D&D 5E I don’t really care what rules the players use.

Reynard · May 13, 2024

It occurred to me as I was trying to formulate a response to another thread that I, as GM, don't actually care which PHB -- or combination of PHBs -- my players care to use. Or PC facing supplements for that matter.

If I run 5E, I am going to use a combination of rules from the various forms of 5E,plus some stuff from other games,plus some house rules,plus just making stuff up as I go.

So, honestly, if they like 2024 monk or A5E fighter or ToV Warlock best? Whatever. The only thing that would make me care is if one of those things required a game wide rule implementation,which then I would have to actually consider.

overgeeked · May 13, 2024

This is the way.

You see a lot of this in the OSR scene. As long as the source games are close enough and there’s not a huge power disparity, many referees are okay with mix-and-match games.

Distracted DM · May 13, 2024

Reynard said:
It occurred to me as I was trying to formulate a response to another thread that I, as GM, don't actually care which PHB -- or combination of PHBs -- my players care to use. Or PC facing supplements for that matter.

If I run 5E, I am going to use a combination of rules from the various forms of 5E,plus some stuff from other games,plus some house rules,plus just making stuff up as I go.

So, honestly, if they like 2024 monk or A5E fighter or ToV Warlock best? Whatever. The only thing that would make me care is if one of those things required a game wide rule implementation,which then I would have to actually consider.

Your would have to decide which version of spells and feats etc you'd want to use, and let the players know

I guess the only other concern is the volume of different books or PDFs you'd need to have available at any one time if you're pulling classes from one version, spells from another, etc etc

And some versions classes are going to just outshine others. But I am definitely in the camp of "I'm going to take use what I like."

ezo · May 13, 2024

I'm strongly the other direction. PHB and XGtE are about it for the players, with very minor additions from other books (SCAG, TCoE, etc.). I generally use the "oldest" versions of spells, features, etc. unless I note it to the players. Everything a player wants for their PC has to pass inspection, so to say.

In general, the further along a game "evolves", the more likely power creep, feature bloat, etc. occurs and the less I like the direction things are going. I extremely, highly doubt there will be a single thing from 2024 rules I'll adopt or include in my games.

Reynard · May 13, 2024

Distracted DM said:
Your would have to decide which version of spells and feats etc you'd want to use, and let the players know

Actually the player just need to tell me which version they want to use.

Distracted DM said:
I guess the only other concern is the volume of different books or PDFs you'd need to have available at any one time if you're pulling classes from one version, spells from another, etc etc

The real problem I see is that since I generally run 5E using Fantasy Grounds, there might be some conflict based on loaded resources.

Distracted DM said:
And some versions classes are going to just outshine others. But I am definitely in the camp of "I'm going to take use what I like."

Again, I don't care. That's a player problem IMO -- because it is a player problem in a strict "Only Core Rules" setup, too. There can always be disparities in power and it is only a problem if it is a problem for the players. As GM, I'm not even a little bit worried about it.

TwoSix · May 13, 2024

Reynard said:
Actually the player just need to tell me which version they want to use.

The real problem I see is that since I generally run 5E using Fantasy Grounds, there might be some conflict based on loaded resources.

Again, I don't care. That's a player problem IMO -- because it is a player problem in a strict "Only Core Rules" setup, too. There can always be disparities in power and it is only a problem if it is a problem for the players. As GM, I'm not even a little bit worried about it.

So nice to see some other people actually get it.

Reynard · May 13, 2024

TwoSix said:
So nice to see some other people actually get it.

I guess I should include a caveat: there are specific individual players I know who I would scrutinize if they brought in some random BS. These are mostly the guys I play D&D with that love Magic and treat D&D like that. That kind of power gaming just isn't fun for me.

TwoSix · May 13, 2024

Reynard said:
I guess I should include a caveat: there are specific individual players I know who I would scrutinize if they brought in some random BS. These are mostly the guys I play D&D with that love Magic and treat D&D like that. That kind of power gaming just isn't fun for me.

Fair. I have an absolute expectation that if I'm nice enough to trust you to make a character with whatever resources you'd like to use, you're going to reciprocate by not trying to break my game.

Reynard · May 13, 2024

TwoSix said:
Fair. I have an absolute expectation that if I'm nice enough to trust you to make a character with whatever resources you'd like to use, you're going to reciprocate by not trying to break my game.

I have two of these guys. One is absolutely trying to break The Game, but not my game, if that makes sense. He just likes to see how to manipulate systems until they collapse. The other just wants a win button. he hates losing, even a little.

Distracted DM · May 13, 2024

Reynard said:
Actually the player just need to tell me which version they want to use.

The real problem I see is that since I generally run 5E using Fantasy Grounds, there might be some conflict based on loaded resources.

Again, I don't care. That's a player problem IMO -- because it is a player problem in a strict "Only Core Rules" setup, too. There can always be disparities in power and it is only a problem if it is a problem for the players. As GM, I'm not even a little bit worried about it.

Reynard said:
I guess I should include a caveat: there are specific individual players I know who I would scrutinize if they brought in some random BS. These are mostly the guys I play D&D with that love Magic and treat D&D like that. That kind of power gaming just isn't fun for me.

OK so your type of game rewards high system-mastery. If player 1 knows that there's a fireball spell that does 2d6 more damage than another fireball, but player 2 brings in the lower damage fireball, I assume you'd allow player 2 to switch to the higher damage fireball.
If player 3 takes two feats from two different books that let them take up to a -10 penalty to hit, but add up to +20 to damage with each attack, and they have features that let them roll 3 dice and take the highest to hit- no issue? Or are these the instances where you'll start scrutinizing, the people that have high system mastery?

Edit: This isn't a combative question btw, I just try to understand tables how "anything goes" with dozens of books/sources work without the GM bogging down combat by having to throw more and more difficult/complex monsters to handle their power- and then there are the other players at the table that aren't looking for the best options and just pick "whatever," who are getting toasted by the higher difficulty enemies being brought to bear vs. the powerful characters.

D&D 5E I don’t really care what rules the players use.

Reynard

Legend

overgeeked

B/X Known World

Distracted DM

Distracted DM

ezo

I cast invisibility

Reynard

Legend

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

Reynard

Legend

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

Reynard

Legend

Distracted DM

Distracted DM

Similar Threads