Curious how many people use just one edition, or create a stew pot from different rules.

Do you-
Only use rules from one edition.
Use rules from one edition, with a few house rules or systems brought in from other editions/systems.
Your rule set can't be pinned down as specifically one edition, you draw from so many different sources.

For me, it's one edition for Pathfinder (1st) a host of house rules with bits drawn from later editions for my 2nd ed games. And by the book for 5th ed, what little I've played of it.

I modify whatever TTRPG to fit my world, not the other way around.  Currently using PF2e (yea I know) and modify it with some Earthdawn style magic items (before they introduced relics in the GMG) and changed up the pure casters to be Expert in their attacks and DC's at 1st, master at 7th and legendary at 15th.   Its worked out great for my players who are a mix of Martials and Casters.   

Currently forcing myself to run Shadow of the Demon Lord as written, to experience it. I like it, but will certainly change the rules eventually (okay, TBH I added critical hits as soon as someone rolled a natural 20 - but that's it!).

Usually run a heavily house-ruled version of 5e.

I don't run house-ruled B/X anymore because I wrote my own neoclone, Dark Fantasy Basic (see the sig). It contains some B/X, some 5e, a bit of 3e, and even a rule from 13th age.

I'm currently playing my own hack of Ben Milton's Knave, titled Book & Blade (link in sig).  Its a mix of Knave and D&D B/X, with the addition of Feat-like abilities and a few other ideas and rules from various other RPGs.  If I need to rule on something that is not covered in my 8-page game, I refer to the Old School Essentials Rules Tome.

So, mish-mash.

Nearly always run a game straight first to see how it works.  Then I start to house rule it.  If I'm after a particular experience/setting, then I try to pick the rules that are the best fit as a starting place before the house rules are added.  Lately, I've got some particular ideas of what I want such that it is easier to start from scratch than any particular rules, though even then the rules are informed by many different games.  It's not quite, "throw A, B, C, D, and E in a blender and then go from there, but it gets close."

GURPS with a fair number of house rules, and some from earlier editions: I never ditched BSII missile weapon mechanics, for instance.

Quote from: Crusader X on July 15, 2021, 08:36:01 PM
I'm currently playing my own hack of Ben Milton's Knave, titled Book & Blade (link in sig).  Its a mix of Knave and D&D B/X, with the addition of Feat-like abilities and a few other ideas and rules from various other RPGs.  If I need to rule on something that is not covered in my 8-page game, I refer to the Old School Essentials Rules Tome.

So, mish-mash.

I love this Book & Blade. Awesome stuff.

Generally I build my own system for any game I actually run. Some have more obvious origins than others, but all of them get so heavily rebuilt that I could easily market the system as my own free and clear if I just cleaned up any lingering IP.

For Fantasy my preference is to use my "Ruins & Realms" game engine.

For Modern/Urban Fantasy I default to my "White Book Mage" game engine (basically a ground up rebuild that started from the OWoD engine, but setting independent).

My past two Sci-Fi campaigns used my d6-based Star Trek (adapted from, but significantly different from... not even the same stats, WEG Star Wars) and my "Rebuild of Robotech" system.

I'm very much a "setting first then find a system to fit it" type of GM and building my own system and a setting sandbox are things I enjoy about GMing in the first place.

Playing? I'll make suggestions (I've got a group where someone else runs Ruins & Realms), but it's mostly what the GM is interested in running.

My current game is based on the 1e Mongoose Traveller playtest rules, with other elements pulled from MgT1, MgT2, Classic Traveller, T5 and T:TNE.

My previous game was a modified version of the Rolemaster Standard System, with some elements from RM2 (and RFMFP, technically, althought that's moreorless RMSS).

My next game is planned to be ACKS, with some tweaks, including a few things reverted back towards B/X, and standard ascending AC (the latter of which could be considered a 3E element).

So, I guess I predemoninantly use the edition I've chosen, but I'm more than happy to use elements from other editions.

I'm in the mish-mash camp.

