You Want to Introduce a Rules Change to an On-Going Campaign

Following up on something asked about from the last article. Thanks for the comments and questions.

You are game mastering (GMing) and have come across a rule variant you like and want to introduce it into your ongoing campaign. The problem you are facing is the application of the variant would change something fundamental about the game world. If you claim it existed from the beginning, then you are faced with the coming up with an explanation of why past events were not impacted. You also have players who have developed characters based on the original guidelines the campaign has been running under. But you really think this change would make the game better.

This change in rules—creating a house rule—may be from an idea you came up with or something someone else came up with. Where the rule change came from isn't the important part. The part of introducing a new rule into an existing campaign is how you bring it into the group.

You have several options.

The first option is to continue the current game as is.

You save the rule for the next campaign. This isn't something I have seen happen though. Role-playing games (RPGs) are about creativity and when a creative person finds something they like they want to use it. If you are in the middle of a campaign, you might have a long stretch of game time in front of you. Waiting to the end of the campaign doesn't really look like an option for using the variant rule, but a reason for not using it.

I think I saw this option come into play, but it was never admitted. A GM was running his adventures that suddenly became hurried. We weren't railroaded to the end, but we were directed. Side adventures that many characters and players take were quickly resolved without much role-playing and we soon accomplished the goal of providing the support for the king who was on the verge of being ousted. The GM shortly thereafter mentioned he would be starting a new campaign using the same game world, but would be introducing a change to the rules he thought was needed to make our game better. Unfortunately the group was already on the edge of breaking apart, and I think some of the players thought the rule change was directed at them because it would have affected their characters.

The next option is to tell your players you are introducing the rule change and the game world is changing from a specified point forward.

The events that would have been effected are just going to sit as is, but you are allowing players to make adjustments to their characters. This can be accomplished by taking time out during the gaming session or by allowing them to make adjustments for the next session. This can work, but many times characters who have to change because of a rule change don't survive well.

I have seen characters die under this type of change. In the more drastic changes, like major game edition changes, characters who were created under one system just don't fit well into the new system. Even on a smaller scale this can happen. Changing how a wizard controls or casts their spells can make a big difference to their personality. I saw this in one campaign being ran in 2^nd edition Dungeons and Dragons (D&D). The GM wanted to move all spell caster to spontaneous casting which ruined one character that had created a personal quest of collecting spells.

You can also introduce the rule with allowing changes to the characters, except as they progress.

I have also seen this one done with poor results. Players have a part of themselves invested in the development of their characters. I've seen a player refuse to play the character they had developed because they felt the alteration of the campaign world eliminated a major part of the characters backstory, and thus personality. Similar to the D&D story above, but was dealing in a space opera setting.

From Unepic 

You can bring the group into the change and have them help provide a reason for the change to be introduced.

Change takes place and people have to adapt. The difference here is you are working together, as a group, to explain a change taking place in the present context of your game. You are not changing the history of earlier events. Our history deals with these sort of changes on a regular basis. We don't call them rule variants, but look back and you can see how a technological advancement has caused a paradigm shift for individuals, groups, societies, and the entire human population.

I recommend this last option for an additional reason—you are working with the other players. Developing a reason for the change with the players gets them invested in the change. I played in one fantasy setting (ran with Generic Universal Role Playing System (GURPS)) where the GM did this with the group. There ended up being more to the change in the campaign than just the rule change.

Players provided side stories that had taken place which led to a world changing event. Not only were we now effected by the rule variant, but we had a whole new storyline to our campaign. The GM used the information everyone provided, gave us some additional details at the next gaming session, and we were off and running again.

However you decide to introduce a change to a game you are running is up to you. I like to keep the group involved because we are getting together to enjoy the game we are all playing. When a person doesn't feel like they like the game being played, they will find a game they want to play.

If you have a comment, suggestion, or critique please leave a comment here or send an email to guildmastergaming@gmail.com.

You can also join Guild Master Gaming on Google+, Facebook, and Twitter (@GuildMstGmng).