Sometimes GMs will find the rules restrictive or don't cover exactly what a player wants to do. Some say let 'rule of cool' be your guide and throw the rules out during those suitably fun and cool moments to allow great stories to unfold.

Generally speaking, if the game is crunchy or you are new to the system then sticking to the rules is a good idea as everyone knows where they stand with one important caveat - don't let the rules ruin your game!

If a dice roll spoils an important plot point then don't let it be die dependent!  If a rule prevents something vital from happening then don't let it.  I'd suggest all GM rolls should be secret for this purpose anyway.

Regarding house rules - if you have them specify them up front.  Don't throw them out there mid-game as the players could feel cheated.  Guidance here is in line with a 'yes' driven game and remembering the game is for everyone's entertainment.

I agree with pretty much everything Barry just said here.  I always think about which rules I want to switch before I even start the game.  Specifically, I like to think about which things must change if I think that they will cause the game to lag on rPol.

I'm an inveterate rules tweaker. I find it very difficult to play a set of rules 'out of the box'. I always think there is something I can improve on, or something I don't like, too complex, too simple, etc.
Perhaps I'm just an arrogant apple. :)

My POV is that rules are there to convey the game reality to the players. Do they feel as if they are fighting a dragon, or are the rules so 'crunchy' that they feel as if they're sitting at a computer poking numbers into a Dice Roller for the whole of their lunch break? What are you engaging, their imagination or their dice-hand?

This is why I prefer 'rules lite' games, and why I prefer flexibility.

However... That only works if you have experienced players who can help the GM to achieve the right mood, because the other purpose of the rules is to give Players (and GMs) some focus - guidelines to keep them on the right track.

If the rules improve your game, use them. If the rules spoil your game, lose them.

YMMV, of course. :)

I'm going to counter Barry on a few points here (and noting I'm still wrapping my headspace around PbP GMing, so my advice comes from the tabletop/face-to-face real time gaming style, but it should still apply-ish):



If you are really and truly a newbie at the game you are running, ignore this bolded bit.  Don't worry about it.  Don't fret over it or even allow it into your thoughts.

Just run your game hewing to the rules as best you can.  Now, on this, don't fret too much about "following the rules closely".  Just do your best, don't stop game to look stuff up, unless you absolutely have no idea what to do.  Just roll with it, make a note, and look it up later (if the game is running smoothly at that point).  If your call was off, let the Players know before the next game and let them know what the 'by the rules' call should have been (that's for tabletop-real time games.

For PbP you've got all the time you need to look up rules, so do so!  Every time you do this, you reinforce your knowledge of the rules).


This one is a contentious point.  The Fudgers versus the Keepers.

Do you let a bit of randomness "spoil" your grand story or do you let the randomness "inform" your grand story.

True fact:  I've gone back and forth on this one over the years.  I've been so far into the Fudger camp that I didn't even bother rolling dice for one campaign!  And likewise at current I'm so deep into the Keeper headspace all rolls are in the open!

So I have no advice here.  Both ways are valid, both lend to different styles.  Both require the trust and support of the Players.

Two notes to ponder:

If your Players begin to get edgy about you rolling in secret, they may be finding their trust in you eroding.  "How can we trust the GM's rolls aren't just being fudged all the time?  That crit that almost killed my character?  Was that FUDGED?"

If your Players are too attached to their characters and the story, they may resent the dice taking things away from them (characters, plot points, decisions, etc).

No advice on these points, just things to consider as you make your way forward in the piranha-shark infested boiling acidic waters of GMing.


I semi agree with this.... up till the "specify up front".

You can certainly make a house rules call mid-game.  If a rule is pestering you and your Players it might just be the moment to have a quick discussion about and see if you all can work out a different way to do things that satisfies everyone.

However, having said that... I do agree with Barry.  These things are best to do as "after-action" post-session debriefs, during the week via emails, and before game, over the dinner break, etc.

I mean if PCs are in the midst of a battle and the "armor defense" rules (frex) are finally reaching the point that your Players are ready to quit in frustration, definitely stop the action and give it a talking through.  But then if those pesky rules are plaguing your game, the best course is to keep note and deal with them before they reach a boiling point.  To this end I ask my Players what things they are liking and what they aren't after each game.  I encourage them to tell me this stuff before games, and if necessary via email (some GM like to email around questionnaires occasionally to keep up with what the Players are enjoying and hating).

Hmm... in a PbP I'm guessing you could just keep a check on the Players enjoyment via the OOC threads and do your "does this need tweaking" conversation there.




My final bit of advice:  Play the game straight (following the rules) until you know the rules well enough to never need open the book (for most sessions).  If you find a rule is bothering you, head into the game's forums, see what others think.  Ask your Players what they think.  Do some thinking about it, but play the rule straight atleast 5 times before you decide it's got to go.

Too often GMs (and Players) get caught up with Theorycrafting a rule never having seen it in actual play.  They just decide "This rule is bad and will lead to X, Y, or Z so it's got to go" when in play those issues either never come up, or are dealt with in other ways (via interaction with other rules or just via the way the game plays).  This called either "The Endless White Plain" or "A White Board Problem", meaning the problem doesn't exist outside of these two areas and disappears once the "problem" hits the field of play.



[EDIT]
Damn homophones getting all mixed up in my wordage!

/shakes cane at those pesky homophones and wishes they'd get off his lawn
[/EDIT]
This message was last edited by the player at 18:20, Sat 04 Nov 2017.

All good advice, And I'll only add one thing. Outside of magic, (includes super powers, and psionics,) you should never allow a rule to break the rule of "makes sense". I mean this in extreme situations. As an example. In 3rd Edition D&D a thief Rogue could make a hide check if they broke line of sight from an opponent. A tower shield gives complete cover from an attacker. If a thief Rogue hides successfully all their belongings are hidden as well. Therefore a thief Rogue with a Tower shield can duck behind the shield, and the shield and them are hidden.

Now, before anyone says anything, This exact situation happened at a WOTC sponsored event back in the early 2000's. They upheld that interpretation. But it doesn't make sense. Again, outside of magic, that if total BS. I advise not allowing such rubbish.

I also didn't allow Improved Evasion/ Evasion to work when the thief rogue was at the center of a fireball, with absolutely nowhere to hide. Rare situation I know, but they did happen on occasion. (Note I did allow the normal save, and only because they were the thief Rogue).