A system without houserules?

[Thrawn4]

Hello everyone.
I just wondered whether you ever played and enjoyed a system that did not need any houserules. I never managed to find one that did not at least need some tweaking. Fate, Gurps and so on does not really count as they are meant to be tweaked.

[The Rose Dragon]

Risus. Does Risus count? I don't think it counts.

Maid.

I haven't used any house rules in Mutants & Masterminds so far, but I am willing to accept that I might have to if I ever come upon players that do not restrain themselves according to the setting I presented them.

[Kaun]

i play most systems without house rules.

What house rules i do have are general rules of etiquette rather then alterations to the system.

The need to alter the rules is all a mater of perspective i guess.

[Totally Guy]

I like to play without house rules if possible.

Burning Wheel works well as it's dice rolling procedure is very well formalised. That's the most complicated game I'd do.

Dungeon World and the other *World games look pretty good for it.

A lot of the lighter games would work well.

I was thinking of Inscectres but I'd need to check my interpretation of the cool dice rule again...

GMless games such as Fiasco and Project Ninja Panda Taco are fine too.


What I dislike is when rules are not described in vague ways in which you end up interpreting it as you expect it ought to be but without realising it. I once played a game in which I'd read the rules and thought that failure meant I had to try something else and the GM thought it meant you got to roll until you succeeded. That took a long time figure out as I didn't know why I wasn't able to see the failure manifest and do something different and he didn't know why I wouldn't just try again. Both of us thought we were playing without houserules.

[Sidmen]

I played Star Wars: Saga edition without any House Rules.

Unless, of course, you count extra talents as quest rewards as "House Rules".

[Big Fau]

Hello everyone.
I just wondered whether you ever played and enjoyed a system that did not need any houserules. I never managed to find one that did not at least need some tweaking.

Skyrim.


What? :smalltongue:

[Radar]

I'd be inclined to point out Legend, but recently I DMed for a group of people with no RPG experiance at all, so I did away with social encounter rules and some more elaborate combat options for the sake of not drowning them in system details. It was also quite amusing to see them adopt the typical murder-hobo mentality right from the start.

I still think this system doesn't need tweaking, even if I did so anyway.

[Scow2]

Skyrim.


What? :smalltongue:

Seriously? I've never played an Elder Scrolls game without houserules.

[Rhynn]

I like to play without house rules if possible.

Same. Played D&D 3.5 without houserules. I do like to add or modify things, though - usually adding rules rather than rewriting/replacing.


Seriously? I've never played an Elder Scrolls game without houserules.

For real, mods are just about a requirement.

[neonchameleon]

Hello everyone.
I just wondered whether you ever played and enjoyed a system that did not need any houserules. I never managed to find one that did not at least need some tweaking. Fate, Gurps and so on does not really count as they are meant to be tweaked.

4e. (I now houserule extended rests to take longer than one night, and use the weapon breakage rules from Dark Sun)
Leverage. (I houserule complications to start at d8 not d6)
Marvel Heroic Roleplaying.
Dread (one-shot)
Fiasco (one-shot)
Apocalypse World

[rockdeworld]

I've enjoyed pretty much every system I've played (not so much 3.0 as a ranger), but I can't say they didn't need houserules.

I've heard Legend fits that description because everything was designed with balance in mind. I haven't played it.

So I guess my answer is "no."

[Jay R]

I have two answers, both of which technically answer the question you asked, but only one of which is what you intended.

1. TOON. Play it as it's written. I've never heard of a house rule.

2. Original D&D. The rules aren't even close to complete (28 8 1/2 x 11 sheets of paper, folded over), and the answer to everything not written down is for the DM to make a ruling based on the principles in the booklets. What you think of as house rules are therefore the actual rule and intended play. It is only after AD&D came out, and the books tried to answer all the questions, that the idea of a house rule could develop in the form we think of it.

[JadePhoenix]

I play most systems without houserules. In fact, I believe most people do that.

[Kelb_Panthera]

You've got a better chance of finding the holy grail than finding an RPG that doesn't have -some- housruling as a necessity.

