How do you feel about House Rules?

[phoenix240]

Generally, I use House Rules when the rules as written are either nonfunctional, so jarring and illogical that they grate on my nerves when I try to use them or don't contribute to the play experience I want create. The final criteria is probably my most subjective and varies from game to game, genre to genre. When I want to employ a house rule I make sure my player know why and invite them to discuss any issues or concerns they have with them before the game gets started or at least before the rules change is implemented.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I use quite a few house rules, based on personal preference if nothing else. For example, I use the 4e writeup for Regeneration, use Inherent Always On Growth/Shrinking/DI for permanently big/small/heavy characters, 'Stun Only' does not inherently include No Knockback.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I feel like the rules are grounded with much forethought and plenty of playtesting over the years. But that doesn't mean the RAW can cover the playstyle of every HERO gaming group forever. House rules are great to account for such differences.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

Though my position on house rules has been different in the past, I've come around to the position that they're good for encouraging particular play styles, setting tone, character decisions, and so on.

 

Where I don't care for them much anymore is the idea that they're "fixing" something that's supposedly "broken" in the rules. Partially because I don't really think the rules-as-written are broken for my games (so I think they're "fixing" a problem that I probably don't see as a problem). And partially because most house rules of that type that I see, actually seem more "broken" to me than the rules-as-written that they're replacing (so even to the extent that there might be a problem, I find most of the proposed fixes worse...).

 

Just my .02.

[Lucius]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I suspect most people use house rules to some extent or another.

 

Using things like Growth, Shrinking and Density Increase as Persistant and Always On is an example of one I'd have no problem with and often use myself.

 

I probably ought to house rule a change to the Extra Limb rules (specifically to close the loophole that lets you save more points on Characteristics "Not with Extra Limbs" than the Extra Limbs themselves cost) because yes, that one IS broken but I guess I'm enough of a munchkin at heart that I don't want to close up one of the last true loopholes the rules have.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I can almost fit a palindromedary through that loophole

[Lucius]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

Generally' date=' I use House Rules when the rules as written are either nonfunctional,[/quote']

 

I'm not sure there's anything in Hero I'd describe as "nonfunctional."

 

so jarring and illogical that they grate on my nerves when I try to use them

 

Like the rule requiring appropriate Skills to use Healing on complex inanimate objects. What, I need a Skill to go with the Power to fix some clockwork, but with something as mind-bogglingly complex as a living organism I can just go "Poof! You're Healed!?" Jarring and illogical is a grate (on my nerves) way to put it.

 

or don't contribute to the play experience I want to create. The final criteria is probably my most subjective and varies from game to game' date=' genre to genre. When I want to employ a house rule I make sure my player know why and invite them to discuss any issues or concerns they have with them before the game gets started or at least before the rules change is implemented.[/quote']

 

My players started from zero when it comes to Hero. At least one of them has started picking up the system enough that I have had occasion to discuss my particular style vs the RAW (when I dissauded him from buying a Contact with an institution his character was a member of; I told him that as far as I was concerned he didn't need to pay points for that, he would already get the benefit because it had been established via roleplay. On the other hand, I told him if he got Burocratics it might help leverage his connections.)

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I did not pay points to get a palindromedary license.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I look at it this way.

 

Every GM is going to have house rules of some sort or another. That's great. If I am a player in that GM's game I'll abide by those house rules because GMastering is a lot of work. Whatever makes it easier for them is cool. I'm not going to argue in-game as long as the changes were stated at the beginning of the campaign. If I got a chance to discuss said changes before the game started I might inquire further but that's it.

 

As far as posting example builds to this forum I see RAW (Rules As Written) as the best way to get everyone on the same page. Otherwise it sometimes gets to the point where we might as well be talking different languages. It's not that I don't have house rule opinions of my own (I do) but they really only matter when I'm the GM. As other long time forum posters know, the 6e rules were written after a LOT of input from board members. A consensus had to be found because otherwise the game begins to become a turnoff to new and old players when each and every GM has their own flavor of house rules that have to be 're-learned'.

[McCoy]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I have an "unpublished" house rule: an attempt to save a wounded person's life, even by a character with no paramedic or similar skill, is always successful. PC's should not die from an above average damage roll, and attempts to save wounded hostages or bystanders should be rewarded with success. So when someone announces their character is attempting to apply direct pressure to the spurting artery and picks up the dice, I'm thinking "Please don't roll an 18! Please don't roll an 18!"

