I rant about RAW: Rules As Written. Do you like House Rules? Do you use them? Or are you a 'by the book' sort of a gamer?

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhXr3MANT9Q

I use house rules, and I can't even remember when I last played a (non-board) game as written.


Tetsubo, is that a map in the background?

Quote from: Tetsubo;426650I rant about RAW: Rules As Written. Do you like House Rules? Do you use them? Or are you a 'by the book' sort of a gamer?

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhXr3MANT9Q

I house rule every RPG I run to fit my current campaign and my current player group -- even games I wrote myself get house rules to make them fit the current campaign/player group.

I'm pretty much as you describe yourself in the video except I have no problem creating house rules on the fly if we discover something that doesn't work right in play. And like you, I could care less about the designer's intent, I bought the game so it is mine to do with as I wish whether or not what I wish matches the designer's wishes.

A blind worship of RAW is very misguided at the very least, because in the end, it will only end up hindering the flow of the game, and will not help it. Rules are tools which should be intended as guidelines and support for a entertaining game world, a good moment spent between friends, and a satisfying make-believe.

As a GM I like the idea of RAW in principle for a variety of reasons. Specifically:

1. Having bought the damn thing, I’d like to think the game can do its job without additional work.

2. My instincts suck and my tastes are, shall we say, eccentric. What might seem like a great idea for me, objectively, isn’t always so.

3. I have a great respect for the Law of Unintended Consequences.

In practice though I always end up tinkering a bit with the rules anyway.

AD&D - as close to RAW as I can get.

Other games, less so.

BUT...I make sure I at least understand those rules as written before I go pulling things out.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;426715I make sure I at least understand those rules as written before I go pulling things out.

That should be a given.

It's my *job* to make sure the game runs just fine as written.

It's my *responsibility* to make a system framework that is solid enough that it can stand a hellova lot of twisting and warping without breaking.

It's my *honor* to supply alternate rules in the game that can be slotted in, yanked out, and used with no further work, so folks can configure things the way they like.

It is my *pleasure* to give folks tools that can change the setting safely, without any fear on their part of breaking anything.

It is my *right* to screw around as much as I want with rules, whether or not the designer allows for it.

-clash

I almost always use house rules of some type. Usually because of stuff I find "missing" in games. For example, I always add in nephilim (aasimar), cambions (tieflings), and shifters to my D&D games. I've written up versions for BFRPG and S&W for my use.

My mantra has long been Use the rules, don't let the rules use you.

Quote from: flyingmice;426723It's my *job* to make sure the game runs just fine as written.

It's my *responsibility* to make a system framework that is solid enough that it can stand a hellova lot of twisting and warping without breaking.

It's my *honor* to supply alternate rules in the game that can be slotted in, yanked out, and used with no further work, so folks can configure things the way they like.

It is my *pleasure* to give folks tools that can change the setting safely, without any fear on their part of breaking anything.

It is my *right* to screw around as much as I want with rules, whether or not the designer allows for it.

-clash

Preach on, brother.

Quote from: Caesar Slaad;426738My mantra has long been Use the rules, don't let the rules use you.

LOL I rephrase it into: "the rules are my bitch. Got a problem with that?"

I get why people like RAW.  If you come from any game hobby other than pre-D20 RPGs, you played RAW.  Very few people houserule card games or board games and you are locked in RAW with computer and console games, so the entire concept of houseruling is bizarre unless your previous hobbies had serious DIY components to them.

I'm such a compulsive house ruler that I force myself to play RAW for twice before I start houseruling UNLESS some rule is really crapping on my game.

Its the easy houseruling that's the core of my OSR involvement.  I like Gygax and Arneson, but I don't worship them and I have no TSR nostalgia.  My love of Classic D&D is all about banging the hell out of it like a hottie made of jello!

Quote from: flyingmice;426723It's my *honor* to supply alternate rules in the game that can be slotted in, yanked out, and used with no further work, so folks can configure things the way they like.

It is my *pleasure* to give folks tools that can change the setting safely, without any fear on their part of breaking anything.

More Publishers need to follow this advice!

Quote from: Spinachcat;426761Its the easy houseruling that's the core of my OSR involvement.  I like Gygax and Arneson, but I don't worship them and I have no TSR nostalgia.  My love of Classic D&D is all about banging the hell out of it like a hottie made of jello!

More Publishers need to follow this advice!

I doubt anyone plays OSRIC or Labyrinth Lord without serious houseruling...just like people did in the days of yore.

I am actually, physically incapable of playing a game as written. If anyone ever released a game that exactly hit all the right notes just as i wanted them...well that's the day I hang up my dice for good.

I'll houserule just about anything... I've never played a RAW game of Monopoly... Candyland was boring as written, even when I was a kid... so it makes sense that I'd keep on doing that with RPGs. I can't think of any rulebooks where, as I'm reading them, I don't hit some bit and think, 'Naw, I don't think so!'