I am a fan of White Box power levels; but I appreciate some of the stuff added in later editions of D&D, and Pathfinder 1st Edition.  For instance; Monsters.

The beauty of White Box, is it's relative simplicity.  It can be run in a simple manner; or you can cram too much mess into it, for it to still be simple.

For many years I used to be a Rules-As-Written kind of guy. Lately I have been running rules-lite systems so I add what I think needs added.

Quote from: Chris24601 on July 16, 2021, 12:58:09 AM
Generally I build my own system for any game I actually run. Some have more obvious origins than others, but all of them get so heavily rebuilt that I could easily market the system as my own free and clear if I just cleaned up any lingering IP.

For Fantasy my preference is to use my "Ruins & Realms" game engine.

For Modern/Urban Fantasy I default to my "White Book Mage" game engine (basically a ground up rebuild that started from the OWoD engine, but setting independent).

My past two Sci-Fi campaigns used my d6-based Star Trek (adapted from, but significantly different from... not even the same stats, WEG Star Wars) and my "Rebuild of Robotech" system.

I'm very much a "setting first then find a system to fit it" type of GM and building my own system and a setting sandbox are things I enjoy about GMing in the first place.

Playing? I'll make suggestions (I've got a group where someone else runs Ruins & Realms), but it's mostly what the GM is interested in running.

Please share white book mage

Generally one rule set but with a few house rules.

Currently running MgT2e pretty much by the book.

Also, However, I'm running B/X for my kids but added some 5e stuff and house rules too.

Made my own d12 system modeled after shadow run years ago. Extremely crunchy.

I'm also in the middle of trying to create my own version of d20, but much more on the light side.

I use a ruleset RAW - then after I feel I'm proficient with it (which has its own connotations), I start designing my own sub-systems that either don't exist, or that I feel the system doesn't give me adequately.

This might actually lead to a lot of renovation, which sometimes causes me to then consider my real goals vs. what the system is trying to do.

Currently I'm into Savage Worlds - because

1) as ruleset when run RAW it has a lot of open ended options within a very tightly bound core set of mechanics.
2) With a few tweaks you can plug in a massive number of sub-systems that exist specific for a setting that cause the system to  scale far beyond what one might expect
3) The flexibility of these tweaks lets one change the entire tone of what the core-mechanics expresses in play from gritty and detailed, to wildly abstract with fairly little effort. The discretion of the sub-systems and their interactions with the core task-resolution allows for a LOT of flexibility with minimal effort.

This is what allows for the multi-genre coverage that Savage Worlds is known for - even *simultaneously*. It has enough crunch to give new GM's plenty of handholds to stick to RAW. It has incredible modularity for more adventurous GM's to go crazy and do their own thing without breaking the game.

Savage Worlds is a tight set of mechanics that is designed to be used as a mish-mash. I mean, Sweet Galactus, Kevin Siembieda got on YouTube and fully endorsed it for Rifts to his own Rift's audience... what universe are we in? The ultimate mish-mash setting with a ruleset that is itself a mish-mash of solid design. Not perfect, but "perfect" is subjective.

Quote from: PencilBoy99 on July 16, 2021, 07:59:15 AM
Please share white book mage

Posted it a few times previously, but here you go; https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8uzbbLvQJOLRWtSaVU4M3A5M0E/view?usp=sharing
It's still got some vestiges of it being Mage focused in there, but it's pretty generic.

The biggest complaint I've gotten from 3rd parties were the changes to spheres; dropping Prime as an independent sphere (its capabilities were merged into the other spheres with the majority of its esoteric effects going to Spirit) and breaking Entropy up into Death and Fate (magical practices associated with death are so universal to human culture and so oddly distributed between the existing spheres that it needed its own thing).

The thing is, both those changes were the direct result of player feedback over the course of decades of campaigning in the setting so, while Ascension purists might not like the decision to change it, it functioned so much better in actual play and helping newbies grok magic that it was worth it to me.

It also made it much easier to build the more static powers of the other supernaturals.

So use and enjoy; keep what you like, change what you don't.