D&D 5E "When (or If) I play(ed) in multiple 5E D&D games, I'd want them to all use the same rules/house rules." (a poll)

[Laurefindel]

False.

As many said, part of the fun is to experience different table dynamics, including houserules.

But even in my own games, I usually make one or two houserules that cater to that specific campaign in some ways, usually to put emphasis on the themes and desired ambiance for the campaign.

 

[Fanaelialae]

False.

I'm playing in two different campaigns with the same DM right now, and they have different add-on rules.

I wouldn't necessarily want to play in two games that have been so heavily modified in different ways that they don't even resemble the original game. But different adjustments that tweak the core rules to work better with the themes of a given campaign are more than welcome.

 

[CleverNickName]

Nah. Differences of opinion on house rules are usually how I end up playing multiple campaigns in the first place.

Bob: "I'm starting a new D&D campaign!"
Sam: "Cool, can I join?"
Bob: "Sure! I'm finally going to get to use the Gritty Realism rules for long rests!"
Sam: (recoils with a hiss)

 

[Stormonu]

I'm in three, and we each use or our own house rules - especially for crits.

I've got no problem with this and I find it easy enough to keep up with who does what how.

 

[J.Quondam]

I don't mind different house rules at all, especially when they're in place to enhance different campaign settings.

 

[Dragonsbane]

Although I run two groups, not 5E though, but.... we always let the DM make their own rules for their games. Plus, my rules differ greatly from game to game, especially available races and subclasses/archetypes/foci

 

[jgsugden]

Want? Sure. I'd love it if all games copied my house rules.

Expect? Heck no. The DM needs to cater to their environment.

 

[prabe]

I checked "true" but it's really a very mild preference, neither an expectation nor a dealbreaker.

 

[Seramus]

They can use what they want. I will use what I want. I have no strong feelings either way, at least not until I come across some house rules that are a travesty.

 

[Giant Octopodes]

I don't think the same house rules would be appropriate or welcome for all tables, and would actively detract in many instances. I played in a naval based campaign set inside an archipelago where the DM had Pages of rules for the management and operation of ships and ship fleets, allowing us to build a mercantile empire and engage in high combat on the high seas. It was great. Would I want to hand out those rules to my group with a campaign set in the plains / desert? No, no I would not.

Beyond applicability, there's the matter of tailoring the rules to the Theme. One campaign might be more horror/survival focused, with strict limits on encumbrance, time and rest management, and a healthy dose of the undead at every turn. I've played in such a campaign and it was a Great time. A more standard "monty haul" style campaign where we're hunting and slaying Dragons? The same rule set would be Absolutely Miserable.

Finally, different rules suit different DMs. A DM I had was very good at using a system akin to "destiny dice" where players could tap into their natural heroic destinies and reroll a dice whenever, and the descriptors used for that extra bit of luck / prowess / whatever were great. Then the dice went into a pool for the DM to use for enemies as the fates balanced out. Another DM tried using the same system, but in that campaign, using them didn't feel very good at all, and too often the DM's usage of them got far more mileage than whatever you were trying to do originally, so folks just stopped using them.

I firmly believe that each table, campaign, and DM can and should have its own set of houserules, and attempting to use the same set universally would dilute and weaken the experience provided. Just my 2 cents.