D&D 5E What houserules do we assume is common in the community?

[Vaalingrade]

Darkvision is darkvision instead of a weird disadvantage hokey-pokey.

 

[MarkB]

And what about things that don't have a die roll? like invisibility?

The rule is specific to healing potions.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Flanking is one that a lot of players seem to assume is in play.

I dislike this one but I think it is common if not universal.

 

[Quickleaf]

Flanking is one that a lot of players seem to assume is in play.

Very true. Almost every player coming from 3e or PF who I GM'ed for would ask about flanking.

I still se holding your action come up, but this is rare.

I can see a lot of 4d6-L or standard array being common.

Actually, yeah, I saw many of my new players ask for what amounted to Holding their action with no specific trigger in mind, just to see what would happen, buy some time to review something on their sheet, or wait for inspiration to strike. I saw that almost as much as I saw the surprise "house rule."

 

[ad_hoc]

I dislike this one but I think it is common if not universal.

Really? I could see it being common among players who come from 3e but I doubt it is used at most tables.

It is also just a bad rule so I can see some tables trying it but then dropping it.

 

[Stalker0]

Clerics and paladins can cast spells with sword and shield regardless of component needs

 

[Minigiant]

Bloodied at 50% HP and people can do cheesy stuff against bloodied foes.

 

[Oofta]

Clerics and paladins can cast spells with sword and shield regardless of component needs

Not according to the rules on spellcasting for spells with somatic components.
"...the caster must have free use of at least one hand to perform these gestures."

If you have a shield equipped and are holding a weapon you do not have a free hand.

 

[Pedantic]

Really? I could see it being common among players who come from 3e but I doubt it is used at most tables.

It is also just a bad rule so I can see some tables trying it but then dropping it.

The Level Up take that moves it from advantage to a +d4 to hit makes it significantly less overwhelming.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Unless it is a very rigidly RAW DM I expect Nat 20s and 1s to get some sort of special treatment on ability checks. It may not be auto-success/failure per se, but the RAW approach of not making them special at all is clearly out of sync with the overall D&D zeitgeist of these rolls being special.

I expect the rule that it takes an action to equip or unequip a shield to be ignored. I don't have particularly strong feelings on this, it's just that few tables seem to be aware of the rule, many of those that are aware don't enforce it, and I think it's a rule best left forgotten.

I have found that when it comes time to drink a potion there's about a 50% chance of someone asking whether it is an action or bonus action. While I'm inclined to think the RAW answer of "action" seems to be in the minority, I can say with much more certainty that people definitely expect tables to differ on this point, players who have had multiple groups are probably more likely than not to have known multiple rules on this point, and many people struggle to remember which rule is enforced at a particular table they play at.

By similar reasoning I suspect about half of tables must not calculate crit damage right, because how it is done is discussed at least once every 2nd or 3rd session (unless a VTT is calculating it for people). Personally I don't really care whether people double the roll total or double the dice rolled. I personally prefer the latter (RAW) option as it is less streaky, but I suppose if you don't play with extra dice right in front of you that becomes cumbersome.