2005 -- A Good Year For 'Rules Lite' FRPGs?

[Akrasia]

I guess it kinda depends on how you define "Rules Lite". I tend to define Rules Lite games as being those with simple, consistent rules where the rules reflect the setting rather than constrain it. By that standard, anything with a class system is unlikely to make the cut, and most d20-type games (C&C included, at least from the box set - I haven't seen the hardcover yet) use different resolution systems for different types of actions mostly due to tradition and nostalgia. Maybe Blue Rose will buck the trend.

I don't see why you think that 'class systems' are incompatible with 'rules lite' systems -- i.e. why a class based game cannot have 'simple, consistent rules...'

The most complex systems that I know about -- GURPS and HERO -- are classless.

Also, I don't see why you claim that C&C uses 'different resolution systems for different types of actions'. As far as I can tell, this simply is not true. All tasks (saving throws, actions, attacks) are resolved the same way. But maybe you meant something different?

That I suppose is another reason why I don't see your suggestions as particularly rules lite - they're all relatively pricy.

Well the C&C PHB is a hardback book for only $20. That's not pricey for a core rule book IMO.

 

[Akrasia]

...
And finally, I'll always be able to find D&D players. Through all the life changes that occur in adulthood, I've decided it's more important to keep the game going rather than find the "perfect system" for my campaign.
...

To some extent, this is why I've stuck with 3E for my campaign until just recently -- the ability to find new players (since I've moved a bit).

However, I much prefer to GM rules lite games -- they require less prep work, and allow for faster paced sessions. I guess this is why I'm a bit psyched by C&C -- it is close enough to D&D to be familiar to players of any edition, yet still sufficiently 'rules lite' for my tastes.

 

[greydown]

I so agree. Rules light systems mean less work....and I'm nothing if not lazy!!!!!

 

[Akrasia]

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=113340

This is also posted in the latest Dragon's Breath article at www.fierydragon.com

Thanks for those links. Not much in terms of specifics, though. I guess we'll just have to wait...

 

[Treebore]

I'm psyched about C&C! Now I also know why I have been seeing BesM for sale.

 

[RFisher]

This will be a good year for "rules light" gaming for me because I'm playing classic Traveller & trying not to stray too far or too often from Books 1-3. (Or Starter Traveller, which amounts to much the same thing with a few clearer rules.)

The "rules light" games I'm most looking forward to trying in the future are: The Ladder, Barbarians of Lemuria, Risus, & The Pool. Oddly enough, they're all free & all released before this year.

I'm also hoping to get a Basic/Expert D&D c. 1981 campaign going sometime. If I run C&C it'll probably be a compromise because I couldn't convince one or more players to give B/X D&D a try. But if the CT campaign goes well, then that likely will be farther into the future than next year.

& there's a LotR campaign that I was running that will probably be revived at some point. I don't know if the CODA system is "rules light", but the way I ran it I think it was.

Oh, & Gygax calls LA "rules light". My Essentials box set should be in the mail right now.

 

[The Sophist]

... Barbarians of Lemuria ...

I like this game too! Does Conan better than the Mongoose thing. Pity it isn't better known.

... The Pool ....

I've never heard of this one. Link?

I'm also hoping to get a Basic/Expert D&D c. 1981 campaign going sometime. If I run C&C it'll probably be a compromise because I couldn't convince one or more players to give B/X D&D a try...

I've been a big fan of B/X D&D (Moldvay/Cook) for my FRPG needs for many years now. Even so, I think C&C is actually better. Stick with B/X if its easier, but you could certainly run a B/X style campaign with C&C.

 

[RFisher]

I've never heard of this one. Link?

Oops. I really meant PACE.

The Pool is actually a different game that I didn't know about until I searched for the link & realized what I found wasn't PACE.

Anyway, PACE is the first diceless mechanic that has appealled to me at all. (Using "diceless" in the broader sense of "no randomizer". I've thought SAGA could be a fun randomizer-other-than-dice game, but I don't think I'd use it for a long-term campaign.)

 

[The Sophist]

Oops. I really meant PACE.

...

Anyway, PACE is the first diceless mechanic that has appealled to me at all. (Using "diceless" in the broader sense of "no randomizer". I've thought SAGA could be a fun randomizer-other-than-dice game, but I don't think I'd use it for a long-term campaign.)

Thanks for the link.

 

[DMScott]

I don't see why you think that 'class systems' are incompatible with 'rules lite' systems -- i.e. why a class based game cannot have 'simple, consistent rules...'

That's probably because you ignored the part represented by the ellipsis, which is "where the rules reflect the setting rather than constrain it." Class-based systems, by definition, constrain character representations to those archetypes covered by the classes, which obviously has a large impact on setting.

The most complex systems that I know about -- GURPS and HERO -- are classless.

The most complex well-known system I know about, Rolemaster, uses classes and is far and away more complex than GURPS or Hero (or 3.5 D&D, which is about on par with Hero IME) - though I admit I haven't played GURPS in a while, so I might be misremembering. That's neither here nor there, of course - claiming "a particular system is complex, so that implies all systems of that type are complex" is a pretty ridiculous line of argument.

Also, I don't see why you claim that C&C uses 'different resolution systems for different types of actions'.

I claim that because, for example, if you cast a spell on someone, the process of resolution is different than if you swing a sword at someone. Heck, it's different depending on which spell you use. So you don't do the same thing to resolve each attack or action; sometimes the active person rolls (such as to make an attack), sometimes the target rolls (such as to make a saving throw), sometimes both occur. Sometimes something different happens, as when a character is injured.