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

House Rules? Don't get me started.

 

I think the Dunning-Krueger Effect and Sturgeon's Law spawned a million vile offspring that all grew up to be RPG house rules.

 

 

Check the fine print: Sturgeon's Law has a 10% error margin.

[Scott Baker]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

House rules are fine as long as everyone knows what they are. If the players get some input before they go into effect, even better.

[gojira]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I can see cases where the individual groups play-style is such that certain things in the RAW are either undervalued or overvalued, and that needs to be corrected.

 

I can also see cases where the GM wants something to be undervalued or overvalued, and makes a rule accordingly. For example, equipment is often free and costs no points. "No points" is clearly undervaluing the utility of the equipment, but in certain types of campaigns it doesn't make much sense to require tracking equipment with character points.

 

Likewise, in certain types of games, powers might be unavailable or only available as Talents or Equipment. Or certain powers might be available only with limitations, or the base cost might be increased to make the power more rare (for PCs).

 

Etc. All those are houserules, but clearly could be reasonable in the proper circumstances.

[Kirby]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I generally have no problems with house rules and have definitely instituted my own in campaigns that I've run.

[Tasha]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I used to have extensive houserules for every game system I played. Eventually I came to see that most houserules are more broken than the "broken" rules they were designed to fix. Mostly because most people who houserule something have no idea why the RAW was crafted the way it was in the first place. Also they tend to be too caught up in their own cleverness to recognize any holes and exploits in their House rule. Many times houserules cause problems with players and are rarely brought to a group for a vote. Mostly they are shoved down the throats of players, no matter how those players might feel about such houserules.

 

Also, most house rules seem to always make something that's very simple and understandable into something that is completely complex and hard to understand.

 

Now, I am really too lazy to be bothered with houserules. It's much easier to open the book and read the RAW, and apply that rule. Then everyone can use the book and understand how a situation can be handled. If there is a disagreement to interpretation then the group can deal with it after the game ends or get a quick consensus at the time and go with that.

 

Also the funny thing is that with hero many Houserules are borne out of some munchkin abusing a part of the rules. The GM instead of learning what went wrong with that build and then later not allowing that kind of thing to happen. Some will make an overreaching irrational houserule that throws the baby out with the bathwater. Sometimes a GM will see something in the rules they thing is "unbalanced" and ban it with no reason what so ever beyond their seat of the pants knee jerk reaction to seeing that ability. Sometimes you see the "realism" argument thrown around for justification for some crappy house rule. Usually it's that person's biases showing their ugly heads again, and also not having a real understanding of how character creation really works and how things synergize together to make decent characters that don't cost more points than they have to.

 

Most houserules suck. If you think you have a clever houserule, you should post it to a message board filled with fans of the system. Then you will see how those people tear the 'great idea' apart and show you the limitations of your idea.

[gojira]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

For example, I just found a rule in Champions Complete that made me go "wah?" Area of Effect, Damage Shield. "When the Damage Shield options are added to a Mental Power, along with the Limitation Mental Contact Only (-1/2), this creates a Mental Damage Shield."

 

Wah?

 

Since when did Mental damage powers cost less? Mental Damage Shield is a +1 advantage, same as switching an attack from PD/ED to MD with AVLD. New house rule!

[bigbywolfe]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

For example' date=' I just found a rule in Champions Complete that made me go "wah?" Area of Effect, Damage Shield. "When the Dam[i']a[/i]ge Shield options are added to a Mental Power, along with the Limitation Mental Contact Only (-1/2), this creates a Mental Damage Shield."

 

Wah?

 

Since when did Mental damage powers cost less? Mental Damage Shield is a +1 advantage, same as switching an attack from PD/ED to MD with AVLD. New house rule!

In most games you get attacked by mental powers much less often then physically struck.

 

EDIT: To clarify, you do realize that a Mental Damage Shield only applies to those with Mental Powers that can "touch" your mind with theirs, right? Anyone can touch you and get zapped with a damage shield. Comparatively few people have Telepathy or Mental Blast.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I suspect most people use house rules to some extent or another.

