Secret House Rules

[jedipotter]

I keep a lot of my house rules secret. Players are told some, can figure out others, but most remain unknown. Though I lot of my houserules are more setting rules, if you see a difference between the two.

How do you expect the players to PLAY THE GAME without knowing the rules, oh High Programmer?

To play D&D, one only need to know the basics like roll 1d20 vs the DC of something and to subtract hit points when damage is done. You don't ''need'' to know every rule to play the game.

....they would get a warning because putting in houserules without everyone agreeing upon it is kind of breaking the shared atmosphere between players and y'know it would be kind of jerkish of me to just suddenly reveal the rules have changed out of nowhere, when people assume that the rules are consistent, even if they are houserules and it lets everyone know what kind of game we are playing here so they can best have fun?

I don't go for the idea that all players must know and agree to all house rules before the game. And even if I did not have house rules, a DM can ''suddenly change things'' at any time.

not to mention that if you don't reveal any of your houserules beforehand.....well you got the perfect excuse to just start making it up as you go along and rule however you like while claiming its something you did beforehand, when really your just making it up in the moment. sure, you MIGHT actually be telling the truth, but if you don't show anyone, there is no real difference between the two anyways now is there? because either way to the player, they're just coming out of nowhere for no reason.

True, but meaningless. You can't tell a house rule from a setting rule from a rule that only effects to this part of the adventure. So it's not like the player will know. And most DM's make stuff up as they go along.

what else do you call letting people believe that certain rules are being followed by all....then revealing that is not the case?

Well you assume there is a revealing. This does not happen.

what else do you call changing the rules behind your players back so that their actions which assume a certain set rules are being followed, are suddenly invalidated?

Making Fun.

but as you said, a vast majority of these rules are unknown to your players, and thus you still deceive them into thinking one game is being played when its actually entirely another. I cannot trust you- that is why I'll never play a game with you. Because I will never know if your going to spring a rule on me, and neither will I ever know if its made up in the moment just to screw me over, or secretly made beforehand to screw a LOT of people over. I want to play RPG's, not Deck of Many Houserules. If you want something that ruins the spirit the game...that is it. look no further.

Well...Trust No One.

I wonder though how you handle any event in the game. Say you have a spellcaster character and go to cast a spell...and it fizzles out. Do you immediately start screaming at the DM and say how you can't trust them?

[Arbane]

I keep a lot of my house rules secret. Players are told some, can figure out others, but most remain unknown. Though I lot of my houserules are more setting rules, if you see a difference between the two.

You've banned antimony and dolphins?

To play D&D, one only need to know the basics like roll 1d20 vs the DC of something and to subtract hit points when damage is done. You don't ''need'' to know every rule to play the game.

Poor lonely middle. Always excluded. I think most players would like to know, for example, that casting a summoning has a non-zero chance of being completely worthless or causing a TPK.

I don't go for the idea that all players must know and agree to all house rules before the game. And even if I did not have house rules, a DM can ''suddenly change things'' at any time.

Yes, but most GOOD GM's don't rearrange the laws of physics on the fly to nerf the PCs.

Well you assume there is a revealing. This does not happen.

Fear and Ignorance!

I wonder though how you handle any event in the game. Say you have a spellcaster character and go to cast a spell...and it fizzles out. Do you immediately start screaming at the DM and say how you can't trust them?

"What just happened?" seems like a perfectly reasonable question under the circumstances.
And "Is it going to happen again?" is even more important.

[gartius]

I keep a lot of my house rules secret. Players are told some, can figure out others, but most remain unknown. Though I lot of my houserules are more setting rules, if you see a difference between the two.

Quote Originally Posted by Arbane View Post
How do you expect the players to PLAY THE GAME without knowing the rules, oh High Programmer?
To play D&D, one only need to know the basics like roll 1d20 vs the DC of something and to subtract hit points when damage is done. You don't ''need'' to know every rule to play the game.

You need to know the rules that would affect your character as those rules affect your descisions. If you go to cast a spell only to be told it doesnt work because of some houserule then it matters. End of.

I don't go for the idea that all players must know and agree to all house rules before the game. And even if I did not have house rules, a DM can ''suddenly change things'' at any time.

A dm can suddenly change things at any time. a player can also respond by throwing the DMG at them for being a bad dm.

Well you assume there is a revealing. This does not happen.

