For the most part, I think 5e is looking great. There's probably a couple of rules I'll change, but I'm still going to give RAW (rules as written) at least a fair shake first.
So far I have no plans to run 5e in a home campaign, so I'll be running it straight up, as presented. Whether that'll always be RAW depends on the adventures they put out for organized play. They may well include variations, or leave some bits for the DM to fill in, the way some of the playtest adventures did.
I am only leery of a few rules in particular (critical hits, as the prime example), so I am definitely going to play as-is for a while in order to be sure I am not having a knee-jerk reaction and trying to "solve" some non-existent problem.
I am going to play as is for my first full campaign which will probably be the Tyranny of Dragons adventure series. Savage Worlds taught me it is best to give the game a good try before using a bunch of house rules, but after a few hours with the Basic rules pdf, I already have a lot of ideas for house rules to "fix" things I see as problems right now. By the time the ToD campaign is over I might have a bunch more or have learned that what I see as issues are not big deals and not worth making a house rule to fix.
My home game is 1e/2e, but I will be running 5e op so I will end up following the AL guide when it comes out.
The only thing I may house rule are the following:
- Moving through enemy spaces
- Critically failing a roll
I've never understood not being allowed to move through an enemy space. Make it a contest Str/Dex(player) vs Str/Dex(Dm), where each chooses the stat that suits their ability. Example, player attempts to use strength to barrel through, goblin uses Dex to attempt to trip. On a success, player gets through, on a fail, attack of opportunity. If the player tried to continue past without using Disengage, then AoO.
And maybe I missed it, but critically failing on a roll should come with serious consequences, just like the awesome benefit of critically succeeding.
Just some thoughts.
I'll try it as is and houserule as things come up. That's what we usually do.
rookrock wrote:
Paraxis wrote:
Will probably just go with the option for more detailed encumbrance posted in the basic rules and more limited non-magical recovery (I'm thinking nil hp and a number of HD equal to your proficiency bonus per long rest). Thieves Cant should really have an alternative option IMO. I'm open to suggestions though. I might dig out the 4e critical hit cards and see how they run in 5e.
I will most likely house rule that you are not fully healed after a long rest and instead you regain HP/HD based on your Lifestyle.
I'll be houseruling to make it simpler and more like Fate (mostly involving the Inspiration mechanics), and also to accomodate the fantasy-alternate-WWI setting that I plan to run with it.
One thing I can think of off the top of my head is the initial stat generation in character creation. I don't like how weak the point buy system is compared to rolling. Not only will you get worse stats on average, you're capped at 15 when a dice roll can go up to 18. You almost feel like you have to roll to avoid nerfing your character, and that just leads to some players rolling well and having characters that are far more powerful than those of their unluckier companions.
Still trying to decide how I want to house rule it though, as I'd like to keep it fairly balanced compared to where players are supposed to be. My first thought is:
1. After point buying you bump your top stat by one point (and go up to 16 if you want.)
2. If you chose to roll, any stats above 16 are dropped to 16 to keep the same maximum in place for either route.
By the book to start.
Ooh, baby, I like it RAW.
When someone rolls a 1 in my games, I simply ask them to tell me what happens. Far more often than not, they penalize themselves worse than I would; anything from a dropped weapon to a broken one, or doing damage to your companion by mistake. It's very entertaining for me, and hey, why shouldn't the players be making it more fun for the GM.
R
I'll try it as written and then "fix" things on a group by group basis.
Probably as written with a few of the options presented (encumbrance... Yes, I am a glutton for punishment).
We'll, since my wife says she wants to play Evangeline A.K. McDowell, I guess I've got to houserule me a vampire...
We'll, since my wife says she wants to play Evangeline A.K. McDowell, I guess I've got to houserule me a vampire...
I may tinker with the equipment lists and add rules for gaining skills.
As written
If I get a chance to run the Starter Set adventure, I will run it RAW. I don't really want to start houseruling anything until I see what options are available in the DMG.
There are a few things I have my eye on, though ~ like the sorcerer's wild magic surge. Having the chance be a flat 5% (a roll of 1 on a d20) means it just doesn't come up often enough for my tastes. I reckon the chance of triggering a surge should be equal to the level of the spell you're casting, so like if you're casting a 9th level spell, a roll of 1-9 on a d20 would trigger a surge. The more powerful the magic, the harder it is to control!
SwampDog wrote:
I have never met a perfect set of rules for me. House rule all the way, baby. I will be using a bunch of rules from fifth edition. I really like the way they reduced the score escalation with levels. 
I will probably Read as Written then move on to Audiobooks. I hope it's as intersting as my Javascript on Tape.
i run a RAW game playing WotC adventures and another set in my own setting with a bunch of houserules.
I'll give peace and raw a chance.
Houseruling is fun for me. I will probably run a session or two with the pregens just to see how it unfolds, but I suspect I will want to give the PCs more starting hit points. The HR I have in mind: start them with their HP as though they were 3rd level and not grant more HP until they hit 4th. The rest of the basic game looks solid enough for me to run with as written. On the other hand, what I currently "perceive" to be low starting HP may run just fine for us and I won't feel the need to fiddle.
