Opinions on rule rigidity are many. I fall int the “fix it if it is not working for you” camp.

Let’s face it our games are ours from the minute we buy them.

They are obviously the toil of another, but creative providence, within the limits of our own game space is from that point, up to us.

I have played military miniature war games and RPG’s for as long as I care to remember and the consistent theme is; if you do not like a rule, change it. This is followed up with the concept that the game has to be fun and fulfilling or it will not get played, so balancing all these factors is the primary goal of rules changes.

To be blunt, if I am going to spend the better part of a weeks wages, many hours painting and playing, then I reserve the right to make the game anything I want it to be. Weighing this also against the size my fairly small and insulated gaming group, little harm will be done.

Examples of the types of house rules I mean are;

• Card activation for ships/planes in Wings of Glory or X Wing etc to allow for solo play.

• Leader command zone range (equal to their stars) and single figure stacking in Heroes of Normandie for more realistic unit compositions and command and control simulation. This also allows for solo play with a revised turn sequence and makes leaders lead from the front which is a systemic loop-hole in HoN.

Zombicide Black Plague looks like it is going to be a winner, blending a stunning board game with a semi RPG vibe and the co-op/solo synergy I have grown to like.

One of the most common threads when researching the game however, is one of regular house ruling. The game is fine as is, worts and all, but there is a strong lean by most players, veteran or new, to fix or modify several elements of the game for better balance, fun or both, especially when you go past the base sets. The designers have left the door open here, making a system that has room for easy changes and it seems has plenty of need/opportunity to do so. Nothing is perfect, but some things feel more mutable than others.

Here are a few I have come across and will likely use:

• The Ballista can only be used/activated by one character a turn.

• The Ballista has limited ammo (6 bolts).

• The Ballista cannot kill spectral zombies (which are considered to be incorporeal spirits, a different way of raising the dead). The way the game is going for me, each Necromancer is going to have their “pet” undead, so maybe Mizar will be the keeper of spirits?

• The Ballista cannot go into a building, but can fire into one (the shot does not travel through the building zone).

• The Ballista will do damage differently to different targets, hurting big ones a lot more if specifically targeted, or capable of taking out multiple targets over several zones (as written).

• The Spectral Zombies are treated more as ghosts, so they can only be hurt by Dragon Bile, magic or magic weapons, or simply avoided. Zombies that are not zombies? Does not sit right. Ghosts on the other hand add much.

• They can also move through walls treating all zones as clear for moving. This makes them more dynamic and they effectively replace the Crows. This also makes them a different threat.

• The Dragon is going to be an Abomination, just bigger and scarier (a blend of the best bits of the Bosses pack and its current self). This comes from my dual desire to add a bigger nasty (with the new Abomination rules, see below), without getting even more figures and to use the Dragon that I already have in a better and less abstract way. I will give it different attack types, randomly rolled including spawning (regurgitating) zombies as an option. It feels a little toothless at the moment and the building crushing rule, effectively taking a victory marker out of bounds (instant game over), seems poorly thought out.

• For added variety, Abomination abilities may have randomly generated abilities on spawning (see necromancers below).

• Abominations are now Multi hit point (likely 6 using a d6 as a marker) with an armour save based on threat level. The characters get 1 XP for each hit they inflict, sharing the victory. The Dragon is tougher than the others (more hits or tougher armour or both), the Wulf-bomination faster, but maybe less tough. This allows anyone to possibly hurt an abomination, but one attack kills are much less likely. If I do not get the Wulfzburg expansion, there will not be a lot of 3 hit weapon and character options available, so this evens that out somewhat and makes Abominations a little tougher overall.

• The Wulvz and W-bomination are used on a scenario basis as replacements for runners and standard Abominations, likely with Faolan or Falstaff, who may be able to re-animate them if destroyed (I only have the Huntsman pack of 3 and 1).

• Deadeyes will need to roll to hit (4+), just like everyone else. This seems logical as they are mechanically steady handed and cool headed, being dead, but are also less instinctive and slower, so why would they hit everything they aim at?

• The party will always be made up of random characters (I have 30 to chose from). This makes sense. You cannot pick who survives after all. This may create some tough games, but each will be interesting and it avoids the same favourite/tough/synergic characters hitting the table over again. Players will however be allowed to swap out their drawn character with another player.

• I will make up a roster for the Necromancers, allowing them to effectively be any Necro in the game (maybe even random abilities rolled for during the same game?). They are powerful NPC’s after all. This mixes up the enemy without chasing more figs. I may even come up with a few of my own. Some of the nastier survivors may be pressed into service as necro’s to, like Falstaff (who is based on Dracula, renamed “The Impaler”) or Mizar (who is just evil looking and may become “The Reaper”). I do after all have nearly 40, so shifting a few makes sense.

I have plenty of figures for this game and the thought of buying more quite expensive extras when they really only add more painting and minor mechanical changes does not sit well. House ruling allows me game variety while staying within my purchase envelope and will give several figures more use.

The intention is to make a single spawn deck with necromancer based add-ins with every creature represented. This means avoiding or changing the crazy strong ones and diluting the deck logically. I may even replace the spawn deck with a progressive table (is there no end to my meddling?). Progressive tables reduce the fully random nature of a flat table as nothing can be rolled again until the table has been completely rotated through.

All of the above can be printed out on a master roster for all players to see, replacing the rules book versions.