Can a GM/DM break rules and setting lore?

[Cap'n Gravelock]

I have only recently begun GM'ing games and I need to ask if I can be allowed to take liberties with some rules and fluff of some RPG settings.

[bc56]

Go ahead. The GM makes the rules, not the books. The books are intended as guidelines. This is especially true for lore.

[BWR]

Rule 0.
And sometimes established lore in an otherwise cool setting is really, really stupid.

[Bundin]

If you worry about one or more of your players having problems with it, just give them a general heads up in advance about your plan to not sticking to the established lore too strictly. That way, they can already 'adjust' to that, and it won't be an "omg, you totally can't do that!!" moment when it happens. If there are complaints, just have a chat about it. In the end, it's shared storytelling, both you and the players probably will deviate from the rules/lore every now and then anyway :)

[Millstone85]

Go ahead. The GM makes the rules, not the books. The books are intended as guidelines. This is especially true for lore.

As with any game, the manual is a contract between the players. Disregarding it is like inviting someone to play Clue only for them to find Monopoly on the table. Being in the position of a referee doesn't change that.

It is not just better to warn people in advance about house rules and original lore, it is a must.

[Celestia]

Absolutely not. If you ever find a DM doing such a thing, please report them to the Role-Playing Police Department (RPPD) so that they may be properly fined and jailed.

[braveheart]

As with any game, the manual is a contract between the players. Disregarding it is like inviting someone to play Clue only for them to find Monopoly on the table. Being in the position of a referee doesn't change that.

It is not just better to warn people in advance about house rules and original lore, it is a must.

For houserules, you are correct, (if you forget to warn someone about one, let them know once it comes up and give the player an opportunity to change their action in accordance). However I must disagree in terms of lore, a GM controls the everything not dice or PC and lore falls well within that category. A GM doesn't need to tell players what they change in the lore, becausebas often as not the players only know the parts of lore that the GM has told them so far anyway.

[Nifft]

I have only recently begun GM'ing games and I need to ask if I can be allowed to take liberties with some rules and fluff of some RPG settings.

You are morally required to make changes to the rules & setting lore when necessary. That's your role and your responsibility.


However:

- Try not to change things just to mess with the players' expectations. The characters? Mess with them. Unexpected things happening to PCs is fun and exciting. But not the players, that's just frustrating.

- If you can find a way to justify doing what you want using the setting's lore, that's more elegant.

- Try not to replace something unique with something generic.

- Never change a thing just to spite a player. If you've got a flavor-lawyer who knows the setting better than you do, don't engage in a power struggle. You will "win" the power struggle, but the player will become unhappy, and having an unhappy player means losing in a more important way. Instead, try to co-opt the flavor-lawyer to help you figure out how to work with the setting's lore.

- Remember that surprises are better in fiction and worse in games. Telegraph your sudden-yet-inevitable betrayals (to the players, not the PCs).

[TheStranger]

For houserules, you are correct, (if you forget to warn someone about one, let them know once it comes up and give the player an opportunity to change their action in accordance). However I must disagree in terms of lore, a GM controls the everything not dice or PC and lore falls well within that category. A GM doesn't need to tell players what they change in the lore, becausebas often as not the players only know the parts of lore that the GM has told them so far anyway.

That's true in homebrew settings, but in the case of a setting with a lot of official lore, players will come in with some expectations. The GM can change the lore, but it's only fair that they give the players notice. Not a whole errata or anything, just a heads-up that you've changed some things. Otherwise they will (quite reasonably) rely on their setting knowledge to make decisions during play, and there's potential for conflict if you haven't warned them.

I agree with Millstone85, if you're using an established setting, you should discuss major lore changes with your players. Yes, it's technically something that the GM controls, but if the players signed up for a Star Wars game, they probably prefer that it be recognizably Star Wars (whatever that means to them). You may have a great idea where the Galactic Empire is actually a benign dictatorship and popular with everybody except some religious nuts, criminals, and the people they took power from, but have a conversation with your players before you run that game.

[Amaril]

With fluff, do whatever the group thinks is coolest. If that means sticking to an established setting down to the last detail, do that. If it means going a completely different way, cool. As long as everyone at the table enjoys it.

