Do you go in RAW 100%?

[Dannyalcatraz]

Anyone going into design really needs to play things that are not D&D, and play them RAW, before trying to "improve on D&D."

I can agree with that.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It isn't like I have an auditor check my work, or anything. I do not find purity of sufficient value to concern myself about it.

I’d say your players are your auditors. If they’re having fun, you’ve passed your audit.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

So I am curious.
Who here would claim that they play ANY TTRPG 100% rules as written with no alterations or omissions? House ruling things not covered by published rules would be allowed but if there is a rule for it, you have to use that rule 100% unaltered for a situation it applies to. 40+ yrs in the hobby and I know I never have. I suspect it can only really be possible for games that have properly minimalist rulesets. But let's say any edition or incarnation of Dungeons and Dragons. Have you every played it 100% straight up RAW with no alterations or ommisions?

I've played loads of RPGs RAW (certainly no knowing omissions obviously there are known omissions and unknown omissions).

I'm surprised that you don't think this happens.

Though not as surprised as I was by the title I admit...

Will we still be playing 100% un-altered rules 20+ sessions into a campaign? Harder to say, but like, let's look at some kinda random examples:

1) WEG Star Wars, DarkStryder campaign - We certainly played through the first book of the campaign (at which point the DM gave up for unclear-to-this-day reasons, I suspect not really game-related) absolutely rules-as-written (I don't think I can ever write "RAW" the same way again, you scoundrel!).

2) Daggerheart - So far, we have no reason to change or modify any rules beyond the ones suggested to be modified by the campaign setting, which I don't count because the game said so. If I think of anything we've changed I'll add it.

3) 2E AD&D - We played it a lot more rules-as-written than a lot of people did, primarily because I was exposed some other people's house rules early on, pages and pages of them, and they were, even to me at 11 or 12, obviously mostly drivel and showing in many cases (and this is something I often see with house rules) that the people writing them just didn't understand the existing rules. But we definitely used a lot of optional rules and certain "takes" on some rules which I know were not the conventional take, and I don't think we used any of the default rolling chargen rolling methods for long. Players Option kicked in later too. I'm not quite sure what would count as rules-as-written in the very complex rules-environment 2E was in but we certainly weren't playing it 100% that way, just a lot more that way than most. 2E was also the most "fudging"-necessary-feeling RPG I've ever run.

4) Cyberpunk 2020 - I do not think we changed or omitted any non-optional rules, though we certainly interpreted some. Still, pretty close to rules-as-written I'd say.

5) Shadowrun 2E - I know we had some house rules in SR2, because some stuff just didn't work right, and I discussed it a lot on the old Shadowland.org (ah bygone days!) messageboard, and people had some good fixes and adjustments.

6) 3E D&D - We used quite a lot of house rules and optional rules because frankly 3E kinda sucked hard rules-as-written in the base books.

7) Spire - I actually made several rules changes after a couple of sessions, which made it more like Heart, in some ways, mechanically. I did run them by the game's creator on the Discord and he thought they made sense, so there's that.

I could go on. I would say if we play an older game eventually we'll come across a rule that's either mechanically broken or just doesn't improve the game and we'll likely change that, but I think whilst I'm very much in favour of people feeling enabled to change rules, we don't often do it.

 

[Fenris-77]

There is a difference between using rules that are 100% RAW and using 100% of the RAW presented in a book (not counting optional rules, naturally). Not using all the rules is pretty common with complex systems, people either forget or simply can't be bothered (Bardic Inspiration anyone?).

 

[Tigris]

Hmmm...

Luckily, I was able to intuit what your intention was.

Perhaps this means my intellect is even higher.

Bonus Goldblum to show it's all in good fun...

... and gratuitous Goldblum, just to enjoy it.

The end.

"Research confirms that finding or making spelling errors is not a direct measure of high or low intelligence, as no significant correlation exists between spelling ability and overall cognitive capacity.
Spelling is largely a function of memory and pattern recognition, not intellectual capability. Instead,, The Independent notes that focusing on, or judging, these errors is often used as a form of social, intellectual, or elitist, judgment. "

 

[GreyLord]

Depends on the game.

Do we also include Role Playing Boardgames?

I Know some of those we have, and especially with some of those by FFG that required an app to run, or others that could be used with an app (like Gloomhaven), or those that were run on a computer (like Gloomhaven).

It depends on the complexity, how complete the rules are, etc.

 

[bloodtide]

Depends on the game.

I play Daggerheart, Marvel Super Heroes, Toon, and Star Trek Adventures RAW. But then they are tiny games with only a couple of rule books, and very little homebrew content out there. They are also short games that don't last very long anyway. Even a "long adventure" is only like three weeks.

But D&D, no RAW there. I'm from the Time Before Time when most D&D books....right in the front....said something like "The scribbles in this book are suggestions. If you don't like them don't use them. Feel free to make up anything you want and have fun". And I sure did so....

 

[Celebrim]

There is a difference between using rules that are 100% RAW and using 100% of the RAW presented in a book (not counting optional rules, naturally). Not using all the rules is pretty common with complex systems, people either forget or simply can't be bothered (Bardic Inspiration anyone?).

There is a difference, but deliberately excluding or choosing not to use certain rules is itself a house rule. Similarly, if the system provides a large number of optional rules, specifying the list of which optional rules are in force is also a house rule.