19
\$\begingroup\$

In order to add customization to my game, I'd like to add new rules that change certain traits or strengths from different races and classes. Is this allowed or not?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 16
    \$\begingroup\$ Are you an experienced DM? \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Feb 7 at 17:52
  • 3
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ If you have particular questions about changing traits, then you may be able to ask here whether they are overpowered or underpowered from the original. \$\endgroup\$ – L0neGamer Feb 7 at 18:02
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ Define "allowed". Allowed by who? \$\endgroup\$ – WakiNadiVellir Feb 7 at 21:49
  • 7
    \$\begingroup\$ This comes up a lot in various forms, and my reaction is always "if you have to ask that question, then you probably shouldn't mess with the rules too much". In a game with friends, the DM can do absolutely anything they want. You may not be playing it "right" but as long as everyone is having fun then who cares? It is, however, really easy for inexperienced DMs to make game-breaking changes, and those can kill the fun for you and your players. @L0neGamer 's suggestion is great; folks here will happily talk your ears off about the potential impacts of any tweaks you're considering! \$\endgroup\$ – A C Feb 7 at 23:59
42
\$\begingroup\$

Communication is the key

D&D homebrew is the means by which you create your own environment, monsters, rules etc., so it’s entirely acceptable, if the changes are clearly communicated before play.

If I were the DM, I would make sure everyone agreed with the changes and everything was clearly understood. I would take time to address everyone’s questions.

I would also limit these changes to a player group I have played with before. If there is a newcomer, I think that adds additional dynamics that would add additional responsibilities, thus making DMing more challenging.

Balance

I would ask why you are wanting to change traits and strengths. This could create an imbalance in the characters. It could have unintended side effects down the road. I would be hesitant to change too much. If some unintended consequence is discovered later during gameplay, there is nothing to fall back on to help resolve the issue.

If it was me, I would tread lightly when making such changes.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KorvinStarmast thanks. That a great idea. I didn't think of looking to the DMG for reference. I will try to find that section. \$\endgroup\$ – matt Feb 7 at 18:30
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ If I had it in front of me I'd tell you the page, but I am AFB \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast Feb 7 at 18:50
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ +1 for Communication. I remember getting in a new group and being given a choice between a Rogue and Paladin characters (already part of story). I had already played a Paladin but not a Rogue, so I opted for Rogue. First combat, and the DM tells me I only get Sneak Attack damage on the first attack roll of the round (not even the first hit)... hum... I mean, I expected to contribute less to combat than the Barbarian, but if I had known about such a crippling house-rule in advance, I'd have opted to play the Paladin instead. \$\endgroup\$ – Matthieu M. Feb 8 at 19:52
37
\$\begingroup\$

The limit is what your players will accept

The concept of Rule 0 is that the DM has the freedom to override and change all of the rules. The GMs freedom to change things as needed and make rulings for their own game is mentioned in the rules so, arguably, even Rules-as-Written the GM has no limits.

More than that, with the exception of some organized play, there are no rules police and nothing to enforce the rules. As long as everyone in the group is on the same page, nothing stops you from changing every rule in the book so long as your players don't revolt and abandon the game entirely.

The more interesting question is how much should a GM change things and how should the GM go about doing it. A GM, especially a novice GM, is likely well served by following a few guidelines:

  1. Be up front with your players. Sometimes of course you need to make a rulings call on an edge case when it comes up. But if you are planning ahead of time to make a genuine change, you should explicitly inform the players as early as possible, especially if this change might affect how they build their characters.
  2. Remember DnD is (normally) well tested. This doesn't always apply to games from smaller publishing houses, but first-party material for DnD normally goes through a fair bit of testing for balance and playability. It isn't perfect, and "broken" things definitely gets published, but more likely than not the designers considered the balance effects more than you have. When making a significant change, you are changing that balance. In other words, be aware that your change may have unintended consequences, especially if you care about balance.
  3. If you are dealing with experienced players, significant changes will run against their expectations. This isn't always a bad thing, but its worth remembering that you may be increasing the cognitive load on your players if they are used to playing without homebrew.
\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Good advice, although keep in mind players may freely accept house rules, only to realize too late that they've broken the game. \$\endgroup\$ – RobertF Feb 8 at 20:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ @RobertF Good point, I've even run into that. But that can normally be fixed at least going forward and the past can be papered over. \$\endgroup\$ – TimothyAWiseman Feb 8 at 20:59

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.