 

Using things like Growth, Shrinking and Density Increase as Persistant and Always On is an example of one I'd have no problem with and often use myself.

 

I probably ought to house rule a change to the Extra Limb rules (specifically to close the loophole that lets you save more points on Characteristics "Not with Extra Limbs" than the Extra Limbs themselves cost) because yes, that one IS broken but I guess I'm enough of a munchkin at heart that I don't want to close up one of the last true loopholes the rules have.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I can almost fit a palindromedary through that loophole

I've seen that mentioned before, but can never seem to remember seeing an actual published character with that build. Could you site some 5 or 6E for me to look up?

 

6E1 does have an example that includes (-1/2) Only WITH Extra Limb.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I've used a small number of house rules over the years, but most of them have really involved rules from earlier versions of HERO System which were once official, and which either suit my and my group's play style preferences better, "feel" more appropriate, or seem simpler or more logical to us, than the current relevant rules. The rest of my house rules are basically extrapolations from existing rules, like my use of the Real Weapon and Real Armor Limitations to distinguish between normal and "super" damage attacks and defenses, which I've described here before.

 

I feel most comfortable when a house rule is grounded in HERO precedents, so that IMO it follows the spirit of the rules, if not their letter.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I've used a small number of house rules over the years, but most of them have really involved rules from earlier versions of HERO System which were once official, and which either suit my and my group's play style preferences better, "feel" more appropriate, or seem simpler or more logical to us, than the current relevant rules. The rest of my house rules are basically extrapolations from existing rules, like my use of the Real Weapon and Real Armor Limitations to distinguish between normal and "super" damage attacks and defenses, which I've described here before.

 

I feel most comfortable when a house rule is grounded in HERO precedents, so that IMO it follows the spirit of the rules, if not their letter.

 

This is pretty much my take on it as well.

Some examples I can think of right off the top of my head include the old -1 OCV if you move and attack, I've got some rules around for Long Term Stun (Shock, essentially), I decoupled Control and Pool costs in VPP's before it was cool (6th Edition change), & made rules for Pushing your Luck for my JI campaign, back in the day.

[Markdoc]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I'm with the crowd on this one: many house rules I have seen have been horribly broken at worst, or can cause occasional "WTF?" moments at best, so I prefer to run the game as vanilla as possible. The only house rules I have had, have usually been either to address things that originally weren't in the rules at all, like mass combat or "setting-specific" (like for example, rules on how magic worked in a fantasy game or "only these powers are allowed" in some heroic games). There have been a few exceptions, though: I house-ruled the 5E version of Deadly Blow out of bounds and substituted one that worked like the 6E version, for example. Also, I like to clearly outline what house rules are in play in a setting document that everybody gets before they start designing characters

 

cheers, Mark

[Guest steamteck]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I have very few original house rules but I do use some of Steves alternate rules from the sidebars in 5th edition and stuff from the APG. I find his alternate rules are often his best ones.

[psyber624]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

What constitutes a House Rule exactly? HERO is filled to the brim with optional rules, added rules, GM Option abilities, Caution and Stop Sign powers, etc. etc. etc. Which pieces you choose to allow (or disallow) in your campaign can also be viewed as a "House Rule" and if the forums are any indication could receive just as much antagonism from some players as an "original rule" which is not in HERO at all.

 

For instance, in my campaigns I would generally limit Multipowers. The limits I use are based off of my own observations of the power and the amount of "discount" I feel is appropriate. However my guidelines are not in any published source material. Does this constitute a House Rule?

[BhelliomRahl]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

I like to clearly outline what house rules are in play in a setting document that everybody gets before they start designing characters

I follow the the same principle. When I start a new game I give all players a hand out containing rules for character creation limitation and restrictions, Setting Rules and House Rules.

If players have queries, they can be discussed then. If during the game I feel a rule needs to be; added, removed or modified I will discuss it with the players and make sure everyone understands why and how it will change the game.

 

I always try to use rules as RAW, I dislike using House Rules for as mentioned in previous posts I don't understanding all the underlying principles behind the Hero Rules and adding a House Rule can create unexpected ripples however with some of the Setting Rules, a House Rule needs to be used for them to work.

 

i.e. At present I am creating a Scion Hero game and will implement several Setting Rules, epecially a new characteristc called Legend which I will control. Legend will influence the chance of events occuring and other matters. I have not yet fully worked out its impact on the RAW but I am sure I will need to implement House Rules to accomadate them.

