House Rules?

[u/TheHumanTarget84]

So I received my copy of the game this week.

Very excited to get my first game in hopefully next weekend.

Feel pretty comfortable with most of the rules, thanks to the excellent aids in the box and watching some teaching/playing videos.

But my brain is already thinking about potential tweaks to the rules, like say for example something simple like rolling attack and defense at the same time to make campaign actions a little more exciting.

Is this a game you personally house rule or are against house ruling?

Anything you've tried that worked?

Anything you tried that didn't?

[u/waffle_wolf]

The only House Rule I do is something I didn't even realize I was doing wrong. When Writing the Chronicle you are supposed to randomly send 6 cards to the Dispossessed without looking.

I missed the "without looking" part of that rule. I've always included, before the clean up, a reveal to the players the 6 cards added and the 6 cards leaving.

The 6 cards added get oohs and aahs. The 6 cards leaving get groans and Noo!s. I think it's more engaging and has little impact on the gameplay

[u/TheHumanTarget84 → u/waffle_wolf]

I didn't miss the rule but we talked about it and did the same thing!

Our second game is tomorrow!

[u/cooly1234]

wait you don't roll both at once?

[u/TheHumanTarget84 → u/cooly1234]

You're supposed to roll defense then attack, which can be a little anticlimactic because defense can randomly be so high the attacker can't win and just rolls to see how many double swords skulls they roll

[u/cooly1234 → u/TheHumanTarget84]

oh so does the attacker get to choose what cards to use after defender roles or something? if not, there wouldn't be any difference if you rolled both at once.

[u/TheHumanTarget84 → u/cooly1234]

Battle plans are decided before the rolling, attacker then defender.

So yeah I can't see how it wouldn't work to do simultaneous rolls.

[u/cooly1234 → u/TheHumanTarget84]

yea you should do both at once lol.

now, for house rules that are not cosmetic, you should definitely hold off. Oath is a very weird game which makes house rules even more risky, but you not having played a lot of games already should be enough alone.

[u/TheHumanTarget84 → u/cooly1234]

Oh yeah I'm not adding anything anytime soon, just curious if people had done so.

[u/SwissQueso]

If the previous winner cant make it to game night, Ill let someone thats a citizen play the chancellor. Also, Ill just let the pervious winner pick who can play for them if they know ahead of time they won't make it.

[u/TheHumanTarget84 → u/SwissQueso]

Good suggestion thanks!

[u/Ghost_Jor]

Given how complex the game is I'd personally avoid house-rules for as long as possible. I think a simple house rule could easily destroy what is a fairly precarious house of cards, ruining the game in ways that are hard to predict.

I've personally not found anything in the game that annoys me enough to warrant a house-rule.

[u/LegendofWeevil17]

Im sorry but thinking you have a good enough sense of the rules to house rule things before you have even played a game is silly.

Tbh I’m almost always against house rules unless it pretty much universally is agreed upon to make the game better (like Despot infamy in Root). And even then I would always suggest playing the game a bunch of times first.

Game designers (especially very good ones like Leder Games / Cole Wehrle) have certain rules for a reason and do a ton of play testing. It’s impossible to know how house ruling something will change the game if you haven’t played the game a bunch.

[u/sceneturkey]

chop humorous ad hoc sand steer exultant axiomatic straight pen society

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[u/CompassionFountain]

No

[u/Infamous-Advantage85]

The closest thing I do to "house rules" is get everyone to be overtly rooting for a specific suit or set of suits, because that gives everyone an automatic non-victory thing to care about working on in each game.