Do You Use Your RPG Rules as Written?

[Mark]

(. . .) even the smallest and/or most insignificant of houserules would disqualify you from answering yes.

That is true. There are, or should be, very few people answering "yes" to this poll. There is only a "better way of asking" this question, though, if it was not the question intended to be asked, which is not the case. The thread and the posts that follow allow for people to explain their answer to the poll question should they feel the need to elaborate.

 

[Desdichado]

I use all kinds of rules as written.

There's also a few that I change. Mostly, I take advantage of the somewhat modular nature of d20 and switch stuff around from other sources.

 

[delericho]

Mostly yes. For games that aren't my 'system of choice' (currently 3.5e D&D), I don't play them enough to bother house ruling them except in clearly game-breaking cases. (For my next WFRP campaign, I'll be house ruling armour and shields, because they're just too damn good currently.)

For 4e, my intention is to run our first games completely without house rules, and then see. The feeling I got from reading the rules was that, although there was quite a lot I didn't like, I would probably not bother with house rules - either live with it as-is, or abandon the system entirely.

Even with my 'system of choice', I generally try not to house rule too much. In my experience, these games tend to work better with fewer house rules, especially if using pre-published adventures. The days when I all but rewrote the system to suit myself are long gone.

 

[Steely Dan]

By the tail-end of 3rd Ed it was a glorious orgy of 3.5, UA variants and Saga for my group, but for now, with 4th Ed, we're playing it as is.

 

[El Mahdi]

I voted no. I don't veiw the rules as "RULES". I see them as a structure or tool for me to use in achieving a goal (telling a story, killing bad guys, taking their stuff, and above all - having fun). I will bend, twist, and outright break them in order to maintain the overall purpose of the game. When the game is fun, my players don't really seem to care whether we are following the letter of the rules or not.

 

[Wyrmshadows]

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.

I would argue that if you can, with little effort hot-swap said adventures into any generic D&D setting, they are fundamentally the same. Of course the plots and locales are different, but they use the same bricks and mortar to build them. That is the strength of these types of adventures, they are made to be placed anywhere. My post wasn't implying that RAW based adventures are all the same, I was inferring that RAW based settings are fundamentally the same because if they all use the same rules they will all largely have the same feel.

Any one of these could fit on Greyhawk or the Forgotten Realms. However they would take much more work to fit in (if they could fit at all):

Athas
Midnight
The Diamond Throne
Dawnforge
Ravenloft
Violet Dawn
Hyboria
and others that break strongly from the RAW of the PHB and DMG.

The striking similarities that exist between settings and adventures that rely on RAW are, by necessity, far greater than the similarities between those that rely on RAW and those that don't. Therefore the generic, vanilla RAW leads to an overall homogenized gaming experience which is good or bad depending on your preference.

There is a reason that Mongoose had to heavily alter the 3.5e rules to make Conan D20. Normal 3.5e doesn't do Conan as well as it does old fashioned D&D high magic badassery.


Wyrmshadows

 

[DammitVictor]

WISE FWOM YOUAH GWAVE

I only run two types of roleplaying games:

1) More or less by the book, or
2) More than once

 

[dragoner]

Yes, unless there isn't a rule for what is happening, then I can usually come up with something on the fly.

 

[Skepticultist]

For me, it depends almost entirely on what system I'm playing.

When I run my favorite system, which is HERO System? I use the Rules As Written. Of course, HERO requires you choose between large sets of options and encourages you to create your own subsystems and creative rulings, so you can bend the rules quite a bit and still be, technically, playing Rules As Written. I haven't found a single mandatory rule in 6th Ed. that has to be changed to make the game playable.

Other systems? It varies in degree according to how well those rules are written. If someone somehow convinced me to run a Palladium system game again like Heroes Unlimited, I would not play it RAW, as Palladium simply does not work as written -- its not just broken, its nearly incomprehensible. Other games exist somewhere on that spectrum between HERO and Heroes Unlimited.

 

[Shiroiken]

I find RAW to be a flawed mentality for gaming. If you can modify the system to work better for your group, there is no reason not to do so. Rigid adherence to RAW may make a game more accessible for new player (such as for organized play), but overall will limit the enjoyment potential for most players.