As far as rules go, though, it depends on the system. Most games, D&D included, hold up fine when the rules are altered on the fly. However, some systems--Powered by the Apocalypse comes to mind--really break down if the rules aren't adhered to exactly as written. It depends on the player-GM relationship the system assumes. In something like D&D, the GM is supposed to deliberately tune the game experience to be challenging, but not unfair to the players, and to actively rebalance it as the game unfolds based on whether everyone is enjoying it. On the other hand, in something like PbtA, the GM isn't expected to hold back the same way--they're supposed to try and f*** over the players as hard as they feel like, and the rules exist for the players' protection, to ensure that no matter how hard the odds are stacked against them in the fiction, they can always exert a certain amount of control over the story. Personally, I favor games that take the latter approach, but they're very much in the minority.

[Pex]

I have only recently begun GM'ing games and I need to ask if I can be allowed to take liberties with some rules and fluff of some RPG settings.

As long as you tell the players before the game starts what rules and established game world lore of published settings you are changing. You do have final say on the matter, but listen to a player who disagrees with a rule change decision. You can of course keep your rule change, but even upon keeping it it helps to hear an opposing view to ensure you aren't causing unforeseen problems. If the rule change does affect something else you hadn't intended you can patch that up as well. If it's too problematic you may decide not to do the rule change. It's also possible you're ok with the unintended consequence and consider it a bonus feature so you keep the rule change.

[1337 b4k4]

As others have said, absolutely you can, and often you should, with the caveats that people should know when those changes are relevant (e.g. they affect the characters abilities themselves, or for example, if house cats are known in your world to be extremely toxic and deadly when touched, the characters having grown up in the world should know that).

But another caveat is to understand what the purpose of the rule you're changing is before you go and change it. My go to example is early D&D gave you the most XP for GP, not for killing monsters and to some people, XP for GP makes no sense. 3.x D&D eliminated that rule, and as a result, 3.x and later D&D is much less a dungeon crawl/exploration game than earlier D&D was, because it completely changed the reward/progression system.

[Frozen_Feet]

I have only recently begun GM'ing games and I need to ask if I can be allowed to take liberties with some rules and fluff of some RPG settings.

Think of what it would take to do the opposite: to never break any rules of system or setting.

They'd have to be both complete and consistent. Raise your hand if you know what's the problem with that.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Changing rules should be a group discussion, or at the very least, a decision announced well in advance and put up for debate and comments. Never change a rule on the spur of the moment just because you think it would make for a better story or some nonsense like that.

Changing the setting is a little more permissible, so long as the group wasn't sold on the idea of strictly keeping to an established setting that they really like.

[Max_Killjoy]

As with so many things that come up, it's a question of intent, and honesty.

Why are you doing it?

Are you being open with the other players?

[2D8HP]

I have only recently begun GM'ing games and I need to ask if I can be allowed to take liberties with some rules and fluff of some RPG settings.

It depends on your table how it will be accepted.

But one old "RPG" (originally called a "wargame") encourages it:

The "rules" are up to each individual table, and always have been.

Dungeons and Dragons, The Underground and Wilderness Adventures, p. 36: "... everything herein is fantastic, and the best way is to decide how you would like it to be, and then make it that way."

AD&D 1e, DMG, p. 9: "..The game is the thing, and certain rules can be distorted or disregarded altogether in favor of play...."

AD&D 2E, DMG, p. 3: "At conventions, in letters, and over the phone, I'm often asked for the instant answer to a fine point of the game rules. More often than not, I come back with a question -- what do you feel is right? And the people asking the question discover that not only can they create an answer, but that their answer is as good as anyone else's. The rules are only guidelines."

D&D 3.5 DMG, p. 6: "Good players will always realize that you have ultimate authority over the game mechanics, even superseding something in a rulebook."

D&D 5e DMG, p. 263:: "...As the Dungeon Master, You aren't limited by the rules in the Player's Handbook, the guidelines in this book, or the selection of monsters in the Monster Manual..."

What typical players usually object to are changes that they perceive reduce the chances of their PC's succeeding at tasks, and/or surviving, so I'd try to guess those and give them a heads up.

[Darth Ultron]

Yes, but for a Gm/Dm it is not breaking something.

If the setting lore says "all elves are evil monsters that eat humans'', a GM CAN make a good elf guy that only eats vegetables or even a village of good elves. This does not ''break'' any lore.

And if the rules say ''elves can not be wizards", the GM can make a elf wizard, and again it does not ''break" a rule.

[Drascin]

I have only recently begun GM'ing games and I need to ask if I can be allowed to take liberties with some rules and fluff of some RPG settings.

