It's all in the subject line, simple questions really. If you'd like to state why you do one or the other, I'd like to hear about it.
My current group (only took me 20 years to find the best crew ever) is RAW intensive. We've discussed House Rules but haven't instituted anything. We're mostly roleplayers, but that's not to say we don't appreciate rollplaying (at least I do, anyway.)
I'm pretty sure we're not the most optimal group out there, but we have fun and we love Bob's Magic Emporium.
Side Note: oddly enough, I can think of one House Rule (involving my character). DM let me sleep in my Hide armor with no ill effects. Starting that way from 1st level, it was a nice perq for a Wood Elf Ranger.)
There isn't a rule for every occasion, so just about everyone has to houserule 'at some point'.
As long as the players can all have a fair say if they feel the rule was a bit rough then I don't see any problem; its about equity.
Oh - wait - I'm not sure if this qualifies as House Rule or not, but we're not really using anything other than the CRB and APG. Some stuff from 3.5 is used (say Oversized TWF), but not others (non-Core classes.)
Oh - wait - I'm not sure if this qualifies as House Rule or not, but we're not really using anything other than the CRB and APG. Some stuff from 3.5 is used (say Oversized TWF), but not others (non-Core classes.)
I reckon ANYTHING from 3.5 is a houserule :p
RAW is the stuff with Pathfinder written on the front.
It's all in the subject line, simple questions really. If you'd like to state why you do one or the other, I'd like to hear about it.
The way I see it, a houserule that...
1) Has been clearly identified (therefore doesn't surprise everyone)
2) Is clearly written down (and available to all for reference)
...is just as valid as any other rules, becomes part of the ruleset and can be used RAW by this group.
I make a clear distinction between a slightly different system and an half-ass "oh yeah, I forgot to tell you but I'm not playing like this".
The rules as published are there to function/be enjoyed for the majority of groups, but I'd bet that a minority of groups function well/enjoy all the rules as published.
I don't only find it Ok to fine tune the system to my (and my group's) taste, but its a hobby that I enjoy just as much as playing the game itself.
'findel
I stay RAW as much as I can. A lot of changes can make things over complicated.
Do etiquette rules apply as house rules?
Dice on the floor do not count-roll it on the table.
Never snatch up a die before it is confirmed.
Leave the table to take a phone call.
And though we understand that it's not a Character Sheet until you've spilt something on it, please watch your drinks!
**
Generally, RAW, with some exceptions. It has the advantage of being easy for anyone to see and understand and prevents the old "But you said it would work this way!" issue.
GNOME
I run one mostly (by by no means completely) RAW game that is a hybrid of 3.5E and Pathfinder RPG and one game, where I create, change, modify, delete and otherwise mutilate the base 3.5/Pathfinder rules of the game extensively. The RAW game is currently on indefinite hiatus, as I have moved to another location for an extended period of time and may or may not be resumed in the future depending on how life circumstances turn out. The, let's call it CREATIVE ;), game is ongoing.
So yeah, I am certainly not afraid to tinker with the rules. In fact, I love doing so and it is integral to my fun as the DM/GM.
|
It's all in the subject line, simple questions really. If you'd like to state why you do one or the other, I'd like to hear about it.
My current group (only took me 20 years to find the best crew ever) is RAW intensive. We've discussed House Rules but haven't instituted anything. We're mostly roleplayers, but that's not to say we don't appreciate rollplaying (at least I do, anyway.)
I'm pretty sure we're not the most optimal group out there, but we have fun and we love Bob's Magic Emporium.
Side Note: oddly enough, I can think of one House Rule (involving my character). DM let me sleep in my Hide armor with no ill effects. Starting that way from 1st level, it was a nice perq for a Wood Elf Ranger.)
Ah Ha! :) I think it's extremely likely that there is a campaign out there that hasn't put in a house rule on something. Heck... the idea of full hit dice at first level was probably the first house rule back in the day.
There isn't a rule for every occasion, so just about everyone has to houserule 'at some point'.
You beat me to it. There are plenty of rules that are ambiguous enough that whichever way you interpret them will count as a house rule to someone else.
I wonder if a better question might have been, what do you consider to be House Ruling?
In our current campaign, we have a Caviler from the APG. This guy is a killer on horse-back, but then you all knew that. Kingmaker is probably one of the best campaigns for this Class because there is so much open space. Be that as it may, it continually astounds me just how often this guys doesn't have to get off of his mount.
Okay, what's my point, right?
Well, I think our DM is mindful of the fact that we're gonna be playing KM for at least another 12 months, if not longer. He has two choices; he can question every scenario, and probably determine that the horseman doesn't really have room to operate, or he can let it go and let the Cavy play his character.
There is no right or wrong choice as far as I can tell. If it were me, I would make the same choice as our DM. He glosses over some things with the Cavie, where he can anyway.
Is that House Ruling, or is that trying to accommodate a horseman in what is arguably a footman's game?
Well, I think our DM is mindful of the fact that we're gonna be playing KM for at least another 12 months, if not longer. He has two choices; he can question every scenario, and probably determine that the horseman doesn't really have room to operate, or he can let it go and let the Cavy play his character.
There is no right or wrong choice as far as I can tell. If it were me, I would make the same choice as our DM. He glosses over some things with the Cavie, where he can anyway.
Is that House Ruling, or is that trying to accommodate a horseman in what is arguably a footman's game?
