Which rules do you NOT use?

[Mokona]

Alignment: Boy, how nice it was to eliminate those arguments.

I throw out alignment for creatures with free will. Intelligent races, especially humanoid ones, all default in behavior to somewhere between Neutral and Good.

Demons, Angels, &c don't have the same kind of free will as humanoid races so they must act within their alignment. Humanoids don't even have an alignment written on their sheet.

 

[GVDammerung]

There's a whole bunch of things I don't do in my game - usually because I think it's not interesting, slows down play, detracts from the fun or whatever. I realise that my style is not the same as everyone's (I'm sure some people would be horrified!)

Anyway, the following don't have a place in my game: . . .

Anyone else do anything similar? If so, why? Is realism more important to you than smooth gameplay and fun? Is realism more fun for you than for me?

IMC -

No alignment - you are what you play
No encumbrance - within reason
No spell components
No limitation to memorized spells per level - casters cast spells they memorize to spells per level available (switching out spells)
No automatic spell acquisition with level - must be given, find, trade, or research
No grappling as written
No disarm
No sunder
No bullrush
No multi-classing penalties
No empty or filler levels - you get a bonus feat
No class skills - all skills are class skills for all classes
No prereqs for feats - level feats like spells
No favored classes
No XP penalties/costs - roleplay or adventure for costs (ad hoc)
No XP - use adventures to level
No automatic AoO except when initially engaging and/or otherwise if granted ability
No “pun-pun” - min-maxers and RAW lawyers are shown the door

3X is overdesigned, IMO. The above are all buzz-killers in one way, shape or form or another, IMO.

 

[Stalker0]

Requiring heavy armor to have assistance to don. Got to love it when the full plate comes walking in off the street. "Hey, did you put that armor on yourself?!!"

 

[Nalfeshnee]

Wow... im seeing a lot of stuff i really dont like here must... resist... urge to argue.


You people really dont seem to mind messing with the natural laws of game balance do you Though t obe honest, i have done a lot of what you 've all mentioend (I think the encumberance and spell-component non-usage is a universal think after seeing this, though other things like no cross-class skills and filler levels getting (of all things_ feats, really surprises me. And i feel sorry for sorcerers too.

 

[caudor]

Wow... im seeing a lot of stuff i really dont like here must... resist... urge to argue.


You people really dont seem to mind messing with the natural laws of game balance do you Though t obe honest, i have done a lot of what you 've all mentioend (I think the encumberance and spell-component non-usage is a universal think after seeing this, though other things like no cross-class skills and filler levels getting (of all things_ feats, really surprises me. And i feel sorry for sorcerers too.

I think you are thinking along the same lines I am. Some classes are shorted depending on what rules are ignored. What good is the survival skill if everyone can just magic-missle a rabbit? Why carry rations or water at all if no PCs ever need them? How happy are fighters with high strength scores if encumberance is ignored?

In my view, ignoring rules = letting balance get all out of whack. It is a slippery slope at best.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Rules I ignore

Encumbrance - Generally too much work.
Material Componenets - Just don't like 'em
Multiclassing XP penalties - I like multiclassing.
Flanking and Flat footedness outside of a suprise round. I know that shafts rogues but oh well. It is a class I generally don't like to see in my games anyway - I'll let characters take varient Rogues that trade Sneak Attack for other things.
Many AoO - I don't use a map in combat, and getting rid of this and the two above makes life that much easier.
Clerics can spontaneously cast spells on thier domain lists in addition to healing spells, but they lose the bonus spell per day from domain.
I tend to foget about familiars.

I don't allow any nongood alignemnts for the PCs. I want the players to play the good guys.

 

[Rothe]

There's a whole bunch of things I don't do in my game - usually because I think it's not interesting, slows down play, detracts from the fun or whatever. I realise that my style is not the same as everyone's (I'm sure some people would be horrified!)

Anyway, the following don't have a place in my game:

Encumbrance - too dull. Too tedious.

Money under 1 SP - can't be bothered with CPs and the price of a meal. That's not heroic gaming! Really cheap stuff is just "assumed" in my game. Same goes for basic adventuring equipment (ropes, picks, rations, etc.)

Identify - this one will be the one which most people will disagree with. I don't force players to identify items (unless there's a good plot point involved). Unless it matters to the game, they get all the info on an item (using an Item Card) immediately. I can rationalise by trying to claim that all the knowledge skills and divinations in the party make such a thing easy, but the truth is it's just easier and facilitates play for me. Doing this, IMO, does not detract from the enjoyment of the game, even if it seems unrealistic.

Components - unless it's really expensive, spellcasters are always assumed to have material components.

Anyone else do anything similar? If so, why? Is realism more important to you than smooth gameplay and fun? Is realism more fun for you than for me?

Well you might be surprised how many rule "heretics" are out there even among realism junkies.

Except for encumberance I do pretty much the same thing, have been for almost 30 years. On encumberance, as long as you don't abuse it we don't recaculate each time gold is added to your pack.

On Identify I'm certainly with you. I assume spell using characters, those witha knowledge of myth and lore, etc. have a good chance to identify the basics, actual use will often (except in rare circumstances) open the abilites of the item to you in a general sense and use in a life or death struggle will reveal the full abilities. Cursed items are rare and almost all originate from a specific period in my settings history so assecertaining the period of creation can give a note of caution to trying an un-identified item. As it all depends on your theory of magic, whose to say what is realistic in this realm of gameplay.

 

[Fishbone]

Death by massive damage.
Keeps creatures with lousy fortitude saves around, and avoids the rolled 1s and 2s from ending a good battle in a cheesy way.

 

[Treebore]

To paraphrase Diaglo I don't use d20 rules, I use the rules set "that binds them all."

Back in the old days, when I actually ran with 3E rules, I ignored much of what previous posters have said. Plus I ignore the various stat generation rules, I use a very generous house rule for that. I also got rid of immunities near the end.

 

[airwalkrr]

I don't use metamagic rods or any other item, feat, or ability that grants the use of metamagic enhancements to spells without raising the spell-level or without some limitation on the ability. A good limitation is like that applied to the Quicken Spell-Like Ability or Maximize Spell-Like Ability feats. I also don't use multiclassing rules as I dislike the way 3e encourages multiclassing. I use a system which encourages sticking with one class.