Do You Use Your RPG Rules as Written?

[Remathilis]

99% of the time. I fix or ban what doesn't work.

 

[Agback]

I Would Like To, In Principle. But So Far I Have Never Come Across A Game That Does Everything I Want It To And That Does It All In A Way I Can Live With.

 

[Coplen]

No.

 

[Vancian Magic]

Technically, yes.

I prefer to stick to the rules of games where possible, and simply opt to run or play games with systems I like in order to do that, usually these are simpler ones or ones that can be 'added to' rather than trying to rip out rules I dislike.

I'm certainly not opposed to house rules or the like, but generally I find that I feel more comfortable with the established rules-as-written as a basis.

 

[The Green Adam]

Never

I refuse - I have yet to find a system so perfect that I didn't change/add/axe something.

AD

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Lately, always. My only gaming lately is with RPGA Living campaigns. I consider RPGA Living campaigns to be as close to RAW as you can be, even though the RPGA does outlaw a tiny handful of things and treasure and magic bookkeeping in RPGA Living campaigns is highly out of the ordinary. Plus the fact that RPGA Living campaigns enforce each and every FAQ and errata as extensions of the RAW.

A nice followup to this poll might be to ask whether one considers the FAQ and errata to be RAW.

 

[RFisher]

A qualified, “No”

While I have no qualms about drifting from the rules, I do like to give the rules a fair shake. I typically like to try to find out what the designer had in mind, find out what other people like about the rule, and then play with it for a while before changing it.

 

[Wyrmshadows]

I'm of the philosophy that the rules are there to support my setting, story and game and not the other way around. What the designers include as a rule is designed for the broadest common denominator of game which is, more often than not, not the kind of game I run. I am not a dungeon crawl GM/DM preferring instead RPing, intrigue, horror, wilderness, urban types of encounters, throwing the occasional "dungeon" in the mix as appropriate to the ongoing story.

I am not asking for the designers to cater to my needs alone. I do expect that RPing games will continue to be "rules as guidelines" as opposed to "rules as sacred scripture." As long as houseruling is an accepted part of the hobby I'll be a part of it. The day that I, as gamemaster, am reduced to mere arbiter of RAW is the day I stop spending my money on RPing games.

I was always curious in regards to RAW GMs/DMs. How do you differentiate one setting from another? If each of your settings have the same classes, races, spells, monsters, etc. (those found in the PHB) how is one setting different from another? Of course fluff is what helps to make a unique setting, but unique mechanical elements go a long way to giving a setting its own personality. Don't you find that following RAW creatively limiting?



Wyrmshadows

 

[Hussar]

I'm of the philosophy that the rules are there to support my setting, story and game and not the other way around. What the designers include as a rule is designed for the broadest common denominator of game which is, more often than not, not the kind of game I run. I am not a dungeon crawl GM/DM preferring instead RPing, intrigue, horror, wilderness, urban types of encounters, throwing the occasional "dungeon" in the mix as appropriate to the ongoing story.

I am not asking for the designers to cater to my needs alone. I do expect that RPing games will continue to be "rules as guidelines" as opposed to "rules as sacred scripture." As long as houseruling is an accepted part of the hobby I'll be a part of it. The day that I, as gamemaster, am reduced to mere arbiter of RAW is the day I stop spending my money on RPing games.

I was always curious in regards to RAW GMs/DMs. How do you differentiate one setting from another? If each of your settings have the same classes, races, spells, monsters, etc. (those found in the PHB) how is one setting different from another? Of course fluff is what helps to make a unique setting, but unique mechanical elements go a long way to giving a setting its own personality. Don't you find that following RAW creatively limiting?



Wyrmshadows

No, not at all.

There are so many elements in 3e that you couldn't possibly use all of them, no matter how many campaigns you ran.

Even if you stick to core, there are still so many different options available that you couldn't play them all.

All you have to do is look at the various "campaign in a box" modules that have come out for 3e. I would hardly say that Shackled City, Rappan Athuk, World's Largest Dungeon, and Savage Tide are limited in their ideas or scope. Nor would I say that, other than they all are meant to be run using 3e rules, they are all that similar in setting.

 

[racoffin]

No. I tend to modify the rules to fit my game, to correct a problem, and so forth.