How does your group deal with rules updates?

[Blue]

I'm in two games and run one. In the one I run, we did convert over from 3.0, though 3.0 PrCs were grandfathered in if the character had them/was working towards them (or player could update to the new ones). We only use the Complete books, and even that's not everything, primarily PrCs that fit the theme of my homebrew, feats, and spells. I'm doing a campaign reset soon, and using that as a chacne to remove the last 3.0 PrCs and intoduce one new core class from each fo the complete books (swashbuckler, spirit shaman, warlock, and scout).

In another game, just about everything core or FR goes. It comes out, it's canon. The DM puts the kibosh on a few thing like psionics, spellfire, incarnum, and new gods/races in non-FR books.

In the last game, rules were set at start of campaign, with a number of changes made for homebrew worlds including a few new core classes and changes to the races. We're welcome to browse the new books for ideas of spells to research, and on a case-by-case basis the DM will review feats if they are important to character definition.

I think right there we really run the gamut.

Cheers,
Blue

 

[Razuur]

They are not even aware. As the GM, I keep my eye on things.

Razuur

 

[Psychic Warrior]

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

Cheers!

Heh. IMC they most certainly did!

I usually ignore most rule changes. Seriously, unless it is in the PHB/DMG/MM it probably won't be in my game. I adopt additional rules as I see fit (ie weapon speeds from Everquest) but actual changes to rules I generally ignore. I rarely read Dragon anymore so the Sage articles are moot. If I get the Spell Compendium chances are that will be the first time I ever see most of the spells (not having the vast majority of the books it pulls spells from) so those will be the 'offical' versions to me.

Oh and if someone were to say my game was 'outdated' I would laugh in their face and give 'em a 'Three Stooges' head slap.

 

[Bardsandsages]

My goal is to run an interesting game, not spend countless hours updating countless miniscule changes in rules. We have officially switched all games to 3.5 rules, because I like the majority of revisions and don't want to deal with picking rules out of two versions of the Player's to resolve issues.

I don't read Dragon, or even visit the WoTC site that often. I have a player who does read Dragon, and if he find some spell or something he wants to use, he'll show it to me. If I feel it won't upset game balance, I will allow his character to research it. If I don't like it, I just say no.

 

[frankthedm]

As an Iron fisted DM I let the players know what, if any, changes will be used, before the sesion they are implemented. Players who are affect by the change:

1. Are allowed to replace /switch out the effected 'thing' if the error was not thier fault and were not abusing it.

or

2. Recieve no compensation if they were "raping the rule"

 

[werk]

My group doesn't care so much about the rules, that's my job as DM.

I pretty much ignore the FAQ/Sage/CS and use the rulebooks and errata as RAW. I also use RotG articles occasionally for clarification.

 

[Arnwyn]

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?

We ignore the FAQs. I think I might have read one... once...

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?

If we don't buy a book that has a rules update, we keep using the old rule (or change it if it was problematic, which was likely done long before the new book with the rules update came out).

Outdated? Our group is ahead of the game.

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?

Don't need it (and thus gets ignored) and we certainly wouldn't feel "compelled" to update anything.

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

We ignore the FAQ.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

With my group, it varies by game (we have multiple campaigns running, with different DMs).

Most of the other guys in the gaming group rely on me to keep up to date on any changes, update, etc... In the rules, aside from those that are presented in WotC books, of course. So usually I evaluate whatever update is... updated (whether it be the FAQ, Eratta, or Sage Advice) and disseminate the information accordingly.

In my own campaign, unless the update is fixing something that is really *really* broken or really *really* big (like the change from 3.0 to 3.5)... I just let it slide until the campaign is over. For other abusable rules and/or systems, I simply ask my players not to take advantage of them, or I have implemented my own house rule to mitigate the abusability...

A few of the other guys have adopted some of the changes presented in the Eratta and/or FAQ, but for the most part we ignore Sage Advice.

Later
silver

 

[diaglo]

we ignore the FAQ, the updates, the new books, etc...

unless, of course, the DM says something. but he will give us a heads up before he puts anything new into the game.

 

[I'm A Banana]

They freak out and burn the tomes in a ceremony filled with gravitas and also cake.