Rules heavy = bad; light = good

[Greg K]

My own preference is for rules medium. Most of my favorite games fall in the rules medium category with some leaning towards the rules lighter end and some towards the rules heavier end.

There are a couple of rules light rpgs that I do enjoy (e.g., Ghostbusters, Toon), but it is simply genre/source material that they work for me. They are also not games that I would want to run for more than a session or two. Warrior, Rogue and Mage is an exception on both accounts and, at some point, I want to give it a try using the scholar option (but then I think about using a Fantasy Hack of Marvel Heroic).

The most heavy rules game that I am willing to run is 3e with strong limits on WOTC supplements. Then again, I don't worry about all of skill the DCs listed in the PHB. I use the basic skill DC definitions from an early an early 3e design article that appeared in Dragon (the DC is how hard for someone with no bonuses from any source) combined with the DM's Best Friend in the 3.0 DMG (i.e. 2-20 modifiers to roll or DC based on circumstances). I also don't sweat about accounting for every skill point or feat when creating NPCs.

 

[Greg K]

Do you see the tinkerability as a strength? For me, it can certainly be, because the actual process of tinkering can be very enjoyable and rewarding. I like tinkering with complex games.

Tinkering to me is a strength, but it is not limited to complex games. Savage Worlds (my favorite non supers and non animation based rpg) is a rules medium game. In my opinion, it is not complex, but the GM is expected to do some tinkering as developing setting rules is expected (even if it is simply renaming a skill, adding or removing a skill (or skills), or adjusting lethality).

 

[howandwhy99]

What say you? Is lite a progression thing, a phase, or am I a victim of my own confirmation bias and seeing judgement which isn't there?

Or - and I can see this as a possibility - is an aging RPG demographic (and we are) being drawn towards games which demand less of our increasingly in-demand time?

Axis & Allies kicks butt! It a helluva lot more enjoyable to me than Risk, which is a whole lot "lighter". But then there are wargames which take 100s of hours too. And in certain circles Axis & Allies just cannot compete. It's too little, too easy.

Design your game for your enjoyment. Don't let others dictate to you their personal taste as either dominant or right.

Storygames tend to be light, so that community is going to be pushing for lighter games. Old school games increase in size as they increase in challenge for the players. So that community is more likely to span the whole breadth of game size.

And then we get contemporary D&D where 3e and 4e are very large compared to almost all other RPGs on the market. And D&D Next is coming in a much smaller, more easily digested packet. And it's popular, so light is popular and those who really only like that variety of game give their applause. People will get bored of it and want something else later.

 

[Morrus]

Design your game for your enjoyment. Don't let others dictate to you their personal taste as either dominant or right.

What an odd thing to say to a man with bills to pay as a consequence of his game sales!

 

[howandwhy99]

What an very odd thing to say to a man with bills to pay as a consequence of his game sales!

You can tell jokes funny to you and jokes you believe others will find funny. But without getting on stage you're not going to learn the latter.
Playtest, Playtest, Playtest.
Know what you like.
Find that niche not being served and aim for them.

Heavy games are good games too. If the current consensus is otherwise, be ready to clearly demonstrate and provide an experience to others which shows what makes heavy games sooooooooo good.

 

[dd.stevenson]

What an odd thing to say to a man with bills to pay as a consequence of his game sales!

From my perspective as a consumer, the heavy games that do well are those which boast compelling setting IPs. Either new or licensed.

 

[Umbran]

Playtest, Playtest, Playtest.

Of course, listening to playtest feedback is letting others impact (if not dictate) what you make, rather than doing only what you yourself feel is best.

Know what you like.
Find that niche not being served and aim for them.

And if that niche isn't what I like, should I not write for them anyway?

There is some wisdom to writing what you like - you'll tend to have greater passion for it. But, to bring an example from fiction - Jim Butler wanted to write an epic fantasy series. He shopped it around for years, and it didn't sell. He needed to make money, so he started writing the Dresden Files, which sold and has been wildly successful. Once he'd built a name, he went back and published that fantasy series... and it is nowhere near as high quality, IMHO.

So, doing what *you* want to do may not always yield the greatest results. Sometimes, you can make some really cool stuff doing stuff that's merely okay to you, but the audience really, really wants.

 

[shadow]

I don't necessarily think that 'rules heavy = bad' or 'rules light = good'. I fact I like the degree of customization that certain rules heavy games, like HERO, allow. However, because I'm a full time graduate student and the people I game with have young children, our group is only able to get together for a couple of hours a week. We don't have time to spend hours making characters or running detailed, tactical combats. Therefore, we really favor rules light games because they are easier to run given our time constraints.

 

[Desdichado]

We want there to be. But in practice that isn't how people talk. Unfortunately, many people state their opinions as broad objective fact, *mean* it that way, and defend it that way.

I disagree; I think that's the minority. Most people, if asked if they mean to make a sweeping generalization that's above reproach or question and applies to everyone, would answer that, no, of course, not.

The problem is more inherent on the side of the listerner and interpretation of what's said.

In my opinion.

 

[Umbran]

I disagree; I think that's the minority.

The number of folks who we have to moderate for being too aggressive, and who then use, "But what I'm saying is TEH TROOF! 100% accurate facts!" as a defense says that, whatever the proportion, they are enough to create serious issues for the community. The edition wars were full of such people.