Poll: What's your level of rules modification?

[Li Shenron]

I feel lonely being the only 'by the book' vote...

We're 2 now.

I am not sure what counts as "other official sources". We have Volo's but that's just extra creatures, not rules, so I think it doesn't count. I may or may not use Sage Advice.

Other than that, no evident rules modifications to the PHB, but it has to be noted that 5e has some areas where different interpretations of the RAW are possible. I may adopt a couple of interpretations which don't match the majority of gaming groups but they are still not rules modifications.

There are also "house rules" which establish social behaviour that the books don't cover (e.g. what to do with an absent player, or intra-party conflict) , but I don't think they are what the poll intends.

If you count these ones as well as interpretations of incomplete or conflicting book rules as "house rules", then it is technically impossible to play without house rules.

 

[aramis erak]

I see rules as a contract...
So when I do use a house rule, I make note in my player handouts.
My preference is for official variants, rather than my own, and my own more than a 3rd party's mods. But I won't hesitate in a home game to make a one or two mods.

 

[Jd Smith1]

I run it RAW, but as I get comfortable with the system through actual play, I start tweaking and reforming, pasting in bits of other systems, and in general making it into something that I feel is best suited to my group. I keep a campaign site with all house rules set out on it.

 

[glass]

My PF1 houserule document has twelve bullet pointed general-purpose houserules (not counting stuff like clarification for gestalt when that is in use, and notes on using content from 3.5, which take up a couple more pages). Other systems will have a similar number or slightly fewer (4e has three IIRC). I do not have any houserules yet for PF2, but it will probably acrete a few as time goes on.

This does not include setting-specific rules. It also does not include homebrew content, of which I have created quite a lot over the years.

EDIT: Meant to say, I am not sure where this falls on the poll.

EDIT2: It is now (a few months later) at 21 bullet points. A couple of extras were added due to circumstances that came up in play, which made it impossible to fit on a single page. At which point it quite quickly grew to mostly fill the second page.The extras were things we were mostly already doing but had previously failed to write down.

_
glass.

 

[cmad1977]

I play with the he rules, not by the rules.

 

[Shiroiken]

It's a bit odd for me. The first time I play a game, it's RAW, because you can't tell if something is wrong until you actually experience it. Afterwards I'll houserule based on what's needed. This can be extensive, but I've found that more often than not the work outweighs the actual benefit.

Of course, I have taken some games and made a new edition for them. I was working on my own D&D Next during the playtest, just in case the official one sucked (there were a LOT of great ideas in the playtest, but many didn't make it in). I also did a version of Legends of the Five Rings after 3E because it just wasn't working for us. In both cases they were abandoned once a better version came out.

 

[glass]

Of course, I have taken some games and made a new edition for them. I was working on my own D&D Next during the playtest, just in case the official one sucked

I would like to hear more about this, if you don't mind.

_
glass.

 

[Shiroiken]

I would like to hear more about this, if you don't mind.

I'd have to go through my notes to get the details. The one for L5R might be gone forever, because that was 2 computers ago. The general idea I went with for D&D was:

• characters start at level 3, unless playing apprentice characters
  • Class abilities are much slower, such as warrior classes only getting light armor at level 1, medium armor at level 2, and heavy armor at level 3. This was to prevent level dips granting huge benefits.
• starting in a class gives you a +1 towards the primary attribute of the class
• saving throws were balanced among all 6 abilities, rather than the strong 3/weak 3 we have now
• Non-spellcasters had dice they could use for various activities , similar to the battlemaster but refreshed every round. Each class had a specific die type and set of uses, which replaced many classic class features (smite, rage, sneak attack, etc).
• There were no cantrips, but spellcasters got a lot more spell slots for lower level spells, turning them essentially into cantrips

Some of these ideas were better than 5E, while some were worse, but in the end 5E was an overall better fit.

 

[GMMichael]

"I slowly rewrite the whole game"

House-ruling can be a slippery slope, no?

There's not a lot of middle ground for me. If I find that I want to use several house rules to create a certain feel, it suggests that, really, the whole game needs to be replaced by a new game or a different, more harmonious game. So my vote sort of averages out to Extensive House Rules and Modules. I'd be happy to just plug in a new module/subsystem if the other parts of the game didn't need any tinkering.