Which RAW rule is most eligible for changing via houserule?

[bjoern]

In your opinion, which rule would you change to make more sense?

My vote goes to the Dark vision/lowlight vision mechanics. As it is now, an elf can see better underground than a dwarf can.
I would make every creature with darkvision also have low light vision and make darkvision start at the point where the darkness beings.

[PsyBomb]

Monks not being proficient with Unarmed Strikes.

Really, just read the Disfunctional Rules thread and pick a favorite

[OldTrees1]

Favored Classes. How long has it been since you have even heard of a table that uses that rule?

[eggynack]

Well, by my reckoning, you have to start with the rules that people already intuitively think are part of the RAW, because the actual RAW is just stupid. Examples of that include monks having proficiency with unarmed strikes, drown healing, and the spell darkness creating light. Beyond that, my favorite type of house rule is spell reorganization house rules. That includes stuff like moving healing to necromancy, maybe giving orbs to evocation, and eliminating alignment descriptors from spells.

[Fax Celestis]

In your opinion, which rule would you change to make more sense?

My vote goes to the Dark vision/lowlight vision mechanics. As it is now, an elf can see better underground than a dwarf can.
I would make every creature with darkvision also have low light vision and make darkvision start at the point where the darkness beings.

In the presence of a torch, sure. In the absence of light sources, dwarves are superior. I would imagine underground dwarven cities don't have light sources at all.

[Threadnaught]

Monk non-proficiency with Unarmed Strike and Diplomacy.

[Psyren]

Really, just read the Disfunctional Rules thread and pick a favorite

This. The legwork's already been done.

[eggynack]

On that note, it might also be worth looking into the rules as common sense dictates (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?240218-quot-Common-Sense-quot-approach-to-rules-(RACSD)). It's a rather direct answer to this question.

[nedz]

All of the below pretty much REQUIRE houserules — if you are going to use them.

[Divide by Zero]

Disregarding the obvious goofs like drown healing and monks not being proficient with unarmed strikes, I have to say favored classes. It's a needlessly complicated mechanic that disproportionately punishes lower-tier builds, since full casters almost never multiclass with non-prestige classes anyway.

[Story]

Favored Classes. How long has it been since you have even heard of a table that uses that rule?

Not explicitly, but I've been in games where everyone made sure their build wouldn't have XP penalties because they didn't feel like asking the DM to explcitly houserule it. Usually, it's pretty easy to work around the rule anyway if you want to.

[Sylthia]

In the presence of a torch, sure. In the absence of light sources, dwarves are superior. I would imagine underground dwarven cities don't have light sources at all.

They do need a light source to see in color, though.

[Flickerdart]

They do need a light source to see in color, though.
This brings up an interesting point - dwarves love gold and gems...but in the absence of light, precious metals and stones don't sparkle, and have nothing going for them. They wouldn't even be that rare, since dwarves live underground and mining is a central industry.

Obviously, this stereotype is perpetuated by the dwarves themselves in order to drive up the value of gold and gems when they trade them to surface dwellers.

[Extra Anchovies]

Disregarding the obvious goofs like drown healing and monks not being proficient with unarmed strikes, I have to say favored classes. It's a needlessly complicated mechanic that disproportionately punishes lower-tier builds, since full casters almost never multiclass with non-prestige classes anyway.

Exactly. Whenever I explain the various player races to a new player, I never, ever mention favored classes. Because they're just dumb. There is zero reason to have them in the game. Single-classed characters are often boring, ToB and full casters aside.

[Psyren]

Single-classed characters are often boring, ToB and full casters aside.

Also incarnum.

But single-classed characters are also easier for newer DMs to parse. So PF and 5e have gone the archetype/subclass route instead.

[eggynack]

But single-classed characters are also easier for newer DMs to parse.
However, characters constructed of tiny one and two level dips are the hardest to parse, and that is what this system incentivizes. The penalty probably shouldn't exist in the first place, but even in a world where it does, its implementation was horrible.

[robgrayert]

The one so good that they finally just made it an official rule in 5.0: you get max hp at 1st level and don't have to roll for it.

[Flickerdart]

The one so good that they finally just made it an official rule in 5.0: you get max hp at 1st level and don't have to roll for it.
Reasonably certain that this was a rule in 3.5 - PCs get max HD for the first hit die, NPCs roll.

[atemu1234]

Favored Classes. How long has it been since you have even heard of a table that uses that rule?

Mine, and the 10+ campaigns I've been in and or DMed for.

[molten_dragon]

Encumbrance rules due to weight. I don't know a single person who thinks that the "My STR 6 halfling wizard can only carry his spellbook and spell component pouch if he goes naked" minigame adds a lot of fun to D&D.