ChrisTheS wrote:
If I were gonna buy the new rule set, which I'm not, too much would need to be house ruled in order for things to actually make sense.
I will run my players thru the Lost Mine of Phandelver as written. Then when we move on to my homebrew campaign we will houserule as needed or as voted on by the group. Although, I don't forsee many changes.
ChrisTheS wrote:
Paraxis wrote:
SwampDog wrote:
I'm already running a 5E campaign using the last playtest rules, so a few changes that are already in effect will probably stay. Other that that I would want to rum at least 3 or 4 games to see how all the pieces fit together before tinkering.
I go RAW when running Organized Play, but in home game i have a few houserules.
I'll likely give it a try as is at least briefly. Houserules are fine, and will develop as they always do. If approached from the perspective of comparing it or holding it up to the ideal that is another favorite edition, it won't hold up. Emulating playstyles is certainly possible, but it's still a different entity.
Oh, I just remembered one other house rule I'm considering: while I don't have a problem with the Inspiration mechanic as such, I think just being able to use it to gain advantage on a d20 roll is kind of boring. If my players agree to it, I might make it so they get a Plot Twist Card instead. They'd still only be able to get one at a time, and they'd have to use it before the end of the session, but they could potentially get more than one each session as well.
If we get round to playing it I imagine we'll play by RAW, or not at all.
Likely houserules so far:
1. No revivify or raise dead. Resurrection can stay, its high enough level.
2. Second wind is only usable in combat (in fact I think that is the rule, actually)
3. Paizo crit deck & Paizo fumble deck
4. Paizo plot twist deck in substitution for inspiration.
5. Slow healing module
6. Wounds module
Otherwise looking very awesome indeed. Very much looking forward to PHB, MM and DMG. I really want to see the treasure tables, magic items, all the classes.
I think I might need to rework the armor chart.
Luciender wrote:
I will run as RAW till the group considers there to be an issue. I'm more likely to just ignore rules that require mental processing, then to house rule.
Most of my initial houserules will be for representing facets of my homebrew setting, mainly custom races and backgrounds and subclasses, but that has little to do with fixing "bad" mechanics.
There are a few things from the playtest that I wish they'd stuck with, though, that I may wish to bring back. Magic missile as a cantrip, for one. Surprise as an initiative modifier instead of a bonus round, for another. I also miss the Skill Die, but since proficiency goes from 2-6 now by default, it'll be effortless to put it back into play. I also need to update my Wounds module (linked below) to match up with the new core rules, but that'll definitely be in there.
RAW for awhile. The more I dig into the rules the more I'm seeing a lot of subtle interactions and some non obvious balance math behind things. The game is really feeling like it had a lot of playtesting and thought behind certain decisions and I don't want to screw with things until I understand the game a lot more.
For example, with people adding in crit fumbles that's really going to favor the halfling race and make advantage an lot more important.
There are a few areas where I might potentially houserule.
1. As a matter of personal taste, I'm not a fan of skills. They just don't seem as flexible as I'd like. I'm thinking of handling skills in a more freeform manner. Basically, something similar to 13th Age, where players can attempt anything if they make a compelling argument that their character would be skilled at this particular activity.
2. In 4E, I really like martial healing and the resilience of low level characters. I could see myself houseruling in this area. But I'll give RAW a try before making any changes. Much of it depends on the characters the players create. If they have a lot of healing in the party, I'm likely to run RAW. If the characters are mostly martial, I'll probably houserule toward something more like 4E.
We'll run a short adventure (possibly the one in the Starter Set) with RAW up to at least Level 5, and then decide if we need to houserule anything. I'll want to have the PHB for that initial adventure, though.
I'm going RAW for pretty much everythung major, but I'll be house ruling encumberance to a "common sense" rule, and I doubt I'll have them track ammo. I think I can trust my players to be reasonable, and if they want encumberence or ammo tracking I don't mind.
Also, I'm not sure if I'll actually use experience or just level after a few good fights or when the time is just right for a power-up in story.
And I don't think I'll like hour long short rests, but I'll give 'em a shot. If they're too long I'll just make it an arbitrary time based on how badly the party has been beaten up.
Only one thing jumped out at me as needing houserule from the start. The entry for herbalism kit says you can make healing potion, but doesn't say if theres a cost, time requirement, or limit to the number you can make. This isn't Diablo 2.
Fallen_Star_02 wrote:
I'll be running rules as written with a few customization options available for my players:
1) they can choose not to know how to read and write in a language and instead learn how to speak an additional bonus language.
2) Those who roll HP at level up can always reroll a 1.
There's other changes I want to make (remove max HP returning after a long rest, wisdom mod for initiative instead of Dex), but I'll give the current rules a chance first.
rookrock wrote:
I'll run it RAW at 1st with maybe some weapons not ebing allowed if I want to run an early medieval era type game.