So the player is not allowed to know why they're actioned failed?

Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
what else do you call changing the rules behind your players back so that their actions which assume a certain set rules are being followed, are suddenly invalidated?
Making Fun.

Fun for you possibly, however if you were in the players shoes would you find it fun?

I wonder though how you handle any event in the game. Say you have a spellcaster character and go to cast a spell...and it fizzles out. Do you immediately start screaming at the DM and say how you can't trust them?

Dunno JP what would you do? You've said it yourself in previous threads that you wouldnt trust any gm so why should a player trust you?

[Requiem_Jeer]

Well, in the event of the random spell fizzling, there are context issues to be concerned with. Is the reason it fizzled due to some unknown phenomena? Or is the secret house rule in question something that affects spellcasting in general? In the former case, a appropriate knowledge roll the moment it is detectable and there you go. It's like having dead magic about, sometimes magic goes weird and the wizard just has to deal with it.

In the latter case, however, that is unreasonable. A character should know the rules that is relevant to them, at the very least. A spellcaster should know about the random failure rules, much like how a person with the track feat should know the common difficulty modifiers on the tracking table (Weather, time, enviornment, number. size), just because they are an expert and such things should not be a mystery to them.

Even a first level caster has cast hundreds of spells (most cantrips) in his lifetime, if there is some odd rule inherent to spellcasting that isn't already covered by the books, it is silly for them not to already know about it at least in broad strokes. Now, it might be metagaming a little to know the specifics if the caster in question is short on spellcraft, but even then the caster should know his spells aren't 100% reliable beyond spell resistance, saving throws, and attack rolls.

Edit: This is how such rules should be extrapolated. The PCs live in the setting that has these rules. Frequently, they have knowledge skills applicable to such things. When you play Dungeons and Dragons, you assume the rules in the book are solid, and you plot your characters and actions accordingly. You must consider whether it is reasonable for the characters to know the changed rule in question. As long as you keep that in mind, and inform the users who use rules affected by the house rules of the changes, it's all solid.

Characters should not be caught off guard by their own features.

[gartius]

Well, in the event of the random spell fizzling, there are context issues to be concerned with. Is the reason it fizzled due to some unknown phenomena? Or is the secret house rule in question something that affects spellcasting in general? In the former case, a appropriate knowledge roll the moment it is detectable and there you go. It's like having dead magic about, sometimes magic goes weird and the wizard just has to deal with it.

I'd like to point out that JP ignore the knowledge skill preferring for the players 'to find about it in game'-essentially boiling all knowledge & spellcraft checks to being useless-this being one of the houserules she has said she uses which she would spring on a player meaning the investment of skill points which could have been used elsewhere have been wasted.

[Arbane]

Edit: This is how such rules should be extrapolated. The PCs live in the setting that has these rules. Frequently, they have knowledge skills applicable to such things. When you play Dungeons and Dragons, you assume the rules in the book are solid, and you plot your characters and actions accordingly. You must consider whether it is reasonable for the characters to know the changed rule in question. As long as you keep that in mind, and inform the users who use rules affected by the house rules of the changes, it's all solid.

Characters should not be caught off guard by their own features.

You must be new to the whole 'jedipotter' thing. JP has made it abundantly clear that they're steadfastly opposed to characters having knowledge skills.

[Arkhaic]

You know, since the distinction between character and player knowledge seems to be nonexistent, could one make pop culture references without breaking character?

[jedipotter]

I think it's fine to leave the details of houserules mysterious so long as people know they're going to be in place, in general; as long as the players know going in that spells might have unforeseen consequences, I don't see anything wrong with keeping the consequences themselves a secret unless the character has a reason to know them.

I agree. I like magic to be strange, mysterious and unknowable.

Jedi - to put this in some kind of perspective can you explain the last three times you sprung a house rule on your players? I can dig a situation if no one is really sure what happens in a given situation so you make a judgement call, or something completely unexpected/unforeseen happens and you realize you need to revise something, but I don't think that's what you mean.

Also regarding the handouts, do they document the mis-summoning chance?

Houserule: If you teleport with an extra dimensional space, like a bag of holding...the effects are bad. It's 50/50 that the items in the space are obliterated or lost in the Astral. And it's 50/50 the space/item is destroyed.

Now, I don't like 'space' items, and they are rare in my game. You won't find one as treasure and you won't find them at magic mart.....but still they pop up from time to time.