[Sylthia]

I don't think I've been in a group yet that really used the rules about food and starvation.

For encumbrance, I've as a DM really only enforced it
A: To keep PCs (mostly spellcasters, who are less MAD anyway) from dumping Strength completely
B: To keep PCs from trying to get too ridiculous with their inventory (i.e. PCs wanting to wield a trebuchet)

[Gemini476]

Reasonably certain that this was a rule in 3.5 - PCs get max HD for the first hit die, NPCs roll.

I think he might be referring to how you can choose to get static averageish hp/level rather than rolling. Although I think that might be an optional variant, because grog. (Which was in Unearthed Arcana, I think, and most definitely in 4E although that one was a bit different in how it worked. Rather than level*(con mod+HD) it's Con score+level*"HD", for reference.)

[OldTrees1]

Mine, and the 10+ campaigns I've been in and or DMed for.

Yeah, they exist. But most people only hear about them once a decade(hyperbole).

[Curmudgeon]

Range penalties for perception skills are linear with distance, which makes noticing anything that's moderately far away impossible. Because these rules mess with my game experience, I addressed them with the following house rule.

Range penalties for Spot (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/spot.htm) and Listen (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/listen.htm) are reduced:
From 101'-300', range penalties add -1 per additional 20'.
From 301'-600', range penalties add -1 per additional 30'.
From 601'-1000', range penalties add -1 per additional 40'.
Beyond 1000', range penalties add -1 per additional 50'.

DistancePenaltyDistancePenaltyDistancePenaltyDista ncePenalty
10'-1160'-13450'-25880'-37
20'-2180'-14480'-26920'-38
30'-3200'-15510'-27960'-49
40'-4220'-16540'-281000'-40
50'-5240'-17570'-291050'-41
60'-6260'-18600'-301100'-42
70'-7280'-19640'-311150'-43
80'-8300'-20680'-321200'-44
90'-9330'-21720'-331250'-45
100'-10360'-22760'-341300'-46
120'-11390'-23800'-351350'-47
140'-12420'-24840'-361400'-48

This addresses the issue of characters being incapable of perceiving enemies at D&D encounter distances (up to 1440'). -48 is tough to overcome with 23 ranks in Spot or Listen; the -144 of the standard rules is impossible.

[Milo v3]

The one so good that they finally just made it an official rule in 5.0: you get max hp at 1st level and don't have to roll for it.

That's in 3.x, talks about it at the start of the class chapter of the PHB.

[atemu1234]

Yeah, they exist. But most people only hear about them once a decade(hyperbole).

It does seem odd to me, though, that all the games I've ever been in use it and yet it seems to not be used anywhere else.

We do, however, allow the Acquire Favored Class feat from Unearthed Arcana. I used it to run a Monk 2 / Fighter 2 / Gunslinger X build that worked out flavorfully, if not that functionally.

[Thurbane]

Favored Classes. How long has it been since you have even heard of a table that uses that rule?

Every 3.X table I've ever played at? But judging by this forum, I'm in the minority.

[Bronk]

My vote goes to the Dark vision/lowlight vision mechanics. As it is now, an elf can see better underground than a dwarf can.
I would make every creature with darkvision also have low light vision and make darkvision start at the point where the darkness beings.

I would just turn Darkvision back into Infravision, since I always thought that was cooler anyway, and not a nerfed way to copy GURPS.

[Fax Celestis]

How about making prestige classes that advance spellcasting actually advance all of spellcasting? There's a bunch that advance spells per day but not spells known, or spells per day and spells known but not caster level, or any multitude of terrible editing/copypasta issues.

[Extra Anchovies]

How about making prestige classes that advance spellcasting actually advance all of spellcasting? There's a bunch that advance spells per day but not spells known, or spells per day and spells known but not caster level, or any multitude of terrible editing/copypasta issues.

Oh yes, these. Green Star Adept (+15 CL in 10 levels, but only +5 to spells known/spells per day), Rainbow Servant (10/10, but the table says 6/10), and Archmage (doesn't advance CL at all) stand out as particularly bad examples.

[Shining Wrath]

My DM enforces the multi-class XP penalty. I'll houserule it when it's my turn, if we do 3.5.

Encumbrance. Most of the time people either ignore or or houserule it, unless you do something like having the Wizard carry out the statue of the barbarian who got Medusa'd.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Monks not being proficient with Unarmed Strikes.




This one. These are extra characters

[Thurbane]

Ignoring the rules about Monks and Paladins not being able to resume their classes after multiclassing (without specials feats or PrC exemptions) seems to be another popular one.

Again, enforced at every 3.X table I play at.