Oftentimes, especially with older rules sets, it can be hard to guess what a particular rule might do, but it usually comes together when applied consistently at the table and as far as the classic D&D's are concerned especially so in the long form, multi-faction campaign game. Consistency is probably the key here.
I know I have been disappointed as a player when I noticed rules being disregarded, when they could have been applied easily and it would have made sense to apply them. And I don't mean this in a rules lawyery way. When I know the GM is making a conscious choice - or ruling - in a way that's consistent and supporting the diegetic reality, I'm all fine with it. That's the GM's job. But when e.g movement allowance or shall we say fictional positioning doesn't even have a meaning, what am I here for? That's breaking immersion, and ultimately taking away degrees of freedom. Aren't those games about choice and player decisions?
Pulling off an amazing feat because we all thought it's a fun idea is one thing (and not to bad a one really), but pulling it off within the bounds and constraints of the rules, that's a game for me, and quite a story to tell.
Trust is also an issue, when it comes to my own GMing. I'm tired of rules futzing. I want my rules system to work out of the box, so I don't have to question everything when I try to apply the tules. That's why I'm so fond of GURPS - it eases my mind, I know I can trust it. What Gygax was writing in parts of the DMG might have been an effort to add consistency and trustworthiness to the hot mess that OD&D had become at that time. I think he succeeded for the most part, but failed here and there.
So yeah, consistency, trust, maximum degrees of freedom within a dependable framework of boundaries.
Alright, I could go on, sorry didn't mean to rant. And I don't mind if I'm missing the point here. Happily so I guess, cheers 🍻
...
Trust and consistency is definitely important. But role-playing isn’t magic. And even magic there are sets of rules you can decide to play. Magic commander and standard and draft all operate differently.
Or GURPS is an even more perfect example. GURPS is a toolkit to build a game from. Every time you run a GURPS game you leave more than half the system off the table. Are you using space ships? Psionics? Magic? Super powers? Martial arts?
@lkh @rdm @deinol Indeed. That reminds me of the people who say that the reason by Monopoly takes so long and causes so many fights is because of all the house rules.
The rules were written for a reason, and when you think it's fun to add things like "Landing on Free Parking gives you all the money in the middle" (it doesn't; it just means you don't have to pay anyone, which is a godsend in the late game), or landing on Go means collecting double, you're asking for trouble.
The game is carefully balanced to play in a certain length of time, and anything that increases the amount of money in circulation will automatically increase the length of time that the average game takes, which will naturally increase everyone's frustration and irritability.
If you understand that, and you still want to add those house rules, then go ahead, and do it with your eyes open.
It's the same with TTPGS. Rules are *rules*. And they've been carefully and thoroughly playtested and the designers know all the reasons they exist and the implications of them being there. Before you houserule, understand exactly what and why and what effect it's going to have on your game.
In my opinion. :-)
...
"in the example above it is assumed that they are doing everythingThe author does not suggest to generally dispose of random encounters. Also:
possible to travel quickly and quietly to their planned destination."
Know the game systems, and you will know how and when to take uponWell, I don't dig that babbling about ultimate power to be sure, but he definitely is onto something with "know your game systems".
yourself the ultimate power. To become the final arbiter, rather than the
interpreter of the rules, can be a difficult and demanding task [...],
for your players expect to play this game, not one made up on the spot.
Also, I do have experienced bad vibes with Monopoly RAW. To my mind it still serves best to demonstrate how disruptive capitalism can be, and if I'm not mistaken, this was the original intent of Elizabeth Magie's "The Landlord Game".
...
@lkh @rdm @deinol you're right. And it does so brutally effectively. Particularly the "all properties must be auctioned" rule, which is designed to make the game flow quicker. Unless you get really unlucky with your rolls, it only takes a few goes around before all the properties are owned. At which point, the fate of the one who owns the least of them is generally sealed.
It's not all that much fun, and someone on the old Dicebreaker YouTube channel once commented that the reason he doesn't like it is because there's literally zero player agency; it's all luck. But I put it to you that that's kinda the point. ;-)
...
Try my Monopoly Legacy variant!
After each game, record which player owns each property. Next game, you play your children. Start with $200 and the deeds to your parent’s properties.
Enjoy!