It's not just that you CAN, but you SHOULD. The game is yours - you and your players', not the designers'.

If a point of lore or rules rubs any of you guys the wrong way, don't hesitate for a second to throw it into the trash and come up with something cooler. In fact, noticing when something is not working for your player group and subsequently setting said element on fire with extreme prejudice is one of your most important jobs as a DM!

[Cap'n Gravelock]

Okay, perhaps I should be clearer. We are/were playing Deathwatch, a 40k RPG. My players are a bunch of Korean kids who wanted to play Space Marines without the HORRIFIC elements thrown in. Heck, they just fight Tyranids as they are similar to the Zerg of Starcraft which they are very familiar with just as, I suppose, the Adeptus Astartes are kinda similar to the Terrans at least in terms of appearances.

I am indeed very familiar with 40k lore but the goal was to make a "friendlier" setting than the usual. We have a 6-year-old who plays as a Furioso Dreadnought for one thing. The oldest player is at least 18 and he visibly balked at the Enemy Beyond and Black Crusade rulebooks and said that they make the game TOO HORRIFYING. Even as a 40k fanatic, I actually agree with him.

In the original lore, befriending aliens was UNTHINKABLE HERESY but my players were interested in diplomacy with T'au, Eldar and even Orks so I changed the lore a bit so the Astartes including my players were much more "heroic" and less xenophobic death machines.

Yes, all of you may now accuse me of ULTIMATE HERESY and declare EXTERMINATUS on me but I changed the rules for my players...

P.S. Do you guys know any other Sci-fi RPG like 40k but less HORRIFYING? Like maybe a Starcraft RPG?

To be clear:

My players wanted to be "heroes of the galaxy" not the "butchers of the galaxy" as the Astartes have become over centuries of grim darkness...

[Max_Killjoy]

Absolutely nothing wrong with what you did.

The 40k lore started out as satire/parody, and then ended up taking itself seriously too often, turning into the poster child for grimdork.

[Cap'n Gravelock]

Absolutely not. If you ever find a DM doing such a thing, please report them to the Role-Playing Police Department (RPPD) so that they may be properly fined and jailed.

I'm already scheduled to be executed for HERESY by the Ordo Xenos...

[Kish]

Then you have nothing to lose.

[Cap'n Gravelock]

Absolutely nothing wrong with what you did.

The 40k lore started out as satire/parody, and then ended up taking itself seriously too often, turning into the poster child for grimdork.

Thanks. I just didn't want to sound like I was trying to ruin the setting or lore. I just wanted to have fun with my players without the horrific crap 40k is famous for.

[TheStranger]

Yep, completely fine. Better than fine - well done! You adapted the setting to fit the needs of your group, which is what a good GM does.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I have only recently begun GM'ing games and I need to ask if I can be allowed to take liberties with some rules and fluff of some RPG settings.

You -can- but that doesn't mean you should. It depends on what your group wants out of the game; narrative, gameism, or simulationism. You'll have some of all three but you and your players will have your preferences for one element or another.

The narrative element is the story your game tells. If you focus on this element then bending or even breaking rules and setting lore can, perhaps sometimes should, be done to make a cooler story. The rule of cool is the rule of the day.

The game element is the rules themselves and the competition they facilitate between the players and the game world (NOT the GM). If you focus on this element then bending the setting lore is okay if you don't go overboard but the mechanical rules are sacrosanct. A victory either handed to you or denied by the GMs whim is meaningless.

The simulationist element, aka; verisimilitude, is the consistency and believability of the game world. Focus on this element means keeping the setting lore straight and at least trying to keep the organization of various creatures and power groups from being totally nonsensical. Now, you can -change- the setting lore if you like but you need to remember those changes and keep things consistent. Most groups won't have this is their primary focus but will want to avoid damaging it too much lest doing so jars them out of the game.

It's up to you and your group to decide what the order of importance for these game elements and -that- will tell you whether you should break rules and lore or not.

[1337 b4k4]

Okay, perhaps I should be clearer. We are/were playing Deathwatch, a 40k RPG. My players are a bunch of Korean kids who wanted to play Space Marines without the HORRIFIC elements thrown in. Heck, they just fight Tyranids as they are similar to the Zerg of Starcraft which they are very familiar with just as, I suppose, the Adeptus Astartes are kinda similar to the Terrans at least in terms of appearances.

