"Amending the Rules" Topic

I'd normally try 3 or so to make sure it wasn't me misunderstanding something. However sometimes it is evident from the start that something isn't working.

I will start tinkering before I've played even one game if i think it necessary :)

'other' = It depends…

Some items, the pencil goes to the page before Game 1!
Some, immediately after game 1.
Others need a few play throughs to see how everything balances.

At least 4, as I want to make sure we actually played the rules as written, not as we thought they were written

"Before you even think about….."
Really? Is this the Bible? The Koran? DBMM?
Let's get real here. You bought it, you can do whatever you want with it.

Agree with Scott – in some rules there are features that you know won't fit your view of how things should be even while the rest look good.

Zero. Many elements must be played out to fully comprehend and appreciate them (or not); others are pretty obvious up front.

I'm with Vigilant, I think.

Usually, you'd run a few games to make sure you understood the impact of a rule. But sometimes you only have to read it to see that there is an extra and unnecessary step in a system. I remember one which had me multiplying and dividing by the same number to calculate fire effects.
And you sometimes find sections "bolted on" which have no effect on the remainder of the rules. I don't think of terrain generators or victory conditions as portions of the actual rules, for instance, and substitute ones I like better without hesitation.

What Scott said.

If a game is fun on the first play, but seems unbalanced, I'll play it one or two more times before making changes. I always seem to miss a key rule.

If a game isn't fun on the first play, I'll either change it or scrap it. I've reached the age where I just don't have enough game time left in my life, to waste it on a game that wasn't fun.

Our group has yet to meet a rule set that we haven't considered amending.

Jim