How does your group deal with rules updates?

[Li Shenron]

I was wondering about how frequent rules update are in 3rd edition, and how do different groups deal with them in practice.

Of course the biggest rules update was the advent of 3.5, but the errata, FAQ and Sage advice (albeit not everyone treats them the same way with regards to how official they should be) have been around since the beginning. FAQs come out quite often in my opinion, and sometimes they imply actual changes to the rules. Furthermore, some books occasionally update something from previous books or even the core.

How does your group deal with these? Do you follow all updates, and if necessary do you update your campaign and your characters according to the new FAQ or the new version of everything? And if you do that, do you buy all the books, or do you just snatch the update information from the web?

Otherwise, if you don't buy a book which has a rule update, do you feel entitled to keep using the old rule, or do you feel outdated? This happened to me in 3.0 when the early splatbooks released corrections to Polymorph and Wild Shape for instance, but I didn't have those books at first, and I was quite irritated when someone pointed out that I was outdated... My reaction was to say that if I didn't have the book, the new rule didn't exist IMC. Then I bought the splatbooks because I actually liked them, so no problem switching to the updated rules afterwards.

Recently it seems that Spell Compendium for example has updated non-core spells, at least changing a lot of names but IIRC also changing the actual spell. How are you going to deal with this? Would you feel entitled to keep using the existing versions (if you don't want to buy the SC), would you feel compelled to update yourself without necessarily buy the new book, or would you actually really need it?

What is your approach with new FAQ versions instead? (being free, it could be pretty different)

I just have the feeling that our group is not interested in keeping up-to-date with the FAQ and less with the books...

 

[Davelozzi]

I look at the FAQ as a potential reference to settle rules argument rather than a source of changes, and the same with Sage Advice.

Updates in new books are a little different. In my opinion, there's too many changes for the sake of changes. I'm all for fixing widespread problems like the 3.0 haste or polymorph but all of the little changes to a million other spells are just a point of confusion, and often times (in my opinion) made things worse rather than better.

For spells that come up with any frequency in my game, I just make a ruling about which version applies if there's a difference.

I haven't picked up the Spell Compendium yet but I probably will. It would be great if we could just use that as a definitive source for any spells outside the PHB, but most likely the kinds of changes noted above will make me decide against this.

 

[Mercule]

The core books are the baseline assumption. Errata is usually adopted, but subject to review on a line-by-line basis. Everything else is considered a house rule or variant, with the entirety of, say, "Complete Arcane" being considered no more manditory than anything in "Unearthed Arcana".

When errata or a new book is published that contradicts existing mechanics, it is reviewed (by one or two players and me) and either adopted or discarded. That's not so much of a formal process as it is just the way things work out because of who pays attension to such things.

Sage Advice/the FAQ are considered nothing more than advice from an expert. It is not something a rules lawyer could glom onto, by any means. But, it might help a player make a case for a rules adjustment at some point -- maybe. Basically, it's just food for thought.

 

[Crothian]

Depends on the rule. Usually it just happens and if I can have a fun in game encounter out of iut so much the better. I styill have aclan of first edition dwarves around my world somewhere.

 

[the Jester]

"System-wide" updates (i.e. new editions or the 3.5 revision, etc) we usually just adopt wholesale. Little bits- eh, it varies on a case by case basis. If I agree with the rationale behind the change I'll usually go with it. There are exceptions, though; I prefer the scout without Disable Device, for instance.

 

[Li Shenron]

I haven't picked up the Spell Compendium yet but I probably will. It would be great if we could just use that as a definitive source for any spells outside the PHB, but most likely the kinds of changes noted above will make me decide against this.

Do you already know if SC has changed the mechanic of some spells?

I wonder if other compendiums (assuming they'll be published) could have the same attitude with classes, feats, monsters...

IMO the idea of gathering the gaming community's response to "refine" the system, like it was done by the 3.5 revision, was a good idea (albeit I have chosen to stick to 3.0 for the most part), but to continually refine the system even further doesn't seem that nice to me.

 

[Buttercup]

We still use most of the 3.0 rules, but have absorbed some 3.5 bits, some house rules and some 3rd party rules. If we run across a problem, we work it out to the group's satisfaction and move on. I don't care at all about the FAQ or Sage Advice, since neither has any relationship to how much fun we're having.

 

[MerricB]

Changes? There have never been any changes. The Scout has always had Disable Device. What are you talking about, citizen?

Seriously, we just adopt them when they come out - it's rare that errata actually changes anything in the campaign we're playing. 3.5e was just a boon on so many levels, that we got into it very quickly.

(Hey, I got all three 3.5e books the day they came out; I took a little more time to get 3e - like perhaps a month for one or two of the books )

Cheers!

 

[Aus_Snow]

Each campaign's rules are sacred once the campaign begins. Before that point though, all kinds of things can, and frequently do, change. The only (hypothetical) exception to this is if something happens to be grievously wrong with the chosen ruleset and no-one (not even me ) has noticed before it's too late. Then, most likely, the offending rule will be changed, and everyone will just have to live with that.

I don't keep up with all the latest opinions, especially the Dragon Magazine ones, as I no longer buy them. The ones that do slip by my guard though, I'll have a look at, sometimes air them with some of the players, and in general try to best determine what will improve or enhance the game. Anything else can kiss itself goodbye, or suchlike.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

We test them out in short one shots. If it fits well with our style, then it gets added to our regular games.