AD&D is not "rules light"

[rogueattorney]

It wasn't written "rules lite," but it was played "rules lite" by pretty much everybody.

AD&D, unlike pretty much every other rpg, gets judged on how it was played rather than than how it was written. There's no mystery as to why that is... for over twenty years, it was the most widely played rpg, and had a relatively stable set of rules during that time. Everyone played. The same can't really be said for any other game from the same time period.

But I see more commentary on it, both positive and negative, where I think to myself... "But that's not what the rules say." So many unstated rules conventions were built up around the game. Heck, a lot of people, me included, who've taken a long break from AD&D are actually surprised by what's in there when reacquainting themselves with the rules.

I personally, after coming back to the fold about 7 years ago, like it a lot more than I did in the 80's. There's nothing in the rules that say you have to play it the same way now that you did when you were 12, and it's fun reading the rules with fresh eyes. That said, as written, it's too heavy for my fairly informal games, and for my group I prefer lighter fare... OD&D and B/X D&D and their clones.

 

[Umbran]

Last I checked, there was no accepted objective measure of "rules weight". All measurement of heft of rules is relative, and most times we don't state the point of reference.

If your point of reference is OD&D, or Tunnels and Trolls, then no, 1e is not rules light. If your point of reference is 3e, or Rolemaster, you 1e is pretty light.

Also, it seems to me that 1e was very easy to make rules-light and still have the system function passably. I don't think the same can be said for 3e or 4e. Thus, it may be fair to say that comparing the game "as played", 1e was light by comparison.

Which is a wordier way of saying I mostly agree with many of the folks above.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

As I said, it depends on your measuring stick. Compared to basic, 1e may be a bit more rules heavy, but then, compared to rock/paper/scissors, Basic is rules heavy. Before you can call something rules light or heavy, you have to have a standard that you are comparing it to. You don't have to look far to see how much more rules light 1e is than later editions.

In 1e if you want to jump across a pit, you tell the dm. At worst, he makes you roll a dex or strength check. In 3e, you factor skill points, movement rate, and attribute and size in, then roll a d20.

In 1e, if you want to grapple, you roll a d20, the dm consults a chart. In 3e, you make 47 rolls, consult 3 books and call WOTC's customer support line.

In 1e, you can play an elven fighter/magic user. In 3e, you can play a half dragon/half drow fighter/wizard/rogue/monk/cleric sorceror/paladin/assassin.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

It wasn't rules light, exactly, but here's the thing: In 2E, the rules were divided into two sections. There was the chunk of rules you absolutely needed to create a character and play the game - character creation, core combat mechanics, and so on. And then there was a mass of other rules that did nothing very much.

If you threw out the latter, and played with the former, you had a fairly rules-light game. And you could do that, and many people did... even, I venture to say, most people. I've been a gamer for over twenty years, much of that playing 2E, but I don't remember anyone ever using the weapon versus armor tables, or the pummeling and overbearing rules.

In 3E, the addition of feats, the drastic increase in the number of things affected by stat modifiers, the increase in magnitude of those modifiers (such that you no longer needed exceptional stats for it to have a game effect), the inclusion of skill points, and the multiclassing system, all added up to a huge expansion of the "indispensable" section of the rules. You could tweak or house-rule this stuff, but you couldn't just ignore it. Trying to do so would leave you with a great gaping hole in your game.

Furthermore, those "indispensable" rules had many more hooks into other areas. For instance, you could pretty easily ignore the 2E rules for pummeling and overbearing, because they were their own little bubble floating off in space. But in 3E, every monster and its brother had Improved Grab; and if the fighter picked up Improved Grapple, well, then, grappling just became indispensable. You couldn't get rid of it without either a) screwing over the fighter or b) making up a detailed set of house rules.

2E was not so much rules-light as rules-modular.

This.

1000% this.

When I call AD&D rules-light, it is because of the separation of the core rules and the "fluff" rules that got ignored.

 

[Piratecat]

In 1e, if you want to grapple, you roll a d20, the dm consults a chart. In 3e, you make 47 rolls, consult 3 books and call WOTC's customer support line.

Heh. Whenever I wanted to torture my 1e DMs, I'd threaten to grapple, pummel or overbear.

I think my personal definition of really rules-light is "can I run a session with never having to consult a rules book?" Everything else gets prepared to that criteria when I consider the issue.

RISUS or Dread? Really rules light. Paranoia? Rules light. Spycraft? Not so much.

 

[jdrakeh]

Depends on what yardstick you use.

This. It clearly has less rules than, say, HarnMaster. It also clearly has far more rules than, say, GURPS Lite. In terms of D&D core only rules, I'd say that it contains roughly the same amount of rules as AD&D 2e, fewer than D&D 3x, and more than D&D 4e. YMMV, of course.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Heh. Whenever I wanted to torture my 1e DMs, I'd threaten to grapple, pummel or overbear.

I think my personal definition of really rules-light is "can I run a session with never having to consult a rules book?" Everything else gets prepared to that criteria when I consider the issue.

RISUS or Dread? Really rules light. Paranoia? Rules light. Spycraft? Not so much.

Funny how 4E tends to fall into rules-light, at least for me. More often than not, no books are consulted during a game session. I'd say about 60% of the time. In the 40% where a book is consulted, its usually just the once.

I wouldn't call 4E rules light though.

 

[Piratecat]

Funny how 4E tends to fall into rules-light, at least for me. More often than not, no books are consulted during a game session. I'd say about 60% of the time. In the 40% where a book is consulted, its usually just the once.

I wouldn't call 4E rules light though.

I think it's lighter for the DM than it is for the players, actually; they have all their powers to manage.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

I think my personal definition of really rules-light is "can I run a session with never having to consult a rules book?" Everything else gets prepared to that criteria when I consider the issue.
.

So what does it say about me that I could do that in 3.x and do it weekly in Hero.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

So what does it say about me that I could do that in 3.x and do it weekly in Hero.

In 3.5E, I would call it an accomplishment to get through a single combat round without consulting a book. It was rare enough to celebrate in our games.