A Campaign With No House Rules

[Asmor]

I've done this before - save for my Weapon Group Proficiency system, which has been adapted into all of my games.

So, in other words... No, no you haven't done this.

 

[JiCi]

Well, the only thing I'm using is the circumstance factor, presented in the DMG. Not really an house rule, but it hasn't caused any problem. I played by the book since the beginning and it worked just fine.

 

[Nyaricus]

So, in other words... No, no you haven't done this.

I'm just going to assume you unintentionally sounded sarcastic there

FWIW, I have run with nary a House Rule in sight before - it's just my players and I like my WGs, so we use them. It doesn't really deviate from the UA version, in any case - which was a case of symmetrical evolution; I crafted my Weapon Groups from the concept in Diablo II, whereas UA was using elements founded in AD&D in the Player's Option book.

cheers,
--N

 

[Nifft]

The official D&D rules keep getting closer to my house rules. 3.5e was fantastic for exactly this reason -- my house rule list dropped in half.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Andre]

Suppose you were to run a D&D campaign using WotC sourcebooks with no house rules at all. Basically, whatever is in the books stands (latest versions of course). Anyone ever done it? Disaster? Success? Problematic?

Reason I ask is, I make so many house rules to my games it begins to look like its own system. I have been wondering if perhaps I should simply run the game RAW. What are your thoughts?

I could probably pull it off with Hero system, since the rules specifically allow for customizing individual games fairly well.

Playing D&D strictly RAW (assuming everyone could agree what the RAW were)? Not a chance.

 

[frankthedm]

I was going to say that the RPGA does that already, but then I realized no, no they don't... Every RPGA campaign has a published list of standards and "house rules" to account for the unique nature of the RPGA and its games.

I think it's highly amusing that even WotC's own campaigns don't use the RAW.

Could i get a like to the current RPGA houserules?

 

[Felix]

You'll get along fine without house rules, though I imagine after a while of playing your group will develop a short list of customs that deviate from strict RAW. They come up unforseeably, but arn't something to be too concerned with.

As for allowing all WotC books... well, the more options provided, the increased likelyhood of divergent power levels in PCs. It won't happen necessarily, but it is potential. I reccommend requiring DM say-so for all non-core options. It may be a very light restriction, but at least you'll know what you have coming at you.



[aside]

Frank, that avatar is not fair: I keep thinking you're TeflonBilly.

[/aside]

 

[Roger]

I've been in a meetup.com D&D group for a number of months now, and a number of the games are very close to RAW, including a game that I've been in. It's been working pretty well, really.

D'oh, I lied -- we're using Action Points. But that's the only house rule I can think of that we're using.



Cheers,
Roger

 

[Asmor]

Could i get a like to the current RPGA houserules?

http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ebxe/welcome

This is the homepage for Xen'drik Expeditions. The Campaign Standards is what you're looking for. Some of the houserules are pretty standard stuff-- pointbuy and fixed HP to account for the fact that PCs have to be made without DM supervision-- but some things like expansion slots and equipment value is very unique.

http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=lg/welcome

That's Living Greyhawk. I've never played it, but I imagine it's pretty close.

 

[Emirikol]

I don't think it's possible to run a HR free game.

You have to make decisions for certain things like:
Do magic shops exist
What are the HR's for replacement characters
Are psionics allowed

Allowing non-core material IS a house rule.

jh