while i find that playing too many house rules can weaken players ( playing within the limitations strengthens players ability to react within the game structure ) , and CAN turn off new gamers (can , not necessarily will ) ; if people want to play house rules in their small groups , i am all for that as long as new players learn the full real rules before you add in house rules , and know the difference between the 2 .

i tend to take this very seriously because i have run a number of games and volunteered for a couple game companies , and have had SERIOUS problems when people who played house rules came in to play in store events using the actual rules . i've seen the fun run out of a weekend of special events because players didnt know what they were doing and took it personaly when the event organisers over ruled them . we had one guy that was so sure he knew it all , that when the GM sited rules and faq ruleings from the official web site ( that the gamer claimed he visited often ) , refused to accept that there was such a thing as an FAQ , threw a temper tantrum about it , and sent his girlfriend to kinkos to have her print out the information from the website , and as bad as all that was , when she returned with the information that proved the GM was right , he went ballistic. in the past we have even come dangerously close to brawls involving several people , and because of store politics at the time , we werent allowed to drop the players from the tournys . thankfully things have changed when my FLGS got new owners .

so just keep that in mind as you play house rules and grow your groups , cause even if you plan on playing at home , its always a good idea to be able to play straight up factory rules so you and the rest of your group can participate in store or community events , becaue its another opprotunity to meet and gain new players .

i have made a ton of house rules like urban warfare , fortifications , airplane rules , etc............ , they are rules to fill in gaps , untill official rules come out to replace them . but we dont always play them , and i go to great lengths of playtesting and give great thought to making sure they compliment but dont interfere with the core game .

when i am demoing the game , its always straight up rules , no house rules at all .

i want the players to judge the game for its own sake and on its own merits .

later on if new players want to play the house rules , we can , but we dont have to .

as such , i got in 4 games today , 2 were demo games to a new player , and when i go back in 2 weeks , the guy i demoed it to expects to have bought his starter and be ready to begin .

and just a reminder , next sunday is mothers day , so plan accordingly .

I agree . . . maybe I'm a purist and like having clear, concise rules. Call me crazy, but I like playing the game as it is.

If I am playing outside my home, then I agree. But, within my own home, why not? That said, I have no house rules for this game. I like it as is.

I'm thinking about useing bunkers, aka pill boxes in my games. Defender gets them, and you get two at 2 pts. They replace any blocking terrain. Count as hard cover. I'm hoping DT will have them in the future. But, I agree, if your going to conventions better brush up on the OFFICAL rules. I have not the time nor the resources to go to them anymore. I know of no store in my area that even runs tourneys.

The same is somewhat true in surgical training. Surgical residents have a habit of modifying textbook surgical techniques in their FIRST surgeries. We are generally advised by our senior surgeons to first follow the textbook approach, master it, and when we know the RATIONALE why the textbook approach suggests this or that kind of procedure, then we could probably begin modifying some techniques which we believe will improve the surgery.

This game is still relatively new to most people. It's always good advice to play it and MASTER it according to the rules by which the game was founded.

That said, I believe that eventually some house rules will emerge far superior than the rest, and will enhance the game for many people. When that time comes, it's best to look at them with an open mind.

Just my 2 cents' worth.

The Weary Warrior said:

i actually went a little further with my pill boxes in that they can be placed anywhere in the zone of cover on back into the defenders depolyment zone . i also have different versions at different costs . though we treat them kinda like an immobile walker . they are in my combat fortifications rules in the boardgamegeek files section on the dust page .

so far i have house rules for mine fields , pillboxes , bunkers , barbed wire , dugouts , wordy but simple rules for urban warfare , and airplanes . we playtested them each thuroughly before we came to our final rules versions . but we only use any of the about 60ish % of the time . they are all designed as add ons , so you can take it or leave it , and not as something that dominates a game .

despite being the person who originated most of them and made the effort to playtest and ring them out , my favorite among them are the mine field rules they can really add in some chaos when deployed right . my second favorite are the airplane rules .