Houserule: Magic resistance does not just 'wink out' the spell...a lot of other things can happen.

Houserule: Touching the mind or spirit or lifeforce of something not human is dangerous(if your human..depends a lot on race.)

The above three get used in most games, and players don't know about them, other then the vague magic warning. Though role-players will encounter them by role playing often enough.


The summoning mis-chance is mentioned in the handout, but not the details.

[ORione]

Well...Trust No One.

But your players should trust you, despite you not even telling them the rules of the game that you are adjudicating?

[Jacob.Tyr]

{{scrubbed}}

[Esprit15]

{{scrubbed}}

[Coidzor]

Playing "Gotcha!" with secret houserules is very rude, especially as a habitual thing.

The majority of setting details should just be made known to the players, as well. The things that are restricted to being discovered in-game should never be in the realm of gotchas or insane adventure game logic and should have clear, intuitive ways to find them out that naturally follow from the actions and capabilities of the PCs and progression through the narrative/world.

Requiring metagaming on the part of the players because they're not allowed to know what their characters know or even that their characters aren't allowed to know things that they should know as a result of their capabilities and training and kobayashi maruing the DM is also in poor taste.

Well...Trust No One.

To draw upon an analogy: Marriage isn't for everyone, there are even some arguments for abolishing it, but if you don't even understand it, you really ought not to be telling people not to get married as a general principle on general principle.

[Brookshw]

Sooooo, why did we need a new thread to address any of this?

[Angelalex242]

{{scrubbed}}

[Mr Beer]

I might find this annoying but if people are happy to play this game, then I don't really see the problem.

Sooooo, why did we need a new thread to address any of this?

Someone specifically asked jedipotter to explain the secret house rules situation.

[rg9000]

This topic reminds me of this.

[YossarianLives]

{{scrubbed}}

[oxybe]

{{scrubbed}}

[DM Nate]

I haven't paid much attention to JP, but I do have some "secret" rules for my homebrew 3.5 campaign as well.

They're both setting and mechanics-based, and I aim to keep them as balanced as I can. For example, my world emphasizes the use of alternate magic systems (incarnum, pacts, etc.) so while spells and spell-like abilities aren't outlawed, they are heavily taxed. Each time a player performs magic, they lose HP equal to the level of the spell. (On the flip side, all spells and spell-like abilities are automatically empowered, so magic users aren't completely nerfed.)

This was not a rule I told them about at character creation. This was one they discovered along the way, and that I explained in detail once they had. (I use my website as a means of recording what they've done and discovered so far.)

In addition, I gave them options to retrain out of their character if they found they didn't like the setup. So while I secretly changed some rules, I maintained player agency.

[Coidzor]

I haven't paid much attention to JP, but I do have some "secret" rules for my homebrew 3.5 campaign as well.

They're both setting and mechanics-based, and I aim to keep them as balanced as I can. For example, my world emphasizes the use of alternate magic systems (incarnum, pacts, etc.) so while spells and spell-like abilities aren't outlawed, they are heavily taxed. Each time a player performs magic, they lose HP equal to the level of the spell. (On the flip side, all spells and spell-like abilities are automatically empowered, so magic users aren't completely nerfed.)

This was not a rule I told them about at character creation. This was one they discovered along the way, and that I explained in detail once they had. (I use my website as a means of recording what they've done and discovered so far.)

That's sort of pointless unless you were also keeping their HP secret from them so they didn't know when they were getting damaged, as they'd find out in their first combat if not sooner. Why *not* tell them?

[DM Nate]

They found out in their first combat. I described how the magic-user felt his soul being channeled into the spell he was crafting, and that it exploded with more force on the enemy than he was expecting. Then I told him what to deduct on his character sheet.

It helped that we have only one magic-user in our group, and that he joined on our fourth session.

[Coidzor]

They found out in their first combat. I described how the magic-user felt his soul being channeled into the spell he was crafting, and that it exploded with more force on the enemy than he was expecting. Then I told him what to deduct on his character sheet.

It helped that we have only one magic-user in our group, and that he joined on our fourth session.

Again. What was the point of keeping that as a surprise? What did you gain from that? What did they gain? Why did you decide to do this?

[DM Nate]

It has to do with the world creation and story line on the website you didn't read.

Also, it contributes to a sense of mystery and discovery that you don't get by knowing everything up front.

