Who plays DnD without messing with it?

[cybertalus]

My last DM fell into the first category. He had tweaked the magic system all crazy. It was basically a system where everyone was a spontaneous caster with a chance for wildmage-type failures and backfires, and all casters could learn spells from any class list. He also used the Torn Asunder crit system, which I came to despise like no other rules system I've ever been subjected to.

We finally convinced him to go back to the standard D&D spellcasting system and dump Torn Asunder, but then he started in with these similarly crazy tweaks to the magic item system and a character generation system that involved a lot of dice rolling and virtually no player choice. At that point he decided to wrap up the campaign we'd been in and start anew with all this new stuff, and I told him I wasn't coming back because I wanted to play D&D, not whatever game it was he was running. He took far less offense at that than I'd expected him to.

After that experience I'm strongly in the "core rules only, no house rules" camp. Though Torn Asunder has left me so loathing of crit systems that I have a hard time resisting the urge to dump the one in the core rules.

 

[maddman75]

After that experience I'm strongly in the "core rules only, no house rules" camp. Though Torn Asunder has left me so loathing of crit systems that I have a hard time resisting the urge to dump the one in the core rules.

I'm a firm believer that if you are making major mods, you need to talk with your players and get their input. For example, with my mentioned mod to hit points, I'd talked with my players about it. My first idea was to redefine hit points as sort of Endurance, and say you got them back after resting a little while. They felt that was kind of video-gamey, so I suggested we make the Heal skill much more useful. That idea was liked a lot more.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Conan the Roleplaying Game is as close to "core rules" as I come in the d20 system.

But I use d20 Modern-style class defense, D&D, Arcana Unearthed, d20 Modern and OGL Steampunk nonspellcasting classes, a completely homebrewed action structure, homebrew expansion to the Diplomacy and Bluff skills, and a spattering of Call of Cthulu-style magic. I also put essentially no restrictions on classes, PrCs, feats and skills aside from not allowing D&D spellcasters. Oh, and I level the PCs when they complete missions and/or defeat major enemies, and don't track XP.

I chose option #1, although to be fair, almost everything I'm using is present in one form of d20 or another.

 

[scourger]

I'm pretty happy with the system as is. I preferred 3.0 as a cohesive game, but I play 3.5. I ran a core 3e game--not even PrCs. Now I run a 3.5 game with a few additions from other games, but no changes to the core rules.

 

[Razz0putin]

tweaking just shows that you care enough to mold it into what you want

 

[GlassJaw]

I like and have run both. I'm currently running the Dungeon Adventure Path and I specifically wanted to run it RAW. There are some players that are relatively new to 3.X but also because I was getting tired of tweaking everything. I was tweaked out. I just wanted to get back to the basics and beat up...err..."entertain" the players. I'm glad I did too - I'm having a blast. I don't even have to think, just play. Or something like that.

So yeah, tweaking and not tweaking both have their place.

Wow, that's a lot of tweaks for one post.

 

[Tharian]

I haven't really changed any of the rules, per se. Instead, it's been more a matter of sitting down with optional material and deciding what, if anything, gets added. Biggest examples are deciding which base classes and prestige classes are allowed from the Complete books and other sources.

On a side note, I'm really evaluating how 3rd party material fits in now that I've found some of the Necromancer Games material that very, very closely fits the feel I was going for with some of the various areas of my setting.

 

[Jdvn1]

tweaking just shows that you care enough to mold it into what you want

We tweak because we care.

That sounds like a great motto.

 

[Wombat]

It's not just D20.

I never leave a set of rules alone anymore.

Okay, Ars Magica stays more intact than the others, but unless I can "get under the hood" and tinker with the rules so they fit both my conception of how the campaign should run and what rules I believe would better serve than RAW, I am just not happy.

Essentially, I feel the rules are a starting point. I write up a campaign, tweak the set of rules that are closest to the feel of the campaign concept, and go from there. Maybe if I were to use Eberron I would more or less use D20 RAW, but even if I did that there would be some serious tweaks.

Why? Because I am trying to create the campaign that I and my players will really like. In the end, the setting is more important that the rules.

 

[Jdvn1]

I'm starting a Round Robin GM game, and we decided to be uniform about the rules. We're going to stick by RAW and then I'll discuss houseruling something if it becomes necessary, but it has to be unanimous.