Which rule would you change?

A interesting question raised by PaulD on our club forum (c'mon, Paul, start a blog!), which I think merits a wider audience.

You can change one rule

But which would it be, and why?

By 'rule' I mean a mechanic or law for either a tabletop game or a campaign system, rather than unit statlines or points costs which is a whole 'nother can of worms. Perhaps I'm overly critical by nature, but I can't think of many games I've played even semi-regularly that don't have something questionable in them. Haven't found anything with Judge Dredd yet but it's probably only a matter of time...

So what one rule above all others would you re-write given the chance - or alternatively what ruleset is, as far as you're concerned, absolutely bulletproof?

As you can probably guess from a prior post, one of my answers would be 'the morale roll in Principles of War'. I think on reflection, 2d10 rather than 3d6 is where I'm leaning, and I might post the maths of that sometime soon.

Rob on our forum suggests the mortar rules in Op: Squad, which I have to confess to agreeing with - they are just a bit too accurate.

However, the all-time least favourite rule I (and I think several other folks) would get rid of is the one in WAB2 which says that if a character is part of a fleeing unit, the unit may not use that character's Ld for a rally check, 'cause, after all, there's no way a strong leader type shouldn't be able to persuade a bunch of nervous types to rally. I really like the WAB2 rules, but... sorry, Martin. That one has to go.

There you go. Food for a blog post, maybe?