PDA

View Full Version : A Fairly Thoughtful and Utterly Pointless Debate



Aranai
2008-02-27, 09:21 PM
<Backstory>
A couple days ago, one of the players of my homebrew game and I started talking about house rules in existing games. Then we got onto the topic of my game, and whether or not everything or nothing was a house rule. Thus sparked the debate I place below. Verily, I should shut up with the backstory now.
</Backstory>

So, therein lies the question. With a completely homebrew game, is EVERY rule a "house rule", or is the will of the creator technically the official ruleset, even if they alter based on the whim of the DM, how the DM is feeling at the moment, or what the DM had for lunch?

You decide! *Fairly embarrassing epic stance*

Toliudar
2008-02-27, 09:25 PM
I'd say that whatever you've told the players is your homebrew rules. Whatever you're making up on the spot, or have figured out and haven't told them, is just improvisation. IMO, none of this is a house rule, since that would imply a deviation from a commonly understood set of rules.

[FLUX]
2008-02-27, 09:29 PM
I fail to see the distinction. I mean, is a houserule weaker or stronger than a 'regular rule'? If there is no difference in form or function, then there's no real point in worrying about it. If there is, and you're making the game, why not include the houserule as a regular rule, and mention the regular rule in a sidebar or something.

Aranai
2008-02-27, 09:36 PM
There's really not a huge point of which is "stronger" over house rules or official rules, I just want to see how many people sway one way or another.

Corolinth
2008-02-27, 09:58 PM
A house rule is the standing rule within the house that deviates from or expands upon the existing rule in the books. House rules exist for a number of reasons. Generally a player wants to do something that just isn't covered well in the rule books. Or perhaps there's a rule that nobody in the group really quite understands clearly, so you all just decide that you're going to handle it, "like this" instead. Then there's the occasional rule they everybody thinks is stupid, and so you change it to something you like better (for example, I always drop death by massive damage when I run games - I never have liked it). Sometimes you just can't remember the where to find the right rule at the right time, so you wing it, and then you find the official ruling until months later and decide just to keep using the house rule because everybody's accustomed to it.

So what system is it? If it's D&D, the house rules are anything you do differently from the core rulebooks, for whatever reason. It doesn't matter that the setting is homebrew - core rules come out of the PH and DMG, while the other stuff are house rules. If the system is something you built from scratch entirely, then your house rules and the core rules are one and the same.

Due to the nature of the hobby, any given house should have a healthy number of house rules. Sooner or later, if your players have any imagination at all, they're going to want to do something that's not covered by the rules. The DM's job, then, is to think on his feet and use the existing rules that he knows to adjudicate the event. If a group runs only with the core rules, it means that hasn't happened, and that's generally not a good sign.

Icewalker
2008-02-27, 10:16 PM
A house rule is a modification from the normal system. If you are still working on and updating the system, then they are not house rules. You are playing on homebrew rules, but until you have a definite and non-changing system, with which you disagree with and make a few variations, you don't have any house rules.

Riffington
2008-02-27, 10:23 PM
This thread will not be complete without mention of Kevin Siembieda.

Wrote some pretty cool games, but it seemed to everyone that the systems needed a lot of houseruling. Turns out, he houseruled them too...

Suzuro
2008-02-27, 10:58 PM
Definitely normal rules. I consider, in this case, the DM to 'be' the rulebook, so what they say are the rules. Just my opinion on it, though.





-Suzuro

Zincorium
2008-02-27, 11:13 PM
House rules: Any rule that does not apply to people playing the same game anywhere other than your group.

House rules override the existing rules in the group that decides to use them, but that heavy authority is limited in scope.

valadil
2008-02-27, 11:51 PM
When I GM I make sure that everything is a house rule. I explain that we aren't playing D&D 3.5, but Jon's Game - a roleplaying game very similar to, but not exactly the same as D&D 3.5 This discourages rules lawyering and scares away players who want to play a build rather than a character.

Prometheus
2008-02-28, 02:22 AM
If a houserule/homebrew is made public, drawn from another source, and/or planned before hand, than it won't be DM fiat and it will be as consistent as any other rule.

Kurald Galain
2008-02-28, 03:59 AM
I'd say the term "house rule" only becomes relevant once people other than the creator of the system start GM'ing it.

Otherwise you're just discussing the difference between a written rule and an ad-hoc rule.

Kioran
2008-02-28, 04:08 AM
I´d be with most others here - if it´s your very own system built from scratch, and no other group uses it, there is no such thing as a houserule, meaning a deviation of one group from some basic standard.
I would, however, differentiate between written down, canon rules, which are accessable by the players, and ad-hoc rules or improvisations. Ideally, the latter will, if they are significant, get reviewed and either added to the written material, or changed and tested again, or discarded.

Regardless, playing your own system, and developing it from a small kernel on during the firs campaign is tremendously enjoyable. I wish you best of luck......

Pronounceable
2008-02-28, 08:37 AM
You're playtesting. No matter what, you're ALWAYS playtesting. Playing RAW of another's system or playing RAW (by you), or houseruling something... They all lead to the same thing: improving of your personal playstyle.

nargbop
2008-02-28, 09:38 AM
I believe your players have this beef:
1 ) Player and DMs play nicely for a time, setting up a reasonable, expected set of rules for play, allowing everyone to know the limits of what they can do and can't do
2 ) Player does something interesting or fun, DM doesn't like it
3 ) DM pulls out a "rule" he hadn't mentioned yet, or had just made up, and player's fun is destroyed utterly

My motto as DM : Don't destroy fun.