Unpopular opinions go here

Status
Not open for further replies.
Words have inherent meanings. Who uses them or how doesn't change their meaning.

That doesn't mean they can't also have semantic loading, and I think that phrase has acquired it.

I'm not defending anyone on any side of this issue being jerks (and being jerks over a game is pretty stupid), but deciding that everyone who says "rules not rulings" must be a jerk as well is pretty problematic as well.

I think "jerks" is an overly strong word, but I'm at this point willing to think that the majority of people using that phrase are making a very strong statement that overextends its applicability. To be very clear, I'm very much going to say that the majority of them are, in practice, saying dependence on rules is "bad".
 

log in or register to remove this ad

New unpopular opinion:

The best kobolds are in World of Warcraft. You no take candle.

KoboldMG.JPG.jpg
 

Is Fiasco a bad game because its rules are so light?
I don't believe I've said that rules lite games are bad. Just that 5e's claim to being rules light is plausible only in comparison to very heavy games, like 3.5 or GURPS...
...not that GURPS is bad...
It's OK to let other people like stuff you don't and it's definitely OK for them to not pick fights with you if you don't find their stuff fun.
That is a noble attitude that would have made a real difference had it been much more prevalent from the 90s on...
 

I've been gaming since 1979, and 5e is one of the most rules-bloated systems I've seen. And I played Phoenix Command and Rolemaster for years.

The core system is simple, almost elegant, but when you empty the bottomless cesspit of feats, spells, class abilities, racial abilities, items, and 3rd-party drek over it, its a bloated, tedious mess.

As stated already, conflating rules with content is not the right way to assess these things. They aren't the same thing, and if you're reading my words and not accepting it, then you need to address that before you even try to deny the argument being made.

Ultimatwly, that bottomless cesspit isn't needed to play the game. Its not a "rule" that it has to be there.

Afterall, step back for a second and look at other games and what they really are at their core.

Mainline Pokemon for example has a ton of neat and intersecting content with lots of interesting interactions and choices to make, and its only grown over the years. It has so much content in fact, the developers don't (arguably can't) even put it all into the games anymore.

But you don't need all of that to play rock/paper/scissors. RPS is fun all on its own, no elaborate pretense required.

Theres a lot of reasons why dice games are fun, but the important thing is that DND, at its core, is a very simple dice game with a whole lot of extraneous content layered on top.

That is why the game doesn't break down when you start removing that content, because the content isn't actually integral to the game being played.

As said, the illusion that all of this extraneous content matters is just that. It should matter, mind, but it doesn't, and thats simultaneously one of the core issues 5e has, but also its single biggest strength.

Its only because the game doesn't actually break when you get rid of its crappy content that people keep sticking with it over anything else. Thats why its rules light.

After all, rules light is often praised as something that indicates a great flexibility to play out any kind of experience.

While people who don't know any better often make the mistake of trying to scramble the existing content to make 5e work for some other type of game (when in reality they should be making new content), the simple fact is 5e can do anything precisely because it doesn't force you to do anything; the game does not break when you get rid of its content.

There are no rules being broken, because there is only one.

One single rule is, by definition, rules light.

Should also be reiterated that, again, people reading what Im saying should actually read what I'm saying, and stop getting hung up on their preconceptions.
 


You seem like the type of person who would play Phoenix Command and Rolemaster. I'm honestly not sure if that's a positve, neutral, or hostile statement either. Let's call it netural.
Its the truth, whatever it is.

I also played, and loved, Millennium's End and Riddle of Steel. By gaming life is a Who's Who of niche games.
 



Fair. It was being seemingly designed to restore radical class imbalance, and present rules so ambiguous and dysfunctional that DMs are strongly incentivized to substitute their own judgement, that makes 5e a bad game. Light or heavy, it's not designed badly, it's bad by design.

You can say a lot of bad things about D&D in general and 5e in particular, and I guess 'easy to learn' and 'rulez lite,' while plausible only relative to something like 3.5 or GURPS, are meant to excuse those myriad failings.
Two tears in a crab bucket. 🤷‍♂️
 

Personally, I find the whole rules light thing to be a pretty thin veneer of edition warring rhetoric. Much like the whole DnD is simulationist.
Edition warring against 4e or 3.x?
I don't believe anyone is edition warring on the whole rules light talking point but even if they were it would have to be vs 3.x in my opinion.

For me games like D&D could never be considered rules light, not even BECMI. Once you've played a rules light game (and you will know one once you've seen it), D&D will always fall into the rules heavy camp.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top