-10, 03:59 PM
Ink Monkeys is also semi-official homebrew.The ink monkeys are absolutely official. They even get official errata, in the official book, and official support everywhere.

Hiro Protagonest
2012-09-10, 04:03 PM
The ink monkeys are absolutely official. They even get official errata, in the official book, and official support everywhere.

Okay, completely official homebrew.

Arbane
2012-09-10, 06:16 PM
Okay, completely official homebrew.

If it's official, it's really not 'homebrew', is it? Otherwise, I can say that "D&D 3.5 is a homebrew system", which kind of sucks all the meaning out of the term.

Hiro Protagonest
2012-09-10, 06:22 PM
If it's official, it's really not 'homebrew', is it? Otherwise, I can say that "D&D 3.5 is a homebrew system", which kind of sucks all the meaning out of the term.

All Ink Monkeys are homebrewers, invited into the ranks by other Ink Monkeys, who create stuff for no pay. It just has the WW stamp of approval. It's like Dragon Magazine, except with better quality control (also, you can use a Charm in there to punch Isidoros into the sun. Then he gets a bunch of essence cannons firing at him, because the sun is not a big ball of fire, it's a giant battleship that turns into a kung fu robot. The sun is also Ink Monkey stuff).

Oh, except it also creates fluff. Like the Daystar. And Zen-Mu.

Andreaz
2012-09-11, 06:12 AM
Then you are denying giving it an official status by virtue of not wanting to. Gotcha.

SiderealDreams
2012-09-11, 06:54 AM
To add to Andreaz. The Ink Monkey stuff was never EVER house rule stuff+. It was official material for the game line.

Hiro Protagonest
2012-09-11, 12:42 PM
...I do assume the Daystar is a giant battleship and that my Slayer can take By Rage Recast and Devil-Tyrant Avatar Shintai.

Sith_Happens
2012-09-11, 02:01 PM
I'm pretty sure that FATAL has a "you really should play this exactly as it's written" clause, but, well... The less we talk about that particular thing (it doesn't deserve to be called a "game") the better.

SiderealDreams
2012-09-11, 02:08 PM
...I do assume the Daystar is a giant battleship and that my Slayer can take By Rage Recast and Devil-Tyrant Avatar Shintai.

Yep. Assuming your ST isn't being weird about it. Either way Andreaz/Arbane are correct. It's not homebrew material and never was.

Loki_42
2012-09-11, 03:07 PM
I'm pretty sure that FATAL has a "you really should play this exactly as it's written" clause, but, well... The less we talk about that particular thing (it doesn't deserve to be called a "game") the better.

Synnibar has that too, and is about as bad, but thankfully on the absurd, overly complex rules for a boring game side, not the squick side.

jackattack
2012-09-11, 04:45 PM
Someone went on the Serenity RPG board asking about possible mental powers (other than "reader") to add to his game. The moderator told him that there are no other mental powers in the Serenity RPG.

Lord Tyger
2012-09-11, 06:19 PM
Someone went on the Serenity RPG board asking about possible mental powers (other than "reader") to add to his game. The moderator told him that there are no other mental powers in the Serenity RPG.

Which makes sense- that's doesn't sound so much like saying "Play it as is," as "That's what's in the game, don't ask me what else you could put in." It would be like saying, "Okay, so there are these types of elementals in Pathfinder, what other types could I put in," and being answered, "Paizo has put these elementals in,"

Edit: Some thing in Pathfinder are left explicitly up to homeruling/homebrewing, such as who exactly grants a witch her powers.

Nepenthe
2012-09-11, 07:33 PM
From what I've seen on the forums, Luke Crane encourages hacking Mouse Guard but discourages house rules. Seems pretty fair to me considering most proposed house rules I've seen there stem from a base-level misunderstanding about what the system is supposed to do.

huttj509
2012-09-11, 09:52 PM
From what I've seen on the forums, Luke Crane encourages hacking Mouse Guard but discourages house rules. Seems pretty fair to me considering most proposed house rules I've seen there stem from a base-level misunderstanding about what the system is supposed to do.