Agreed 100% Kris. At a LOTR GT I had one opponant argue when I pulled him up on a rule stating as thats how his club played it, but showing him the relevent page prooved his club was wrong, but thats how he was taught the game. I very rarely house-rule over an existing rule (not done so with DT) but do love adding in extra's that are missing from the main rules set.

elfbait said:

i think thats also another aspect of my resistance to alot of house rules .

thus far my house rules have almost all been to fill holes in the rules , not change them . the only exceptions are specific to certain units like airplanes that became exceptons to some core rules to make them fit the game . other than that i leave the core rules alone .

before this game came out i was already running hard preping for it , so the weekend it hit shelves i demoed it at a convention , and the following week straight i did demos so by a week in i was already at 40 some odd games . i had already run through so many games and seen so many situations unfold that when some one posted to complain about a trend they saw in the 2 or 3 games they played , i had seen it and how it was countered a dozen times or more .

while most players are basing their need for house rules on a limited amount of play , they dont see the bigger PUZZLE that i get to peek at .

right now im some where around the 240ish mark , so i have seen the game unfold under so many circumstances , i see the rationale behind the rules and player situations alike .

additionaly i have had a lot of experience in minis games , and haveing seriously gotten into WH40K 20 years ago , i have no problem putting in effort to build terrain and game materials/aids to fill out the game space or help in play .

well before this game came out , i was so enthused that we gridded off the twin sized bed sheest so that we can play on battle fields up to just shy of 6X8 FEET , so we have played from 3boardsX3boards on up , and have seen how the game plays out on larger fields , how unlimited range weapons play out at longer range , how the game scales up beyond 16 points , how 16 points plays out on a larger table , how the game plays with little and lots of terrain , etc ........... its not just seeing how the game plays out on a larger field , but how ALL the combination of circumstances play out and effect each other over the course of an extended time .

i dont look at it from a point of "i know more than the rest of you" , or "i'm smarter than the rest of you" , but rather i have put forth the effort and had a chance to gain experience that alot of other people have not , and i have watched a variety of players form different back grounds and how they react or treat a situation or rule .

and this goes beyond just DT . having played minis games for 20 years , i have seen the problems other games have had and how newer games fix or worsen those problems , and how dust tactics has dealt with those same problems . so far they seem to have fixed them all , either through well planned out rules , or by leaving them out of the rules all together in some circumstances .

and while there are a few rules i would like to see , i wont even attempt to house rule them in because i see the problems leaving them out solves and the ripple effect of the problems it would cause to bring them in .

Eh, I am 75/25 on this. Mostly bc I played a lot of apocalypse games in 40k but, if Dust Tactics gets that big then by all means. I can see rules being changed for house rules to be wrong, but house rules to be used for house units and house terrain maybe a little different. I took down some of my house rules because they change the rules. Now my additional rules and units I don't see a problem with. They aren't changing the rules and it just expands on the game. Like your building rules they are just to be used within a group of us. When I teach people to play I teach them the straight rules. I won't let them use the additional rules until they have a firm grasp of the core rules. This is also why they say unofficial. Now I've had the complete opposite of you Kris and have gone to a 40k tournaments where the whole store knows about some stupid house rule and you wont know about it until you start playing. I just walked over to the store owner saying I am withdrawing from the tournament and I would like a refund for not knowing the house rule and they gladly gave me a refund and I have yet to play in a tournament there again. Now I hate, absolutely hate people who use the ruling "well it doesn't say I doesn't so therefore it does." My FLGS uses common sense when it comes to ruling if its not in the rulebook or FAQ he will ask the person what there arguement is. He will automatically rule in the opposites favor if you say that quote or even slightly hint in that quote.

arkangl said:

i dont really count against home made units , though i may debate against its abilities or values based on the risk it has to the fairness of the game . if some one wants to bring a home made unit against an experienced player for non tourny games , i have absolutly no roblme as long as their opponent fully agrees to the values and stats so that its fair for all .

