Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="swrushing" data-source="post: 1842946" data-attributes="member: 14140">I use house rules with practically every game i run.i view the core rules as a mass market appeal product that was built without specific knowledge of me, my campaign goals or my players and their wants. So, its not surprising that altering those mass market rules by someone armed with all that knowledge  could make for a better fit. Now, in general, i try and give a list of house rules at the beginning of the campaign and then do very little if any changes after that. Changes to classes to meet player character needs is one common house rule. This avoids the notion of "trying to keep up" with a continual series of changes being a problem. We pretty much start with a rule set and keep it. This includes things like classes available and PUBLISHED stuff as well. very little "new official stuff" gets in after we start.There are of course two exceptions to the "no changes" after start rule. I tend to make these evaluations and  corrections at six month intervals, as part of a regularly scheduled .campaign update.if something is found to be "broken" it will likely be fixed after a while. More often than not, "broken" IMG means "too weak" not "too powerful." For instance, after 6 months i altered the core abilities of a couple classes in my stargate game, offering a replacement ability (player choice) in two cases for core abilities that had never been used. both were accepted and now those characters use their core class abilities frequently. These changes will be incorporated into the start-up house rules in my next campaign.The other case is where something, some change, is requested by a player, usually to enable a story element that has developed in play. If others like it and I evaluate it as "not a problem" then it gets in. "Not a problem" is my usual standard. i know some GMs who turn things down unless there is "a very compelling reason to make the change" and who turn down most suggestions on that account. I am running under one such Gm right now. But my standard is that if it won't cause problems and a player is interested, its good. The fact that it will be more fun for the player(s) is enough "justification" as long as it wont cause issues with other players or the game.So, i have house rules and find them helpful to the game.</blockquote>

Verification