Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 1398073" data-attributes="member: 1465">Quote:Originally Posted by Li Shenronwhen it is done NOT for campaign issues but because you don't like the RULE... First of all... sorry to come up so late to my own thread, but I don't have web access during weekends  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> (by the way... what the hell happened with these smileys..!).I found out that it is effectively very difficult to distinguish between altering something in PHB because of a campaign reason or because of a rule-biased change. I thought it was important to point it out in the poll, but I didn't expect too much from voters to distinguish exactly, because it is not easy.What I meant with this poll was to highlight changes to core mechanics such as the following examples:- roll initiative every round- change how critical hits work / use critical fumbles- change which actions provoke AoO or not- change a core feat- change a core spellThere are JUST example of stuff that usually gets changed "because the DM doesn't like it". All DMs I have seen wanted to at least change a bunch of these kind of things. Really, I try my best not to!  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> Not because I think it's wrong to change such things, but just because after all I can't believe that my change would be necessarily better than the core rule. Trust me, there ARE several core rules I don't like, especially when they are all-or-nothing rules: for example, I don't like the spellbook rules and the Spell Mastery feat.If instead the change is driven by a setting motivation, then you may not consider it a house rule for the purpose of this poll. For example, if you gave the Sorcerer a load of spell-like abilities because in your world Sorcerers are really so infuse with magic that it reflects to more power, then it's ok (consider it a setting issue and not a house rule for this poll); but if you have given the Sorcerer a boost because you simply thought that it was too weak, then consider it a house rule.Changes to races or classes could be driven by both reasons, but changes to combat or weapons or feats/skills or spells are 99% because the DM think they are too weak/powerful, and you can count them all as house rules here...</blockquote>

Verification