the idea of bringing in a piece of cheese with the idea that your opponent could also bring in a broken piece does change the game in that it changes the purpose of the game and takes away alot of the fun , because you are not playing against your opponent as much as dictating what YOU are going to make them bring .

a custome unit should be killable by standard game pieces of equal or lesser value , and should be playtested thuroughly before you finalize the values and cost .

custom unit abilities only really effect how that unit interacts with the battle game , not how all units interact with the game .

my biggest concern is against those rules that change the core mechanics or add in mechanics that change the way the game is played beyond a special scenario or event .

for instance my urban warfare rules dont actually change the mechanics of the game , as much as provide special terrain elements and break them down to make them playable in the game . i expect some of those might change after sealowe since its supposed to have building rules . and the urban warfare rules ONLY effect or create urban battle fields , so when we are not in an urban battle field they have no effct on the game at all .

my airplane rules on the other hand DO have game mechanic changes that apply to the airplanes themselves to make them fit into the game , and still represent the drastic dif. between them and ground units . i expect when FFG releases the aircraft rules , we will see some mechanics changes , though i suspect their will be vastly different from mine . at that point i will revise or remove mine once their are out .

the one gripe i have about alot (NOT ALL) of the custome units i have seen on the web is that because this game is so new , and because so many people are cranking them out , the values are all over the place , and alot of units are just screwy . while most players are not trying to cheat , alot of their units are not fair to their opponents . and while i understand people getting all hyped up , when they make units , they tend to imagine making it for the limited game they play on the small board they have when they start , so they dont seem to understand how those rules drasticly custom unit abilities change and can become broken as the board or points values grow . you really need to understand the game and examine it from all the different angles in all the different options , otherwise as the game grows you will either end up with a bunch of broken/useless units or redoing all your work to restat them and change their abilities .

see thats why I use standards for making my units especially the tanks. While I overlook my typos I sat down and wrote a chart for each stat and ability. Then the points are based on those stats. Maybe I should release this stat chart on my blog so ppl can make there stuff more equal rather than over powering. Even a lot of my superheroes can be killed by a simple squad or a tank. I mean captain america and wolverine can be killed by just a single luther or a recon squad. I've seen it done.

arkangl said:

i dont even use a chart for the pont values , but i have made some to break things down by caliber and mount type . in the end i always rely on playtesting the heck out of something to get it right . because of all the games i have seen , i usually get it pretty close in the beginning so it just needs a little tweak , but sometimes , like with the airplanes , it takes alot of adjusting , and can be a pain because adjusting one sticking point can create another somewhere else in how it plays out . the planes were a major headache to work out , but were worth it to make them work so well . i will be sad to see them go when FFG releases their own rules

part of the problem is this is a world wide game . and posting things to a blog doesnt get everyone info because there are tons of blogs and fan sites with dust fan content that dont vistit other sites . even as great as BGG is and even with it having been around for 10 years , there are tons of other sites with players that have never even heard of it or just dont go there , just look at yahoo groups . .

even posting them here in the forums with a sticky wouldnt solve the problem since even this forum is a small community with a limited number of people who come here regularly . thousands of people may visit the FFG main site page in a day , but only a fraction of them will actuially go into the forums . i my self am guilty of it too .

see this is why I supply links to other site and I am trying to get those ppl to work as one. If we do the dust community can make standards and say yay or nay on ppl doing stuff like that. 40k is the same way but the bigs ones have an alliance between themselves. Like Bell of Lost Souls, From the Warp, and Jawaballs. All their sites provide links to the other and even have feeds to the other. Hell if its ok with you I was going to add your stuff to my blog to expand ppls ideas.

but thats still part of the issue . even some of those big 40k fansites have dust stuff on them that you only find if some one stummbles across it (like "by his masters voice" which was posted on DAKKA DAKKA ) , plus all the yahoo groups plus all the DT fan blog sites , plus all the independant sites that have blogs on them .