[Kirby]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

"Meh" to those who claim house rules are cumbersome and broken. That sounds more like a bad experience than a trend. House rules I've used in campaigns before include the following:

 

• A 'to hit' roll of 3 will always succeed, and as long as a 3 or less wasn't needed, it will do maximum damage. A 'to hit' or skill roll of 18 will always miss or fail, and will generally be harmful, if not embarrassing.
  
• DAZED: What HERO refers to as CON Stunned, I refer to as dazed. When Dazed, you must spend your next phase recovering from it, if you are both Dazed and knocked below 0 Stun, you must spend your next available phase recovering from it, then your following available phase taking a REC until you are in the positives. (Note: This is the 4E version.) Side: If brought to 0 Stun exactly, you must make a CON roll. Success you can still act, failure means you must take a REC and are treated as if in negative Stun.
  
• DENSITY INCREASE, GROWTH, and SHRINKING: If you want these to be considered 'permanently' on, you may buy them as 0 END, Persistent, Always On. Consider purchasing Inherent as well.
  
• FIND WEAKNESS/LACK OF WEAKNESS: I don't see the need to make you spend extra points defining Normal/Resistant attacks/defenses on these. So, if you have FW: Standard Defenses, it applies to both normal and killing attacks. Just as a Lack of Weakness for Mental Defense would apply to normal Mental attacks and Killing Mental attacks.
  
• FLASH: I treat flashes a little differently, but somewhat more forgiving/realistic, IMHO. The Body/Flash is rolled normally, but the 'total' is now the minus the affected character is at PER rolls and OCV. The victim of the flash will recover one point for each of his/her phases. So a flash of 5 will put the target at -5 on say Seg. 2. If the target is a 5 Speed, he/she will be at -5 on phase 3, -4 on phase 5, -3 on phase 8, and so forth.
  
• LUCK/UNLUCK: While allowing good things to happen to the PC with the Points of Luck on the Luck Table I tend to use the first three options under Other Ways Of Using Luck (FREd, p. 128) depending on how the player prefers. For Unluck, while I use the Levels table (p. 222), I also treat it as the opposite of the benefits of Luck.
  
• RAPID FIRE/SWEEP: This is allowed, but only for up to three shots total, and not on the same character.
  
• PULLED PUNCH: If you want to pull a punch, it is just a -1 OCV, regardless of STR or Damage Class being pulled.
  
• PUSHING: No EGO roll is necessary; however, you may only push each power once per turn.
  

While I've not had anyone play with Duplication in a game of mine, I doubt I would be as restrictive as FREd suggests with Altered Duplicates (+1/4 for 25% differential point spending, +1/2 for 50% and +1 for 100% variety) as that makes the cost punitive.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

3 and 18 are always success and failure by RAW, and max damage is a common critical hit option so I wouldn't call that a "house rule". Same with using options listed in the book for luck.

[Tasha]

Re: How do you feel about House Rules?

 

What constitutes a House Rule exactly? HERO is filled to the brim with optional rules, added rules, GM Option abilities, Caution and Stop Sign powers, etc. etc. etc. Which pieces you choose to allow (or disallow) in your campaign can also be viewed as a "House Rule" and if the forums are any indication could receive just as much antagonism from some players as an "original rule" which is not in HERO at all.

 

For instance, in my campaigns I would generally limit Multipowers. The limits I use are based off of my own observations of the power and the amount of "discount" I feel is appropriate. However my guidelines are not in any published source material. Does this constitute a House Rule?

 

Optional Rules from the current edition of the rules and/or one of the Current Genre Books or Addons (ie HS Martial Arts, APG etc). Those are NOT house rules. Those are options that need to be in a Universal rules set to adjust things to fit various genres and Group's tolerances for book keeping for realism

 

BTW, very mild house rules that are "Grounded" in Hero System Rules can be ok.

 

I kind of like the Idea of "real Weapon" limitation decreasing the DC of the attack when put against Superheroic Defenses/Tech. Same with Real Armor not being as good vs Superheroic Attacks. It's a real nice idea that uses stuff already in the rules to simulate "bulletproof Superheroes" without causing rDef Inflation.