Reminds me of the ADnD 1e DMG, basically says "feel free to change stuff that gets in the way of your game, but understand why it is the way it is first."

Arbane
2012-09-12, 12:25 AM
If I remember correctly, the rather cracktastic RPG World of Synnibar had a rule that if the players caught the GM not following the rules, they could call him on it and get double XP for that session (along with the GM's eternal hatred, of course). I'm not sure if it 'allowed' houseruling.

jackattack
2012-09-12, 03:29 PM
Which makes sense- that's doesn't sound so much like saying "Play it as is," as "That's what's in the game, don't ask me what else you could put in."

No, it was very much "there are no other mental powers because we say so and if you try to put them in you are playing the game wrong."

Sith_Happens
2012-09-12, 10:47 PM
If I remember correctly, the rather cracktastic RPG World of Synnibar had a rule that if the players caught the GM not following the rules, they could call him on it and get double XP for that session (along with the GM's eternal hatred, of course). I'm not sure if it 'allowed' houseruling.

What happens if the GM decides not to follow that rule?:smalltongue:

nyjastul69
2012-09-12, 11:08 PM
From what I've seen on the forums, Luke Crane encourages hacking Mouse Guard but discourages house rules. Seems pretty fair to me considering most proposed house rules I've seen there stem from a base-level misunderstanding about what the system is supposed to do.

What's the difference between hacking a system and house rules in a system? I'm not trying to be snarky. I've just never heard the term hacking used in regards to a RPG.

NikitaDarkstar
2012-09-12, 11:23 PM
I think Nikita might have meant mechanical changes? Exalted's system is complex enough that adding houserules or new powers can seriously break some things (even more than they're already broken).

Actually I meant fluff wise. It seems like a system that's to intertwined with it's fluff to be able to change it much without ending up with rules that seems odd. But as I said I've only read the system (and not overly in depth either) I haven't actually played it so my impression might be very wrong.

Knaight
2012-09-13, 12:22 AM
Synnibar has that too, and is about as bad, but thankfully on the absurd, overly complex rules for a boring game side, not the squick side.

Synnibar is a poorly made, poorly written, mechanical mess. The amount of descent necessary to go from that to FATAL is probably larger than the entire range of RPG quality if you disclude FATAL and Racial Holy War from the category. FATAL is in a special category which it has almost entirely to itself.

vartan
2012-09-13, 12:37 AM
The intro to Spirit of the Century has the authors stating that their suggestions on how to play the game right are intentional and that they are unapologetic.

Totally Guy
2012-09-13, 12:54 AM
What's the difference between hacking a system and house rules in a system? I'm not trying to be snarky. I've just never heard the term hacking used in regards to a RPG.

Hacking a game is taking the rules of the game and making them work for a different setting or genre. Realm Guard is a Mouse Guard hack, Dungeon World is an Apocalypse World Hack, they are their own games that use very similar rules.

A house rule is where you decide that something should work differently in the game because the existing rule is inadequate or results in something unacceptable.

Arbane
2012-09-13, 01:33 AM
What happens if the GM decides not to follow that rule?:smalltongue:

Raven c. s. McCracken himself breaks into their house and sets their copy of the rulebook on fire, I suppose.

Siegel
2012-09-13, 05:31 AM
Apocalypse World of course has the

"There are million ways to run Apocalypse World but this is how you should do it to make it sing" clause which i love.

My only House Rule for Mouse Guard?

Fate Award for humor.

nedz
2012-09-13, 07:50 AM
If I remember correctly, the rather cracktastic RPG World of Synnibar had a rule that if the players caught the GM not following the rules, they could call him on it and get double XP for that session (along with the GM's eternal hatred, of course). I'm not sure if it 'allowed' houseruling.

Surely the DM would just have to houserule this one out first ? :smalltongue:

AFAIK There are no RPG rules police who might turn up at your house and arrest you for having Bad Wrong Fun.