DT doesnt have single big fan site yet that contains all the stuff itself . the closest thing we have to a major listing is BGG simply because they give us a page just like every one else .

and there are alot of people that buy a game and dont visit anyones site but their own .

i dont really go out to visit anyones blog sites because there are so many that even the linked ones become a spider web of trying to remember which one and where something was .

additionaly there is a dif. between blog sites and forums as forums are generally more interactive where as blogs tend to be more personal . thats another reason why i havent started my own blog on BGG ( they offer that as another option to those that want to do so on their site )

because i do use this site and BGG alot , if i see some one post something cool , i may follow a link to it on some ones blog , but thats where i generaly stop .

i use dakka dakka for some things because they allow photo hosting so i can upload a pic to their site and they will host it so i can display it in messages on other sites like BGG .

alot of my other visits to fan sites have been because i saw a picture that interests me when i googled something related to dust , followed the link , and checked it out , but probably wont ever see their site again .

short of one of us winning the lottery and paying to start a single big dust fan site that can host pics , provide forums and blogs host files and list auctions , even as many of us as there are and will be , we will still just a bunch of scattered fans .

and as far as my content , once i post it at BGG , i dont care what people do with it as long as they give me credit , tell them it was originaly posted at the geek ("this was originaly posted by grandinquisitorkris at over at boardgamegeek " ) , and if special circumstance arises later pull it if i request them to (wich isnt likely now since i know what to hold onto for later and what to post openly right away) .

Kris I'm with you in theory, but is this really a problem? Demos, teaching new players and store events I agree should remain straight out of the book. But I've almost never seen anyone get confused between house rules and official rules. I guess it comes down to who you play with. I mostly play with gaming vets that always take the time to learn the rules first.

it CAN , as i noted above in the examples of events i have been part of .

and as you said , in your group , you guys always take the time to learn the rules first , but i have seen first hand what happens to those groups that dont take that time .

with alot of the house rules i have seen that change or add mechanics of the game . if they dont teach new players the regular rules first , then new players are at a disadvantage when playing some place else .

perfect example , i have a friend who plays WH40K in a small home group . his friends that he has played the game with cant go down to the local game store and play against other players because they are playing a hybrid mixing of 1st , 2nd , fifth edition , and "common sense" . so if they read about a tourny and decide to go play it , they are screwed because they only play with an patchwork of rules that they all think are great , but since none of the learned the real rules first , they rely on "this is how we play it " . my friend is the only person who knows the real rules out of a group of 8 or 10 players , the rest all just rely on him to make rulings . they rest of the group COULD learn the rules , but they dont even know just how much they dont know .

and the game community here is full of small home groups like that .

i think alot of the house rules some groups come up with address problems , or later get "clunky" when the game scales up in size and area .

i also believe that playing to many house rules to much of the time weakens players skills as they start to rely on those house rules to much , so that when presented with a game or series of games that dont use those rules (such as a tourny or at a convention ) they are at a disadvantage . about 30-40% of our games dont use any of the house rules we have made . we are just as compfortable with them as without them .

GrandInquisitorKris said:

Wow, I feel good after hearing GrandInquisitorKris' affirmation of DT rules. My buddy and I (we come from 'traditional' wargame background) have decided to adopt our very first miniatures game and we have chosen DT even though it is a hydrid of mini and boardgame. We bought all the expansions there are currently and am waiting for more to arrive. With so much cash plonked into a single game, DT better be worth it. After we started playing DT, we now know the money is well-spent. We had so much fun with it. Of course it doesn't hurt to have an expert further extol the virtues of DT, it only makes my wallet more glad to have spend what it spent on DT.

Oh, may I add that we never use any house rules at all and don't feel the need to. Maybe it's because of our background, we want to keep DT 'pure' and close to what the original designers intended it to be. But we do come up with our own scenarios which were loads of fun to play using purely only those units released so far

thnx , but i wouldnt call my self an expert , just a very enthused gamer who has had enough experience and skill ( at modding and craftyness ) to take this game beyond the limits of just what came in the box .

glad to hear we have another fan to add to the community .