[Zrak]

Like I said, I think it's fairly reasonable for players to assume that the rules will work as they do in the book unless told otherwise, but I don't see a problem with not telling players how the rules will be different so long as they know they will be.

As an aside, I think the way people treat jedipotter is really rude and honestly uncalled for. She and I had a debate when I first started posting that we took to PMs to avoid derailing the thread, and it ended up a perfectly nice, productive conversation. If you don't feel you can have a productive conversation with her, maybe that's at least partly on you.

So I'll just sing a verse... well, chorus:

Why would you use "postin' dirty" when "writin' dirty" is right there in front of you. Inexcusable.

[Coidzor]

It has to do with the world creation and story line on the website you didn't read.

Also, it contributes to a sense of mystery and discovery that you don't get by knowing everything up front.

Oh, yes, farbeit from me to expect a simple question to be answered with words instead of being expected to research an offhand link.

No, it really, really doesn't. At least, it doesn't if how you've presented it here is accurate.

Edit: Finding out *why* magic tears off part of your soul if not even learned sages and great wizards or gods know is potentially interesting as a mystery to investigate. Finding out that casting one's spells per day as a first level character half-kills them during the first session is not really necessary for that or actually, y'know, interesting.

[DM Nate]

Oh, yes, farbeit from me to expect a simple question to be answered with words instead of being expected to research an offhand link.

No, it really, really doesn't. At least, it doesn't if how you've presented it here is accurate.

It does when it's a smaller part of a larger experience. If, however, it's not your thing, then...it's not your thing. But to say it's completely worthless is like saying strawberry ice cream is pointless because you prefer chocolate.

[DM Nate]

Edit: Finding out *why* magic tears off part of your soul if not even learned sages and great wizards or gods know is potentially interesting as a mystery to investigate. Finding out that casting one's spells per day as a first level character half-kills them during the first session is not really necessary for that or actually, y'know, interesting.

There you go! That's actually part of the grand mystery of the campaign, and ties directly into the main plot. The character will find out WHY this happens, and specifically how it influences what the BBEG does, but for now...it's part of the bread crumb trail.

[eggynack]

There you go! That's actually part of the grand mystery of the campaign, and ties directly into the main plot. The character will find out WHY this happens, and specifically how it influences what the BBEG does, but for now...it's part of the bread crumb trail.

But why wouldn't the character know about this? They're wizards, albeit low level wizards, and they've studied magic a whole lot. Has no one said to them, in all of their training, "Oh yeah, casting magic hurts. I can tell you that,"? The weird thing about these hidden house rules, so much of the time, is that they actually reduce verisimilitude. We know some things about our world, and especially things about our world that we're ostensibly experts in, but these rules so often assume that our reasonably aged characters are as newborn babes to this world. Maybe justified if we're talking about a victim of amnesia, but otherwise, it gives the impression of a world that doesn't live and breathe, because everything that is to be discovered must be discovered by our protagonists. It's a problematic thing, in other words.

[DM Nate]

The "why does magic hurt me?" is one question among many that the new characters had to address, including:

• Why am I a ghost?
• Why don't I have any memories?
• What is this weird Shadow world I can jump back and forth from?
• Why does the Shadow world resemble a twisted and contorted version of the real world?
• Why are those in the physical world suppressing all forms of religion and knowledge of ghosts?
• (And, perhaps most importantly) How and why did I die?

In that context, the "oh, ****, magic hurts me" is just another weird aspect of this completely-new world the characters and players are discovering, but one that fits into the overarching theme and story.

[Coidzor]

There you go! That's actually part of the grand mystery of the campaign, and ties directly into the main plot. The character will find out WHY this happens, and specifically how it influences what the BBEG does, but for now...it's part of the bread crumb trail.

No, I'm pointing out how you had an idea and then did something that didn't make sense with it still, and clarifying how what's actually interesting is not aided by your trying to make it a surprise. Nor is it sufficiently dickish to be a proper gotcha, either.

So your motives for doing so are either not yet divulged or you're operating under a mistaken belief that somehow making "magic = pain" a factor not known about your setting is somehow superior to, say, "magic = pain, why is that?" as a direct hook when pitching the setting.

If you think that surprise is a meaningful part of the breadcrumb trail, it makes it seem like you must either think your players are dumb or you don't really know how to lead them into investigating a mystery about the setting that's important enough for you to want them investigating it.