What game mechanics etc. do you, the DM, forbid?

[Aikuchi]

Too many to list.
But I'll address Sir Devria's topic on 'Wish'.


Numbger of words allowed is equal to level.
No commas, colon, semicolons, "and, however, but, only, including, if, along with".
They can write it or whatever and confer with the plyer group but the one who casted / or got granted the wish has to speak it out word for word to me.

Whatever comes out of it, sticks.

No multiclassing beyong 3 classes (including PrC's. unless it was totally necessary to get that much to have a PrC to begin with ... :/

 

[Tatsukun]

Wow, it seems that I am a very open DM. I hate the idea of telling a player s/he can't do something because it wasn't in AD&D.

OK, my rules...

1) I allow most anything if the player can prove s/he wants it for fluff, not crunch.

2) Bards don't get spells, but they get more skills, and they get ramped up bardic music.

3) No cleric actually has a god. They all draw power from the same set of runes. Many clerics belive that the runes are a gift from a god, but many (and most non-clerics) don't belive that.

4) No teleport and teleport-like spells.

5) Sorcerers get natural armor bonuses as they improve level. (balance issue)

6) Fighters get "fighter lore" which works exactly like bardic lore, but can only be used to know about a monster and how to fight it.

7) 1 PRC per PC, 2 with a darn good reason.

In my next campaign (or next revision of this one) I am thinking of...

a) No magic, arcane or divine. There is only psyonics

b) Armor as DR

c) Heal skill actually heals HP (somehow, I'm not sure yet)

Well, that's it. I guess the only other thing to say is that I don't actually get to allow / disallow anything. I'm the DM, but that's just a member of the group. I dislike the idea that it's in some way "my game" and I get to choose how the group will play.

If the group wants to change longswords to 1D20 damage, with a range of 15' and I am outvoted, that's what we do!

-Tatsu

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I banned AOOs a long time ago. Makes combat twice as fast.

Also, I use old school item creation rules, and brought back the hazardous effects of spells, I.E., aging from haste, wish, etc, system shock (DC 6 con check), no parachute for the fly spell, a few other changes.

 

[shilsen]

Biggest problem is with "wish". I told my PCs (30LV+) that if they truly feel a need to use it that their wish is on the spot and SUBJECT TO ANY DISTORTIONS that i can fit into their wording. If they have a problem with that then to bad.

Do you do the same for Miracle?

 

[diaglo]

That explains why he claimed he needed to Lay on Hands . . .

you'll have to ask Gary about that. those were his words originally not mine.

 

[Fighter1]

I banned AOOs a long time ago. Makes combat twice as fast.

Also, I use old school item creation rules, and brought back the hazardous effects of spells, I.E., aging from haste, wish, etc, system shock (DC 6 con check), no parachute for the fly spell, a few other changes.

On a similar note I think that the concentration check bit for Casters NOT generating an AoO when casting; all they need is a lot of concentration skill points - silly considering that it is suppsoed to take concentration and effort to cast which has nothing to do with protecting oneself whislt doing so. That given casting ALWAYS provolks an attack of opportunity.

It was set so that if the AoO missed then no harm done and the spell is cast but if it hit - we set it up like the Mounted Combat feat; using the Concentration Skill you could negate a hit on yourself from an AoO generated from casting (the effect on the casting of the spell NOT the actual damage). If you succeeded in negating the hit you still have to make a normal concentration check or loose the spell. If you failed that one you lost the spell but still took no damage (as you negated the hit).

With the campaign I play in now the normal rules apply...I hope to convine the DM to change things...

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

No multiclass penalties - give favoured class bonus skill point instead... much like someone said earlier.

Dumped the double cost for cross class skills. Although the cap remains the same.

Threw out the natural healing for hp rules. Didn't/doesn't fit the style of game I was after and required too much CLW wand bookeeping. A substantial rest (an hour+) restores all lost hp.

Ignore encumberance, as long as things stay relatively sensible.

 

[HiLiphNY]

I don't allow in my campaign:

• Spells
• Magic Items
• Races other than Human
• Classes other than expert

. . . oh, wait. That's just real life! Heh. My point, bar no rules, just make sure the bad guys get to utilize them, too!

 

[Griffonsec]

having recently been reading my new Special Edition DMG (which i paid $40 for online) i can tell you that it covers your problem if you want to look it up.

use the optional/variant rules on summonings. make the player pick specific creatures.. give them names... and build them... much like the Pokemount for the paladin... but this does it for summoning spells.

Are these rules only in the special edition DMG? I like the sound of them, but I'm not willing to shell out $70 right now.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Are these rules only in the special edition DMG? I like the sound of them, but I'm not willing to shell out $70 right now.

I seem to recal similar alternate rules in unearthed arcana. which makes them open and possibly online somewhere.