"This system is unbalanced." "That system is too complex." "Monte Cook is the Antichrist, that's why Call of Cthulhu is the only game anyone should ever play." Any of these phrases sound familiar to you? They do to me, and I generally do my best to stay out of the RPG Holy Wars. Inexplicably, a lot of folks come to me for advice on games and the care and feeding thereof (I told Becca this blogging thing was a bad idea...), so here's my thoughts on how perfectly good game systems like 3.5 become a headache for their GM.
By far the biggest offender in making a game broken are house rules. "What?! Are you saying that the things I add in to make things 'more realistic' or 'simpler' or 'cooler' are actually bad?!" No. Not necessarily. Maybe. Yes. Look, big-press game systems like 3.x, tend to be designed by, you know, professional game designers. They get put together by people who know how to balance things. They get play-tested. Then they get tweaked by the people who put them together. Are you going to tell me that you know how everything fits together in d20 better than Monte does? That little rule that seems to you to just get in the way is probably there for a very good reason, and you'll probably figure out what that reason is after you begin ignoring it. Or maybe you won't figure it out and just become one of the d20 haters.
Think about it for a second, though. If your complaint is that spellcasters have become too powerful, do you use any house rules regarding them? Maybe you made a little adjustment regarding spell slots or preparation requirements to make magic-users more survivable at low levels? Yes you did? Good chance there's your problem, son. You have a fighter who cleaves his way through encounters four or five CRs above his level with nary a scratch? Sounds like a case of Hero Points to me. Or maybe you skimmed over the rewards-per-level chapter saying, "Hell, I know how much treasure and magic items to give." So house rules are bad? No. Just give some thought before you implement them. What will this rule affect? Will anything else be affected? If I were a munchkin how could I abuse it? Is he saying that I need to be an expert in the rules before I go about changing them?! Actually, yes. I am.
Another thing that I place under the rubric of "house rules" but most people do not are the various "rules supplements", "campaign supplements", "complete books of [fill in the blank]". You know what I'm talking about: splatbooks. Munchkins love 'em. Never, ever forget that they only exist in your game with your express approval. Don't also ever forget that the rules therein are usually intended for specific settings and/or styles of play. Know this before Billy-Joe-Ray-Bob rolls up a character with spells from one book, feats from another, and a character class from yet a third. Am I saying splatbooks are evil? No. I own, employ, and enjoy a whole bunch of them. What I am saying is that they are easily abused, even by players who do not have munchkinery in their hearts, and I give thought to the suitability of each of them before I approve them for use in a new campaign. Just because an Eldritch Might feat or spell might be appropriate for one game I run doesn't mean it is okay for the next.
Related to this is the Randolph Scott Factor. Guys, for as often as I stump and preach about loosening your grip and letting the players go, you also have to be prepared to say NO. Billy-Joe-Ray-Bob wants his Eldritch Might-Frostburn-Monkey Grip-Using sorcerer/monk for use in your low-magic campaign wherein you'll be exploring the relationship between religion and nobility? Say it with me, son: no. He says, please? Nyet. He throws a tantrum? Nein. He says you'd do it for Randolph Scott? Hell yes, but he ain't Randolph Scott, is he?
House rules and Randolph Scott are the biggest offenders, but ignorance plays a big part as well. And in this case I use the word in its classical definition: I'm talking about not knowing something, rather than calling people douchebags. In 3.5 the biggest victims of ignorance are Attacks of Opportunity and Grappling. Here's a newsflash for the haters: the shit actually works if you take the time to understand it! I get my blood pressure up every time I hear someone moan and complain about breaking out the grappling rules. Seriously, I've begun to wonder if I'm the one who has it wrong because I don't have a problem with either of them. Need it explained? Well, I ain't gonna do it. Put down the splatbooks and open your damn PHB. Really, its all there.
Some other time I'll talk about other hater-babble, like "Game-x is all about combat, that's why Call of Cthulhu is the only game anyone should ever play."
Meantime though, give me some thoughts here. What other complaints have you heard/have yourself? What have I missed?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
So that's why you're so stingy with treasure?
ReplyDeleteI don't much care for splat books either. The one I don't like in my game very much is the Item Compendium. It has some stuff that is just too nice. PHB II is also not a favorite of mine.
ReplyDeleteOf course, when I'm a player, I love having all the choices available. That's usually my barometer: If I would do anything to have that race/class/item, it's probably too good.
Not a doubt about it: if you're a player and you find something that makes you say, "This is really cool", then it is probably something that will give you [i]le migraine[/i] as a GM.
ReplyDeleteI sometimes get accused of having killer, over-powered NPCs in the games I run. When I do I simply point out that most of my world-NPCs are retired player-characters. :-)