Houseruling to reinforce themes is better than houseruling to "fix" mechanics

[Asisreo1]

It's arrogant if they're convinced that their fix will work on the first try.
But because of the constrains of being an employee designer (deadlines, priority on new content over fixing the old one, potential pressures from higher-ups or the marketing dep, etc), it's pretty reasonable for an experienced amateur to eventually improve a published system.

[Modders "fix" issues of video games all the time. And while it's difficult to say whether or not a big mod was better than the original game, community patch usually lead to games that are objectively better than the original games.]

In general, that's not what happens, though. Experienced amateurs are few and far between. So while there are instances of a well-made houserule fix made by amateurs, they are way too many outliers to not feel like the majority is not fun.

If the professionals (who were all amateurs at one point) don't want me to fix their rules, they can simply not make rules that don't work. Not always as easy as it sounds and sometimes impossible to check without a level of play-testing that can only be called unreasonable.

And how is it the same as fixing someone's art on twitter? In the first instance, art is entirely subjective, a rule not working isn't always so. In the second, unless the professionals are playing in my game, I haven't exactly confronted them with my fixes. Even many of the professionals who work on specific systems use house-rules when they play those systems themselves. Is there a hierarchy regarding which professional is correct? Can you list it out for me?

Rules not working is, in the majority of cases, subjective. No matter how many numbers you try to pull, very few features can be considered "good" or "bad" in an objective sense since it relies on your personal experience with it in a campaign or your personal feel of the system.

And its not the professional to be annoyed by the arrogant spouse, its the other spouse having to live with their decision until they finally decide to get a professional.

I passionately dislike this attitude. Yes, they are professionals. Yes, they did many good things. (For all its faults, the base 3.5e system is surprisingly robust and numerically stable.) They are not unique or superhuman. Another person with experience in the system and some thought will be able to improve and absolutely fix many things. Hindsight is a big advantage in this regard.

Nobody thinks they're gods or superhuman. But they are professionals. Doctors give incorrect diagnoses sometimes, but an amateur might scoff and say "I know this symptom has to be this!" When they have no real understanding of the symptom, disease, or treatment and wind up agitating a problem they were trying to help.

But I don't hate these rule fixes, its just that when its the amateur that gets the air of superhuman understanding that throws out red flags for the campaigns they run.