I am indeed very familiar with 40k lore but the goal was to make a "friendlier" setting than the usual. We have a 6-year-old who plays as a Furioso Dreadnought for one thing. The oldest player is at least 18 and he visibly balked at the Enemy Beyond and Black Crusade rulebooks and said that they make the game TOO HORRIFYING. Even as a 40k fanatic, I actually agree with him.

In the original lore, befriending aliens was UNTHINKABLE HERESY but my players were interested in diplomacy with T'au, Eldar and even Orks so I changed the lore a bit so the Astartes including my players were much more "heroic" and less xenophobic death machines.

Yes, all of you may now accuse me of ULTIMATE HERESY and declare EXTERMINATUS on me but I changed the rules for my players...

P.S. Do you guys know any other Sci-fi RPG like 40k but less HORRIFYING? Like maybe a Starcraft RPG?

To be clear:

My players wanted to be "heroes of the galaxy" not the "butchers of the galaxy" as the Astartes have become over centuries of grim darkness...

This is exactly what you should be doing. Building a game your players want to play. As to your question, I'm not very familiar with the 40k line, but my understanding was Rogue Trader was supposed to be a less grimdark 40k RPG. If you're looking for "Space Marines" type stuff, you could look into some of the old classic Traveller stuff (Cepheus Engine is a free clone)

[Cap'n Gravelock]

This is exactly what you should be doing. Building a game your players want to play. As to your question, I'm not very familiar with the 40k line, but my understanding was Rogue Trader was supposed to be a less grimdark 40k RPG. If you're looking for "Space Marines" type stuff, you could look into some of the old classic Traveller stuff (Cepheus Engine is a free clone)

Traveller... I should check that out. Thanks.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Okay, perhaps I should be clearer. We are/were playing Deathwatch, a 40k RPG. My players are a bunch of Korean kids who wanted to play Space Marines without the HORRIFIC elements thrown in. Heck, they just fight Tyranids as they are similar to the Zerg of Starcraft which they are very familiar with just as, I suppose, the Adeptus Astartes are kinda similar to the Terrans at least in terms of appearances.

Why play a 40k RPG in that case?

Anyway, if you want to schmooze with aliens and whatnot then just play Rogue Trader instead.

[Cap'n Gravelock]

Why play a 40k RPG in that case?

Anyway, if you want to schmooze with aliens and whatnot then just play Rogue Trader instead.

I showed them my 40k rpg collection. They liked the Astartes/Deathwatch. They wanted to be "heroes of the galaxy". 40k is all I had at the time.

[1337 b4k4]

I showed them my 40k rpg collection. They liked the Astartes/Deathwatch. They wanted to be "heroes of the galaxy". 40k is all I had at the time.

Hmm, so are they attracted to 40k lore as a whole, just not the grimdark thing? Or are they wanting just a general space marines thing? Or are they wanting an even more general sci-fi high adventure thing? Or a "big damn heroes" Firefly style edge of the universe trying to get by sort of thing? Because it might be worth trying a different system entirely:

Some links, all free, with mentions of paid products as well

Space Marines: Cepheus Engine or Traveller, specifically focusing on the military stuff. If you pick up Traveller, you might want the "High Guard" addition for classic. Could also try something like Robotech although it's more mecha than space marine.

Sci-Fi High Adventure: D6 Space and D6 Space Ships. Sorry these two aren't actually free (they used to be) but at $3 for the PDFs it's the next best thing. D6 was the system underneath the old WEG Star Wars RPG, so this is basically old starwars with the serial numbers filed off. There's also the Open D6 stuff which was supposedly OGL'd by the WEG founder. Not sure how this differs from the DTRPG links. Adventures on Dungeon Planet is a Dungeon World (nee Apocalypse World) hack for Sci Fi and there are current production Star Wars and Star Trek games online and at DTRPG

Big Damn Heroes on the Edge of Space: Stars Without Number is a sort of old school D&D meets Traveller meets Firefly sort of game. Obviously there's the Firefly RPG as well. White Star is old school D&D IN SPAAAAAAACE and Traveller/Cepheus engine can be used for this as well.

Lastly Transhuman/Cyberpunk Sci Fi fun a-la the netflix series Altered Carbon can be had with Eclipse Phase which does pitch itself as Transhuman Horror but you could tone down or skip it entirely (e.g. go Delta Green on the horror elements rather than Call of Cthulhu)