Different philosophies concerning Rules Heavy and Rule Light RPGs.

[aramis erak]

I'd rather rules systems just get out of the way here. The solution to bleep head GMs, is not to play with bleep head GMs. And the solution to not liking a particular use of GM authority, is to play with people who wield that authority differently. You can also have games tailored to that problem. I don't that is objectionable. but having it be an element all game should account for in the rules: no, just no. That stifles good and great GMs, it stifles entire styles of play as well

Novices reading the rules need to be warned what to look for, especially since many come to the hobby by reading a gift rulebook.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Novices reading the rules need to be warned what to look for, especially since many come to the hobby by reading a gift rulebook.

That is fine but that is advice, not rules

 

[Micah Sweet]

Novices reading the rules need to be warned what to look for, especially since many come to the hobby by reading a gift rulebook.

Why do RPGs need to warn their users that some players may be jerks? I've engaged in plenty of other kinds of games where no one feels they have to make a point of mentioning that.

 

[Thomas Shey]

And a GM can feel more artificial while providing a worse experience to his players. People here means people and GMs for whom this might be a preference and a way of enjoying the game.

Then perhaps say "GMs" in the future so you're not implying the players are getting the same out of it (which they might be, but since they're likely not consulted, there's no reason to take as a given).

The purpose here is to have a fun game for people who like this. You seem to be assuming that it is always about a GM imposing this preference on a group of players who don't enjoy it. This is why it is important to play with groups you have chemistry with. And a good GM can adapt to player preferences (and a good player won't be the one guy at the table complaining about the direction the group has chosen to go in: whether it is the direction I am defending or the one you are).

And again, lots of people put up with elements in games they dislike because they otherwise don't get to get the rest of the experience. And the fact the one play "won't be the guy complaining" doesn't mean he's still not having a problem with it; the fact its a group operation is exactly why he's not (and it doesn't automatically mean the rest of the group is preferring it either; it just may mean they don't care enough to get into it);.

Q&A is very organic and also still social. So I find most people don't mind a player asking a question, as much as they might mind pausing to check on a rule.

But that's it. To get close to the information rules data supplies its often not going to be one question, but several.

What does a "hard climb" mean to a given GM? What does "the ground you're jumping from is slippery" mean? It may well mean very different things to a GM and player (assuming "hard" is not a term-of-art), and the only way the latter is going to be sure is to chase that down, and that may make the difference between trying the task and not.

That said, rules fading into the background as a reason for liking this isn't necessarily about time (though I do like things to move at a fast clip).

I'm not saying this is about you, specifically, but I've seen enough of an obsession about time with people supporting rules-light games that I think its a legitimate thing to bring up in this context.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Why do RPGs need to warn their users that some players may be jerks? I've engaged in plenty of other kinds of games where no one feels they have to make a point of mentioning that.

Because there's a lot more time commitment with most people playing RPGs than most games, and thus a lot more opportunity for other player behavior to have longer-lasting impacts.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because there's a lot more time commitment with most people playing RPGs than most games, and thus a lot more opportunity for other player behavior to have longer-lasting impacts.

I don't know if I agree. What about sports? Plenty of people play sports on a regular or long-term basis, but I don't recall any rulebook warning us about the dangers of jerk players or referees.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Then perhaps say "GMs" in the future so you're not implying the players are getting the same out of it (which they might be, but since they're likely not consulted, there's no reason to take as a given).

No. Because I was talking about both GMs and players for whom this is a preference. Normally this is exactly the kind of things people should be talking about with players in their games to see if they are on the same page

 

[TiQuinn]

I don't know if I agree. What about sports? Plenty of people play sports on a regular or long-term basis, but I don't recall any rulebook warning us about the dangers of jerk players or referees.

"Good sportsmanship" comes to mind as a phrase, and there are usually coaches who are supposed to instill this in kids.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I don't know if I agree. What about sports? Plenty of people play sports on a regular or long-term basis, but I don't recall any rulebook warning us about the dangers of jerk players or referees.

Well, bluntly, because the social matrix of sports just expects some of that. Its not like there's not procedures in any formalized sport to address it.

 

[Thomas Shey]

"Good sportsmanship" comes to mind as a phrase, and there are usually coaches who are supposed to instill this in kids.

"Supposed to".