Quote from: gleichman;650796Sloppy.

It will work for players who aren't directly interested in the rules, assuming you do actually remember to use your changes correctly- after all there's nothing to compare them to for verification now is there?

I wouldn't play in such a game. I like knowing the rules.

Are you completely unfamiliar with International Law, or anything dealing with warfare? Everyone "knows the rules", regardless if they're written down or not.

Your counterargument is pretty weak.

Quote from: gleichman;650796Sloppy.

It will work for players who aren't directly interested in the rules, assuming you do actually remember to use your changes correctly- after all there's nothing to compare them to for verification now is there?

I wouldn't play in such a game. I like knowing the rules.

Of course I'll remember them. I've been doing this for over 30 years. Those neural pathways are well-traveled and used every day.

Quote from: jasmith;650801Of course I'll remember them. I've been doing this for over 30 years. Those neural pathways are well-traveled and used every day.

So you say. But again, there is really no proof now is there.

If only human memory was known to be completely infallible under any and all conditions. But alas, we'll just have to make do with your statement that you *think* you're remembering everything.

Good enough for you and your group no doubt.

In a few 1E AD&D games I played in over the last few years or so, we ended up going through every single rule line-by-line before chargen, largely to determine what set of rules we were going to be playing by.  Especially houserules, and going through each table line by line.

If we couldn't come to an agreement on the set of rules we were going to use, we went our separate ways without ever getting to the chargen stage.

Quote from: gleichman;650802So you say. But again, there is really no proof now is there.

If only human memory was known to be completely infallible under any and all conditions. But alas, we'll just have to make do with your statement that you *think* you're remembering everything.

Good enough for you and your group no doubt.

:rolleyes:

Most people just don't need a manual glued to one of their hands, to accomplish tasks they perform all the time.

So, when you run games you look up every single rule before you use it? Just in case your very fallible memory fails? Or, do you have someone like yourself, standing over your shoulder, frantically thumbing through the rules and ready to cry "FOUL," if and when you make an error? And what happens then? Do you grab a whip and flagellate yourself, crying Mea Culpa, for your grievous crime of making a mistake while GMing?

Quote from: jasmith;650804:rolleyes:

Most people just don't need a manual glued to one of their hands, to accomplish tasks they perform all the time.

So, when you run games you look up every single rule before you use it? Just in case your very fallible memory fails? Or, do you have someone like yourself, standing over your shoulder, frantically thumbing through the rules and ready to cry "FOUL," if and when you make an error? And what happens then? Do you grab a whip and flagellate yourself, crying Mea Culpa, for your grievous crime of making a mistake while GMing?

Gleichman is a REAL gamer.  He makes no mistakes.  His rules don't just model physics, they ARE physics.

Quote from: ggroy;650803If we couldn't come to an agreement on the set of rules we were going to use, we went our separate ways without ever getting to the chargen stage.

As it should be. People wanting to play different games so find a place that plays the game they want.

Quote from: KenHR;650806His rules don't just model physics, they ARE physics.

Can his/her rules explain Planck's relation E = hf ?

Quote from: jasmith;650804So, when you run games you look up every single rule before you use it? Just in case your very fallible memory fails?

No, but people certainly have the option to question any rule use and/or verify it. That is what the rulebook and errata are for after all.

Quote from: jasmith;650804And what happens then? Do you grab a whip and flagellate yourself, crying Mea Culpa, for your grievous crime of making a mistake while GMing?

Something like that, but more adult and with less blood flying around.

Quote from: gleichman;650807As it should be. People wanting to play different games so find a place that plays the game they want.

Having differing ways to handle various things doesn't mean you're playing a different game.

Holy beJesus, if one group plays AD&D by rerolling 1s on ability generation, and another group plays AD&D by starting out at Max HP, it doesn't mean they are playing different games.

And by the way, I'm still waiting for you to show me where in Moldvay's basic rulebook it says you should be playing on a grid.

Quote from: KenHR;650806He makes no mistakes.

I wish.

Quote from: KenHR;650806His rules don't just model physics, they ARE physics.

In the game world, this is certainly true.

Quote from: gleichman;650807As it should be. People wanting to play different games so find a place that plays the game they want.

Coming to an agreement by going through every rule line-by-line is a very long arduous process.  In one particular game, it took us almost a month of several weekends in going through each single rule in the books and various houserules we could think of.

Quote from: ggroy;650814Coming to an agreement by going through every rule line-by-line is a very long arduous process.  In one particular game, it took us almost a month of several weekends in going through each single rule in the books and various houserules we could think of.

More effort that we would ever take, so much in fact that I wonder if you just have a really committed group or are yanking my chain. Whatever, it's not my concern.

Here's our process last seen in my son's attempt at running Dark Heresy.

1. He pitched the game, the group agreed after suggesting some changes in the background fluff.

2. The GM reads the rules, one or more players read them as well. possible rule problems (and solutions) found in the read through are noted at this time for future reference.

3. The game is ran RAW, typically with one of the system's adventures to see how the designers felt it should be played.

4. The entire group reviews the result and offers their opinions.

5. A judgement is reached on if the game requires house rules or not. Or if it's a lost cause and should be abandoned.

6. If house rules are the decision, they are put into place. If RAW looked acceptable, they are kept.

7. Another game is ran RAW + defined house rules.

Steps 4-7 are repeated until the game is acceptable to the whole group, or it is abandoned for better system. Note, this process never really ends but it does come close to ending as the game is fine tuned.

Dark Heresy took one trip through and was abandoned on the first step 5. Total time: one game session and a few hours during the week prepping for it.

Quote from: ggroy;650814Coming to an agreement by going through every rule line-by-line is a very long arduous process.  In one particular game, it took us almost a month of several weekends in going through each single rule in the books and various houserules we could think of.

a month that could have been spent gaming


IDK, maybe it's because I'm older and don't have the free time I did as a kid.  But time spent gaming is a commodity, and we can't spend time going over that level of detail when we could just be playing.  If something comes up, we just deal with it as reasonable adults.

The other extreme is a game where nobody could come to an agreement on how to roll stats for chargen.  I was flexible on this, but the other players and DM couldn't come to an agreement.

So we packed up and went our separate ways after 30 minutes.