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

[Lord Mhoram]

I disallow any non-good aligned PCS, and my group plays with that kind of tone, so nobody cares.

I disallow most AoO (I keep the move through a threatened square, just so people can't run right by, and the attacks vs spellcasters but that is about it). I tend to ignore flanking, and some parts of cover. The reasons - I don't want as tactical a game as others do - I want to be able to play without a map and miniatures. Get rid of some of the precise technical tactical stuff from the combat rules, and the need for a detailed map evaporates. I do make this clear to players, so that no one makes a character with skills based on utilizing those aspects of play.

 

[BlueBlackRed]

I think I'd be more likely to just lobby for him to be booted from the group (or just exclude him as a player from my game if I was DMing) but the general assessment stands. I have the vauge hope he was kidding/trolling.

Kidding? Kind of. I do say it as a joke. But I do follow it up with my standard anti-psionics speach:
"I've seen enough version of psionics through my two decades of gaming to see that all psionics does is throw another mechanic into a game that, at best, isn't needed."

I would not make a PC to kill another PC unless we were playing an evil campaign. And I would not force another player to play or not to play something that the DM would allow, even if I disagreed with it. But I certainly would not like it if I saw the exploits and broken psionic PCs that I've seen many, many times before.

 

[BlueBlackRed]

I think the rule is exactly the opposite of this. From the Hypertext SRD:

"The square you start out in is not considered threatened by any opponent you can see, and therefore visible enemies do not get attacks of opportunity against you when you move from that square."

- and -

"If, during the process of withdrawing, you move out of a threatened square (other than the one you started in), enemies get attacks of opportunity as normal."

Way too much legal-speak there for me.
We're playing D&D not Star Fleet Battles.

 

[BlueBlackRed]

I disallow most AoO (I keep the move through a threatened square, just so people can't run right by, and the attacks vs spellcasters but that is about it). I tend to ignore flanking, and some parts of cover. The reasons - I don't want as tactical a game as others do - I want to be able to play without a map and miniatures. Get rid of some of the precise technical tactical stuff from the combat rules, and the need for a detailed map evaporates. I do make this clear to players, so that no one makes a character with skills based on utilizing those aspects of play.

I kind of like this. In the future I'd like to focus on the role-playing aspects of the game rather than the tactical board game aspects.

 

[Staffan]

I was already using "death at -Con", but I think I'm yoinking "act until -Con bonus".

Feel free. I got it from Arcana Unearthed.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Oh yeah, one other thing I disallow is anything that will fool a detect alignment good/evil spell/ability - in my games Good and Evil are almost forces of nature/physics, and you can't pretend to be another. And I run two kinds of "evil" there is the little "e" evil - people that lie, murder, steal ect, and the other things that read as a big "E" evil - Evil Outsiders, Evil self willed Undead, any Cleric with a doman that has a spell with the "Evil" descriptor. These are so supernaturally evil that no society, if it knows about them, are accpeted. So a Paladin, who getsa "big E" evil off a detect evil , can cut them down in cold blood and it is within alignment.... and if there is a question, they can just display another paladin abiliy right after to show they haven't lost thier paladinhood. This allows a paladin to get some of the "It's truly evil cut it down where it stands" thing that is one of the cool things a paladin can do, but allows criminals and like to be protected by the law - it is assumed that if anyone has gone so far as to be read with a "big E" they are irredemible. This differentian has helped avoid a lot of the classic paladin problems in my game.

I also don't have any evil gods. All gods are good or nuetral - if the being is Evil and Godlike it is a Demon/Devil or whatnot. I give the Demon and Devil lords Deific rank. Leads to a strong Good vs Evil kind of game.

 

[arscott]

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

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

-Tatsu

Look over the Treat Injury Skill (and accompanying surgery feat) from D20 Modern. They were written to do just that.

 

[Mercule]

defeated by a confluence of house rules!

Heh. Here's one that'll reveal just how much I'd gotten up on the wrong side of the bed, earlier:

Druids are expressly prohibited from drawing power from a deity. They're free to worship a deity, but it gives them no more benefit than it would a fighter -- under any circumstances.

Of course, I've seriously considered moving druids into the "arcane caster" heading, and I'd actively lobby for a change to rangers, given the option.

 

[Avatar of the North]

To whomever said they dont allow Spiked chains and Siangham because they arent real;
Siangham are indeed a real weapon. Siangham came from Malaysia, and are used in a fighting style called Kuntao

(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siangham)

 

[Cabral]

Dropped the exp penalty for multi-classing. Exchanged that for gaining an extra skill point per level of your favored class.

Ooo. I like that. I'm going to have to steal that. I nixed the XP penalty because, to me, classes, including multi-classing, are the execution of your character concept, not the definition of the character in and of themselves.

Other things: No casting requirements for creating alchemical items.

Very little non-WotC material and not all WotC material.
No planeshifting Paladin's mounts (That's a 7th level spell! ).
No alignment restrictions on Paladins (tweakage as needed)

I make many rulings on the spot and sometimes I'm not consistent.

The summon monster variants someone wanted are here. I allow them, but noone has used them.