By the book or house rules?

[Erekose]

Conversation about 3.5 Edition has included comments about how it will negate the need for many house rules that players use and this has started me thinking about why people create house rules.

In my opinion it seems to fall into two camps:

(1) Flavour - i.e. changes to the rules to enhance the campaign

(2) Mechanics - i.e. something is "broken" in the underlying rules and needs to be patched

In the campaign that I DM there are many examples of flavour house rules, e.g. the paladin, ranger and bard have all been modified as only the cleric, druid, sorcerer and wizard classes can cast spells.

These flavour changes are unlikely to be changed by any new edition to the rules. I appreciate that this isn't, and couldn't possibly be, what 3.5E is for as it presumably addresses problems with the underlying mechanics.

In fact, it makes me wonder how many players play purely "by the book" and include no flavour house rules. I would imagine this is mainly in official campaigns, like Forgotten Realms, rather than home brew campaigns?

 

[Bagpuss]

I've been playing by the book. I thought I would atleast for my first campaign until I knew the rules. Now since we don't exclusively play D&D all the time, my first campaign is only up to about level 10. So I will be playing by the book for a while.

 

[Celtavian]

re

I don't think any edition of D&D will eliminate the need for house rules. This new edition does eliminate the need for widespread house rules for spells like Harm and Time Stop. I think it encourages an even greater degree of creativity amongst the player base.

Gamers are by nature creative. Personally, one of the things I most loved about 3rd edition D&D was the way they included more guidelines for creating house rules. In previous editions of D&D, you were exceedingly limited in the actions you could take and there were very few guidelines for creating new rules. Now, creating your own rules such as feats, spells, monsters and just about anything associated with D&D is supported by the game system.

It sounds like 3.5 is even more friendly to the entire process of designing for your own campaign. I would say 3.5 will only further spur creativity while at the same changing certain aspects of D&D that 80% or more of the consumer base agreed needed to change.

 

[s/LaSH]

I'll run basic stuff by the book - actual actions and spells - but sometimes I'll mix and match at a higher level to allow for the weirder things I can do to the PCs. About the simplest was creating a druid/cleric hybrid class (with all class abilities from both classes at one level) which is only broken if you don't compare it to the other PCs...

3.5 won't change the fact that I do crazy, crazy stuff, but maybe it'll make it easier...

 

[candidus_cogitens]

In the campaign that I DM there are many examples of flavour house rules, e.g. the paladin, ranger and bard have all been modified as only the cleric, druid, sorcerer and wizard classes can cast spells.

Pardon the digression . . . but I would be very interested in seeing these alternate versions of paladin, ranger and bard.

I too have thought about dumping the spells from the paladin and ranger classes. But as for the bard, I've actually entertained the notion of making him MORE of a spellcaster. Historically, the bard was a kind of druid, after all.

 

[el-remmen]

I've got a ton of flavor "house rules" that can affect mechanics. . .

Rulings regarding how wizards get new spells, rules of conduct for monks and paladins, house rules to allow for a more archery focused ranger, and changes to the all the non-human races - and things that are important to me like making everyone spell skill points for literacy - and it only being a class skill for rogues, wizards and clerics (I still call them priest).

Oh yeah, and the biggest change is to the generic cleric class which I really can't stand - with customized spell lists for each deity so that priest of healing gods don't get access to flame strike - or so that priests of Thor can cast lightning bolt, and the like.

Oh, and for me 3.5 will just mean a new set or rules to sift thru to take what I want and leave what I don't.

 

[2d6]

My group used to use excessive mechanics type house rules for things like hit location, combat endurence, special combat moves, and things of that nature. We dumped all the house rules shortly before the player option books came out and never added any back in when we switched to 3E. Not even to Harm *gasp*


2d6

 

[Erekose]

Originally posted by candidus_cogitens
Pardon the digression . . . but I would be very interested in seeing these alternate versions of paladin, ranger and bard.

I'm more than happy to send you these. In essence, the ranger follows the "archer-ranger" model and has a pool of archer feats similar to the way the fighter has a pool of feats. The paladin gains "divine protection" rather than spells which works similar to the standard barbarian's damage resistance. In our campaign the barbarian is customised to be more like a berserker and so loses damage resistance and armour proficiencies but gains an AC bonus like the monk (but based on CON).

As for the bard, this class is based more on the skald than the druid. And so he is more of a fighter and less of a spell caster.

 

[Erekose]

Originally posted by nemmerle
Oh yeah, and the biggest change is to the generic cleric class which I really can't stand - with customized spell lists for each deity so that priest of healing gods don't get access to flame strike - or so that priests of Thor can cast lightning bolt, and the like.

This is very similar to what we've done. Every cleric has his/her own spell list which mirror the attributes of their deity.

What I would like to do, but haven't done yet, is come up with an alternative version of the arcane schools for wizards based on the elements.

 

[HellHound]

I was once the crown prince of house rules. But in the past eight years that changed a lot.

First it was Vampire Revised. For the first time ever, I started running an RPG 'by the book' (for the rules at least, I still use 'house rules' in the shape of new bloodlines and thaumaturgical powers and rituals).

Then came 3e. Once again, my house rules flew out the window. I use a lot of 'house rules' in the form of prestige classes, new feats, etc, but the actual MECHANICAL rules are the ones from the books.