"When Rules Don't Work" Topic

Writing in Slingshot #336, Gordon Lawrence describes how he modified Hail Caesar to better represent hoplite warfare.

When you discover that the rules you're playing don't handle your desired historical period properly, what are you most likely to do?

* find another ruleset
* come up with house rules
* look for house rules on the internet
* change historical period
etc.

Come up with house rule. As a long time TSATF player, I look at all rule sets as a starting point.

When I purchased a copy One Hour Skirmish the first thing I did was make a file with my own clarification of the rules. After that I add my own house rules for Rhodesia Fireforce actions.

I have quite a few homegrown rule sets that I have stolen ideas from other rules.

Tweaking the rules is half the fun. The other half is painting, and of course, the other half is actually playing.

In general, I'm not a fan of house rules. I used to be an inveterate tinkerer, but I've tended to move towards Raw. However if it's a broad period (and they don't get broader than 'Ancients') then house rules for a specific conflict can work.

All models are wrong, but some are useful. My appetite to tinker depends on the scope of changes. If its simple tweaks, mods to stats, the odd special rule etc. then I'm happy to make my own local changes. If its more fundamental such as the game system itself being broken then I generally consign to the bookshelf and bring out every now and then to remind myself what not to do :)

Depends on what's wrong with the rules. For me, rules with excessive book-keeping or game-losing activation systems shouldn't be played in the first place. But if the mechanisms are sound, and you just need to add a troop type or modify some of the numbers, I say go for it.

A lot of the interaction between a rule set and players is subjective (opinion).
Not a problem, but that is why there are so many rule sets.
It makes gaming more interesting.

I suspect most (not all) rules worked just fine with the group that wrote them, but a different group has a different opinion on how a war should be fought and thus announces these rules are "broken" i.e. we do not like them.

There are rule mechanisms I do not like, but that is my personal preference rather than a factual "this is wrong".

?
martin

I want smooth playing mechanics and an end result that is a satisfying game where the broad movements and results seem 'proper', and don't get fussed if abstracted mechanical details in the process are 'wrong'.

In the interest of faster and/or smoother play, will definitely make houserules to polish mechanical details for game play, and check to see what others have done.

If the mechanics are hopelessly bogged down, then it's time for different rules.

Change period, what? The miniatures are perfectly good! Rules come and go, miniatures are forever.

Sometimes rules are too far gone to salvage. My first Napoleonic rules seemed really good on initial reading, but was dreadful to play. I kept trying to tweak them as I liked the figures and terrain that came with the rules but it was hopeless.

An example of an easy tweak which fixes the unbalance of Twilight Struggle is to start the US side with two extra influence. And that's pretty much how everyone plays the online version.

Write my own.

Drink another beer.