Sometimes players ask me to make exceptions for their characters. They want to take a level in a class for which they don’t qualify, they want a weapon that doesn’t exist, an so on. These discussions bore me to tears.
Why do we have rules? *Rules impose limitations* and this is supposed to be fun. If players have bad abilities, low hit points, lousy spells, no money, then overcoming these challenges is supposed to be fun.
If this is not fun, there are several options:
Don’t get me wrong. There are different rule discussions:
Don’t waste my time arguing with me about bending the rules. If at all, let’s talk about the introduction of house rules.
#RPG #thoughts
(Please contact me if you want to remove your comment.)
⁂
Typically we have two types of arguments about rules. One type is where there is a disagreement on what the rules actually mean, and generally you make a decision at the table and it is resolved later in court (ie. forums). I approve of thoughtful resolution of these arguments because everyone ends up happier afterwards.
The second type of argument is one where players want certain abilities, weapons, spells etc. for their characters and the rules make it fairly clear that it��s not possible. You are the only wall standing in the way so these requests come directly to you.
I personally think that these sorts of requests should only be even *considered* by a DM who likes tinkering with his world and trying out new stuff. And even if you were, I’d be *very* careful about what is allowed.
As a player in the same game it gives me no particular thrills to see the other characters in my party performing normally impossible feats (though it doesn’t irritate me at all - my point is, the change benefits only a single player). That said, you will recall that some players become very irritated when rules change and systems become inconsistent. I have worked my way to where I am, accepted the roll of the dice, and stuck with the rules, and I still get satisfaction from the game (perhaps more than if I had a self-styled weapon of legacy).
It is apparent to me that you get absolutely zero enjoyment from these kinds of player-motivated-changes. In that case my recommendation would be to get tough and say no. Introduce a house rule that there are no house rules.
I guess that’s what *i would do*... 😄
– Marco 2007-08-17 15:41 UTC
---
That certainly seems to be the easiest solution. The only problem I see with it is the question of player fun: If some players enjoy it so much, why deny it to them?
– Alex Schroeder 2007-08-18 12:23 UTC
---
But do the players enjoy it less if you say No? It means, God forbid, that they’d have to play by the rules.
– Marco 2007-08-18 16:08 UTC
---
Some of them certainly like to complain. ;)
– Alex Schroeder 2007-08-18 16:10 UTC
---
Yes, some players do that.
– Marco 2007-08-18 17:13 UTC