Tyndmyr
2012-09-13, 09:05 AM
Reminds me of the ADnD 1e DMG, basically says "feel free to change stuff that gets in the way of your game, but understand why it is the way it is first."

This is pretty reasonable, yeah. I discourage people including lots of house rules in games they've never played by the rules. There's a lot of value to understanding why things are they way they are, and frankly, people who haven't yet played make terrible house rules anyway.


What happens if the GM decides not to follow that rule?:smalltongue:

Infinite xp!

NikitaDarkstar
2012-09-13, 10:45 AM
This is pretty reasonable, yeah. I discourage people including lots of house rules in games they've never played by the rules. There's a lot of value to understanding why things are they way they are, and frankly, people who haven't yet played make terrible house rules anyway.


Couldn't agree more. My D&D group has a pretty decent amount of house rules by now, but amusingly enough the first ones we made when we first started to play the system has been scrapped for being stupid, complicated, game-breaking and generally making less sense than the rules as written. :p

Devils_Advocate
2012-09-13, 01:01 PM
What happens if the GM decides not to follow that rule?:smalltongue:
What happens in a game of chess if one of the players decides not to follow one of the rules?

The specifics will doubtless depend on the people involved. The only sure thing is that they stop playing chess, even if they proceed to play a very similar game instead.

Bear in mind that a player can fiat too. He can say "No, that didn't work, my dwarf is immune to poison". When it's pointed out to him that this goes against the rules he can say "Well, that's stupid, I'm not doing it that way" and then proceed as if the GM hadn't said anything to the contrary.

RPGs are unusual in that they generally explicitly allow a single participant to behave in a manner that would be considered exceptionally immature in... I'm gonna say pretty much any other sort of game. As a result, the understanding that the GM has a License To Be A Jerk is so common that even when a game explicitly says that it grants no such license, the GM may be able to get away with being a jerk anyway, and the group may even deride the game for its departure from convention, because come on, everyone knows that GMing comes with a jerk license, that's just how it works.

It's honestly kind of weird how the hobby has this whole dom/sub thing pretty deeply built into it. Not that there's anything wrong with that, if that's what you're into!

(Mind you, the GM could easily alter the social contract back to normal by saying at the start "I'll run this game, but only if I get traditional GM cheating privileges; you can only play in this game if you're okay with that". But by the same token, a group of players could alter the standard social contract by saying "We'll play your game, but only if changes to the rules require a majority vote; before we play you'll have to agree to that".)

Tyndmyr
2012-09-13, 01:19 PM
RPGs are unusual in that they generally explicitly allow a single participant to behave in a manner that would be considered exceptionally immature in... I'm gonna say pretty much any other sort of game. As a result, the understanding that the GM has a License To Be A Jerk is so common that even when a game explicitly says that it grants no such license, the GM may be able to get away with being a jerk anyway, and the group may even deride the game for its departure from convention, because come on, everyone knows that GMing comes with a jerk license, that's just how it works.

It's honestly kind of weird how the hobby has this whole dom/sub thing pretty deeply built into it. Not that there's anything wrong with that, if that's what you're into!

I too find this whole attitude exceptionally odd. Don't use it at my tables...instead, if the rules are being changed, someone just suggests something, everyone banters around it a bit, then, if we all like it, we go with it. No real GM fiat, more of just group decisions. We've got a few players who have GMed in the past, so there's some experience, and nobody really feels like they have to be in charge.

nedz
2012-09-14, 04:53 AM
I too find this whole attitude exceptionally odd. Don't use it at my tables...instead, if the rules are being changed, someone just suggests something, everyone banters around it a bit, then, if we all like it, we go with it. No real GM fiat, more of just group decisions. We've got a few players who have GMed in the past, so there's some experience, and nobody really feels like they have to be in charge.

This is pretty much what we do.

At the start of the campaign I will publish all of the house rules I have in mind and then they will be discussed. Any that the group doesn't agree with will be dropped/changed. Others may be suggested by various players.

During the campaign though: any rules changes will be agreed by the group.