How Much Houseruling Are You Willing To Do?

[CleverNickName]

So no, as of right now I have no intention of banning at-will magic or Reaper.

Har har. These two things are the first to go on my chopping block.

 

[Pheonix0114]

I voted "A Lot", but would like to say that I hope 5e will allow me to lower that to "Some" or even "A Little."

Currently my version of Pathfinder uses Bell-Curve Rolling, Wounds/Vigor Points, changes to the feat system, and I'm working on a hack inspired by 5e to make the math flat. I've also built my own game on the bones of nWoD. So my willingness to tinker with a system to get the experience I want is nigh infinite, but I would love for 5e to simply give me the experience I want out of the box, well once I add Bell-Curve Rolling and Wounds/Vigor, that is.

 

[TerraDave]

Always do some.

And 5E seems like an excellent candidate for it!

EDIT: not in the sense that it needs it, but in that it can take it.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

My last 3.75 game (3.5 chassis; 4.0 / Saga additions) was pretty heavily house-ruled IMO*, but I was able to fit all of the changes on a single page, front-and-back, in reasonable font size.

So, uh, ... some?

* It included healing surges, action points, auto-scaling of skills, changes to some specific feats, changes to spells-per-day calculations, etc.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

A Little, at most. I already have an edition that I love, where I don't have to house rule Some to make it play the way I want. So unless 5e is even awesomer straight out of the box, no mods needed, I'll just stick with what I know and love.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm an inveterate rules-tinkerer, I /like/ to modify rules and come up with new ones.

Even so, I don't like /needing/ to do so because the rules are F'd up.

 

[CleverNickName]

Currently my version of Pathfinder uses Bell-Curve Rolling, Wounds/Vigor Points, changes to the feat system, and I'm working on a hack inspired by 5e to make the math flat. I've also built my own game on the bones of nWoD. So my willingness to tinker with a system to get the experience I want is nigh infinite, but I would love for 5e to simply give me the experience I want out of the box, well once I add Bell-Curve Rolling and Wounds/Vigor, that is.

I've always liked bell-curve rolls, but my players hate them. They prefer linear odds, I guess.

Since we are sharing, right now I play a house-ruled 3.5E game that only has two "heavy" rules changes: Con loss instead of level loss, and turn undead is a 1st-level cleric/paladin spell instead of an ability. The other six houserules are all just omissions: no spiked chains, no wish spells, no gnomes, no half-orcs, no half-elves, and no spells for the ranger (d10 HD instead).

 

[Drowbane]

I should have read your OP a little more closely before voting. I voted "Some" based on past experience. However with 5e my tolerance for House Ruling is lower ("A Little", probably). It has to come out of the box as something I want to play or I will not even bother. Some of the things I have seen in the Play-Test and some ENWer's attitudes towards those dynamics tell me that I am too set in my ways and that 5e is not for me.

I have 3e house-ruled to my liking and it runs smooth and is easy to DM. I do not, strictly speaking, need or want a new system. However, if WotC impresses me I will give 5e a fair shake. If not... well I never bought into 4e either.

I want to like 5e, but 4e (and things WotC did during 4e, such as the DDI killing Dragon and Dungeon mag) put a bad taste in my mouth.

I've always liked bell-curve rolls, but my players hate them. They prefer linear odds, I guess.

Since we are sharing, right now I play a house-ruled 3.5E game that only has two "heavy" rules changes: Con loss instead of level loss, and turn undead is a 1st-level cleric/paladin spell instead of an ability. The other six houserules are all just omissions: no spiked chains, no wish spells, no gnomes, no half-orcs, no half-elves, and no spells for the ranger (d10 HD instead).

o.0

Could it be that we were seperated at birth?

Though I do have two(!!) 1/2 orcs in my newest 3.5. The Players didn't want to upgrade to real orc. Meh, w/e, I bow to the whims of the players at times. The PCs will rarely meet another 1/2 orc however.

 

[MacMathan]

I am in the none to very little camp since I have limited time and want that sort of thing sorted for me by the people I am buying it from.

What I really want to see is what the 'official" houserules/modules are that they use for Encounters and such since this is where a lot of new people get to explore the game for the first time IMO.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

A little. I'm more apt to not use a rule than to add rules. I tried for a couple years to make 3e into the game I wanted an ultimately failed. We tried C&C for a while, but had so many houserules in that we may as well have been playing 1E, so that's what we did. I can ignore things like the dwarf being immune to poison and the idiotic slayer theme, but the healing mechanic ruins the game for me. Rules that are integrated that deeply can't be easily houseruled away. There's a domino effect that has far reaching complications, so at that point, I just try a different game.