I'm not sure what you're talking about. Changing a module to suit a particular party is not a house rule. "Glossing over some things" might or might not be a house rule, depending on the value of "some things".
I'm not sure what you're talking about. Changing a module to suit a particular party is not a house rule. "Glossing over some things" might or might not be a house rule, depending on the value of "some things".
We have a lot of encounters in the wooded areas. Just how much maneuvering room does a horseman really have in the woods? How do you determine that? It's not in the RAW...
I'm not sure what you're talking about. Changing a module to suit a particular party is not a house rule. "Glossing over some things" might or might not be a house rule, depending on the value of "some things".We have a lot of encounters in the wooded areas. Just how much maneuvering room does a horseman really have in the woods? How do you determine that? It's not in the RAW...
Well, technically-speaking, you could place trees on the battle-map and determine it that way, but yes, I see your point it is certainly not comprehensively covered in the official rules.
That said, by making up rules to cover that situation, you are merely plugging the gaps / filling the blanks, so it is qualitatively different houseruling than the wholesale changes of rules and additions of entirely new systems that I so enjoy. If you are just glossing over the trees than it is no houserule at all - the rules don't say what to do about it, so you do nothing about it. But as I said, even if you did something improvise some rules for it, I would say you are still playing by RAW as far as my standards are concerned.
I always use house rules, and by house rules I mean blatantly changing rules, because I've never played a game that's more by RAW.
We have a lot of encounters in the wooded areas. Just how much maneuvering room does a horseman really have in the woods? How do you determine that? It's not in the RAW...
It depends how you do it. Like Roman said, if you place trees on a battlemat so that the horse always has to squeeze --> not a house rule.
But I was in a game once where the DM said that all flight speeds are reduced by half in a forest, no matter how close the trees are or what kind of creature is flying around. (He thought that the idea of flying around in a forest like "Star Wars speeder bikes" was ridiculous.) That definitely counts as a house rule.
I am pretty sure almost everyone houserules at some point. Many people may have had some houserule so long they simply forget they are not using RAW for somethings.
Gods know I houserule things, I myself don't consider changing a mod as written to be houseruling as well mods are not rules. Now if ya changed how something works then yeah that is a houserule.
I am pretty sure almost everyone houserules at some point.
Yeah, I think you're right about that, to what extent might be a good question.
Many people may have had some houserule so long they simply forget they are not using RAW for somethings.
In 2e, we ignored some of the demi-human rules barring certain classes. I was quite happy to see those rules finally kicked to wayside in 3e. It also made me wonder just how many other groups had ignored those rules. I'm betting it was a bunch.
Gods know I houserule things, I myself don't consider changing a mod as written to be houseruling as well mods are not rules. Now if ya changed how something works then yeah that is a houserule.
What are some of your House Rules?
Pretty clear we are going to need a House Rule to define House Rules guys....
What are some of your House Rules?
The only houserule I use every time is all 2 skills per level classes gain 4 skills per level. Other then that one I can't really think of all that many I always use.
These could be called house rules but, Do not expect to get any magic item ya want ever.Don't expect full potions and scrolls in every village or to have every item you need to craft any time you want it {That gold cost is the cost of the items you need to craft with after all}
Those might be houserules , if so Eh I can live with that.
Also I have changed some feats in some games{vital strike as one feat] or how some skills work. But for most games I do not have many that stay the same in every game I run.
I would define a "house rule" as anything we use to play the game that contradicts what is written in the Core Rules. It could also apply to any elaborate system we've devised to cover situations not in the rules, but technically that falls under the category of "arbitration." However, if such a rule is static and could be considered an extension of the rules of the game, sure, it's a house rule.
For instance: one of the few house rules I play with respect to HP generation. Player characters always re-roll results of less than half on hit dice. I find this creates discrete bands of HD instead of potentially overlapping HD between classes. Since this contradicts the rules in the book, it is a house rule.
In the second case, I have a rule that you draw a Crit or Fumble card on a natural 20 or a natural 1. Since the RAW crit rules are unchanged, but this is something that extends the rules in a way that players will always want to know about it, it is a house rule.
If a situation comes up in-game, and I need a one time modifier, say, the balance DC for walking across "flaming ice", or whatever — that's just GM arbitration. Two different GMs could easily pick different numbers, and they would both be "correct". Not a house rule.
just two house rules:
hit point rolling:
group 1: reroll 1's
group2: roll two times, take highest
Natural 1:
Dex Check DC 10 or you lose your next attack or standard action
otherwise completely raw
I would define a "house rule" as anything we use to play the game that contradicts what is written in the Core Rules. It could also apply to any elaborate system we've devised to cover situations not in the rules, but technically that falls under the category of "arbitration." However, if such a rule is static and could be considered an extension of the rules of the game, sure, it's a house rule.
I like this description
'findel
|
I generally use House Rules to customize the rules for the setting I'm running in.
Higher powered games have seen rules like:
All PC's get +2 Skill points per level
Hit Points rolled as follows (d4 becomes d2+2, d6 becomes d3+3, d8 becomes d4+4, d10 becomes d6+4, d12 becomes d8+4).
In low magic games, I'd allow an attribute raise every 2 levels instead of ever 4... so long as the same attribute wasn't increased in consecutive raises.
If I'm running an AP (which, presumably, are written specifically for RAW) then I play as close to RAW as possible. I think the only House Rules I have in Kingmaker involved the Armor Check Penalty on Ride skill not applying several of the listed actions and Detect Magic being pushed up to 1st level.