I never understood this take. Even the one-side-of-one-page Lasers & Feelings has multiple lookup tables, and is a bit much for me to memorize in one go. I'm no one's idea of a smart person, but I'm struggling to visualize a system that meets this standard that isn't just a coin-flipping contest.
They absolutely do. They bring the game to a screeching halt as you need to first find the relevant table and then find the place in the table.
I do allow rules handouts - and character sheets. What I'm saying here is that the time spent physically finding the rules in the book weighs the game down in ways that don't apply if you can look at your character sheet or the common rules to find them in a second or two. Presentation matters.
They were thinking "let's trim 1E's unarmed combat rules down from three systems to one and simplify that one, while keeping it similar enough to be able to claim reverse compatibility."
I'm afraid you're misremembering. Variable damage by size is a core rule. Weapon vs armor type hit adjustments are a core rule. The most complex initiative system in the history of D&D is a core rule, as are its numerous exceptions and special cases (like potion onset times). The Pursuit and Evasion in Outdoor Settings rules with four different categories of percentile modifiers are a core rule. The item saving throw rules with eleven different types of saves for the fourteen different types of items are core. The Detection of Invisibility rules involving cross-referencing level or HD and intelligence (a 9x8 table) are core. The rules for flying creatures and aerial combat (DMG 49-53) including five different maneuverability classes with diagrams laying how how they turn on a hex grid are core.
Again, I think this comes down to people not quite understanding the complaint they're making, conflating complexity with tedium. In America, which has a very strong anti-math and anti-intellectual instant gratification culture, the Oregon Trail series is entirely about provision management and delayed gratification, and to date the franchise has sold (checks Wikipedia). . . SIXTY-FIVE MILLION copies. Granted, it got a significant boost from school purchases, but plenty of people bought it with their own money. As a computer game it does much of the tracking for you, but it doesn't give you the answer to the conundrum of, you have X kilograms of food and Y kilometers* to the next town, how much should you ration and how hard should you travel? Because that's essentially the core gameplay, and it's a math problem!
Yeah, Dungeon World (and PbtA games in general) fit just outside my rules light definitions on just about all counts. But I'm well aware the lines are arbitrary and all the factors I've mentioned have been taken into account by Vincent Baker; he just added a touch more complexity (which isn't inherently bad, just something with a cost). For rules light I said one sided containing all character options to be actively rules light and he went for two.
i agree, and while i don't mean to sound elitist or one true way gaming this may still come off as it: if your dungeon crawl isn't dealing with those sorts of things are you really dungeon crawling or are you just adventuring and happen to be inside a dungeon while you do it? or rather, a dungeon crawl is a certain type of experience/playstyle
Resource management isn't the same as "crunchy."