Bear in mind that -any- addition, tweak, or discarding of a rule is houseruling. No RPG is so perfectly written that you don't have to add, remove, or tweak -something-.

[Slipperychicken]

Even when a system doesn't need a houserule, things are sometimes worded poorly, or it's a hassle to look up the actual rules, so the DM makes something up so it makes sense.

[BWR]

I think every game I've ever played or run has had house rules. Some are just minor tweakings to iron out a bug or annoyance, other times, usually under me, there are major overhauls to just about everything.
I'm a compulsive rules tinkerer, and every time I get into a new system, I go bananas making new classes, schools, abilities, whatnot until I start working on more basic things, like skills.

In my latest PF campaign I have managed to keep house rules to a minimum.
1. The PCs got Ancestral Relic for free, as a story seed.
2. Classes with 2 skikll points per level got 3
3. crafting can be done without feats (higher DCs, can't improve other people's work, they don't get much loot in the first place).
4. the magus class is restricted to elves (fits the BECMI feel of elves being fighter/mages)

I continually have to reign myself in from introducing new rules or modifying stuff.

[Jay R]

Even when a system doesn't need a houserule, things are sometimes worded poorly, or it's a hassle to look up the actual rules, so the DM makes something up so it makes sense.

In TOON, one of the rules is that if a question comes up, and the Animator doesn't know the answer, he rolls a 1d6. 1, 2, or 3 = yes; 4, 5, or 6 = no.

That is so clear and straightforward that I have never seen anybody houserule anything.

[Slipperychicken]

In TOON, one of the rules is that if a question comes up, and the Animator doesn't know the answer, he rolls a 1d6. 1, 2, or 3 = yes; 4, 5, or 6 = no.


I've heard elsewhere that's actually a good rule for games in general. Seems like it would keep things moving with a minimum of arguments.

[Knaight]

I play Microscope by the book. Granted, Microscope can be distilled down to a page, is basically a very formalized structure that a game happens in, and is highly unconventional to begin with, but it still applies.

[Bulhakov]

I've never played without houserules, and personally don't know a single player/GM that played without some tweaks (mostly to remove game-breaking "cheeze", make some rules more rational or speed up the game).

[Saintheart]

I play Microscope by the book. Granted, Microscope can be distilled down to a page, is basically a very formalized structure that a game happens in, and is highly unconventional to begin with, but it still applies.

So there is someone on here who does!

Same here. Microscope doesn't need a houserule as such.

Technically, freeform roleplay has no houserules because it's all houserules, too. :smallbiggrin:

[Asmodai]

Actually it totally comes down to the people playing. Some people can even play Exalted 2nd edition without houserules and errata. Others go and tinker with everything.

[Xeratos]

I'm pretty sure the only people who ever play a system without house rules are the people who wrote that system, because it's already exactly how they want it to be. Even then, I doubt that's a 100% of the time scenario, especially if their were multiple authors that disagreed on how some things should be handled.

I'm basing this on the idea that any deviation from the stated rules in the book is house ruling. For example, if I craft an encounter, and I don't roll for random loot off tables, but instead generate specific treasure based on what I want players to have, the best that could be said is I'm using a variant rule, which is essentially just a house rule that's printed in the book.

All that having been said, I feel that house ruling is as much a part of tabletop gaming as rolling dice is, and I see nothing wrong with it as long as everyone is on the same page about what's being changed.

[Slipperychicken]

I'm pretty sure the only people who ever play a system without house rules are the people who wrote that system, because it's already exactly how they want it to be. Even then, I doubt that's a 100% of the time scenario, especially if their were multiple authors that disagreed on how some things should be handled.


I've seen people houserule their own homebrew. This one DM made an OP monk fix which gained some stupid amount of DR. At level 18, he had us in a siege against level 1 mooks, and the DR laughed them off (he was literally running around inside the enemy castle because of how ineffective the mooks were), at which point the DM decided the arrows would start breaking it because he was frustrated and didn't understand how 3.5 scaling is supposed to work.