Houserules - Yay or Nay?
- Thread starter dungeon blaster
- Start date
WayneLigon
Adventurer
As a general rule I house-rule a few things, mostly minor stuff or flavor-based. No favored classes, for one. Elves are the same height as humans, and age like they do until they hit about 17-21.
In specific campaigns, I might add other things. The most common one I've usually added is that you cannot multiclass a divine spellcasting class with an arcane spellcasting class.
I tend not to make changes to classes, though I am thinking of a general upping of skill points.
In specific campaigns, I might add other things. The most common one I've usually added is that you cannot multiclass a divine spellcasting class with an arcane spellcasting class.
I tend not to make changes to classes, though I am thinking of a general upping of skill points.
Chupacabra
First Post
My current campaign has 12 pages (albeit in generously-sized print) of house rules. Mostly for slight modifications of feats and spells. A couple of feats get thrown overboard. A few spells get "clarified". Classes and races get a minor tweak here and there. No one has objected so far as most of the changes are IMHO pretty logical and make the game run smoother (like modifying Dodge so that you don't have to declare each and every turn).
Last edited:
Storm Raven
First Post
I generally house rule as necessary to achieve the style of campaign I am trying to create. For campaign style, I have elmintaed, modified, and added classes; I have eliminated spells; I have changed races, or used an entirely different slate of available races, and so on.
I also have some "tinkering" house rules that I have implemented to make certain areas of the game work more smoothly, or simply because I don't like the standard rule (for example, I have house ruled the Dodge feat to simply give a flat +1 dodge bonus to AC). I try to keep these down to a reasonable number.
I have a list of what I call "Table Rules", which are essentially clarifications of things that have come up in play, or just notes on how I resolve some ambiguities in the rules. (For example, I let people know how I handle the Leadership feat in the Table Rules, or how summoning non-standard monsters works and so on). I don't consider these to be "house rules" per se, just clarifications of how I, as the DM, rule on certain aspects of the game.
I also have some "tinkering" house rules that I have implemented to make certain areas of the game work more smoothly, or simply because I don't like the standard rule (for example, I have house ruled the Dodge feat to simply give a flat +1 dodge bonus to AC). I try to keep these down to a reasonable number.
I have a list of what I call "Table Rules", which are essentially clarifications of things that have come up in play, or just notes on how I resolve some ambiguities in the rules. (For example, I let people know how I handle the Leadership feat in the Table Rules, or how summoning non-standard monsters works and so on). I don't consider these to be "house rules" per se, just clarifications of how I, as the DM, rule on certain aspects of the game.
Imagicka
Explorer
Greetings...
Houserules aren't what make the game yours. The moment you open your mouth and say something to your players in-game is what makes the game yours. Houserules just show that you don't agree with the standard rules, and you think you can do things better, or they just haven't gotten the right (or any) rule for what you need.
I myself have houserules for...
Of course, when I'm running games at my local gaming events, or gaming cons, it's vanilla rules all the way.
Houserules aren't what make the game yours. The moment you open your mouth and say something to your players in-game is what makes the game yours. Houserules just show that you don't agree with the standard rules, and you think you can do things better, or they just haven't gotten the right (or any) rule for what you need.
I myself have houserules for...
- Giving additional skill points to Fighter, Wizard, Sorcerer and whoever else has 2 skill points per level
- Given additional class skills to the Fighter
- Combined Move Silently & Hide into one skill called Stealth
- Combined Listen & Spot into one skill called Observe
- Gotten rid of the skill Use Magical Device completely
- I've upped the AC bonus for shields
- Altered the alignment system slightly and added a morality quantifier for alignments
- Added background feats
- Elves need to sleep
- Added Reputation
- Added Action Points
- Oh yeah... and I've also changed the races, mostly in name only.
- Then as the game goes on, I plan on introducing alternate magick systems
So, how did that happen? -- Also, I'd like to hear what you've done to the sorcerer and especially like to hear about your alchemy rules.der_kluge said:
Of course, when I'm running games at my local gaming events, or gaming cons, it's vanilla rules all the way.
Odhanan
Adventurer
Hey, thanks Greywulf! I'll forward your compliments about the food to the girls!greywulf said:Odhanan, I've been following your campaign for a while now and it's probably the best, most entertaining series I've read for a long time. And I'm very jealous of the excellent food too
When's the next one going to be up?
I don't know if we're playing this week-end, and whether there'll be an update of the Praemal Tales in the next few days depends partly on it, as you may guess!
Gold Roger
First Post
I could have sworn I've already posted my answer. Hrm.
Generally, I prefer to adjust the setting to the game rather than the other way around. I also don't like to fiddle around with minor details, like individual class features, spells and feats (though I do develope my own).
But I made some big changes compare to Core:
-No sorcerer
-Free multiclassing. No xp penalties or barred classes.
-No alignment restrictions for base classes. Not even for paladins (LG is default, but exceptions exist). I also don't restrict PC alignments, but prefer to work out a social contract about what's acceptable at the table.
-Feats, skill ranks, new class features, arcane spells and non-PHB divine Spells need to be aquired in game. This isn't hard, nor a way to restrict what PC's can use, but I feel it binds PC's more into the game world and means stuff like mentors, wizard guilds, order, churches etc are more important. It also means can level mid session.
-I've slowed down advancement.
-I've used AP, but found they didn't do the job. I'm now working on my own Swashbuckling cards, mixed with neutral event card.
-I'm not really happy with how item creation and AC work (scales terribly and worst christmas tree offender).
I generally alow non-Core stuff, provided the player can convince me it makes sense in game, I own the book and it isn't a baseclass.
Generally, I prefer to adjust the setting to the game rather than the other way around. I also don't like to fiddle around with minor details, like individual class features, spells and feats (though I do develope my own).
But I made some big changes compare to Core:
-No sorcerer
-Free multiclassing. No xp penalties or barred classes.
-No alignment restrictions for base classes. Not even for paladins (LG is default, but exceptions exist). I also don't restrict PC alignments, but prefer to work out a social contract about what's acceptable at the table.
-Feats, skill ranks, new class features, arcane spells and non-PHB divine Spells need to be aquired in game. This isn't hard, nor a way to restrict what PC's can use, but I feel it binds PC's more into the game world and means stuff like mentors, wizard guilds, order, churches etc are more important. It also means can level mid session.
-I've slowed down advancement.
-I've used AP, but found they didn't do the job. I'm now working on my own Swashbuckling cards, mixed with neutral event card.
-I'm not really happy with how item creation and AC work (scales terribly and worst christmas tree offender).
I generally alow non-Core stuff, provided the player can convince me it makes sense in game, I own the book and it isn't a baseclass.
Similar Threads
