Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Complexity as a Barrier to Playing Dungeons & Dragons
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Scurvy_Platypus" data-source="post: 5505358" data-attributes="member: 43283"><p>Hmmm. Maybe I'm just stupid....</p><p></p><p>I'm not quite clear on what the point is. I mean, I really doubt you're going to have a horde of folks showing up and saying, "No, no, the game used to be much more complicated in the old days and it's simpler now". That particular argument is most likely to occur when you start talking about the rules as a gatekeeper function for guiding/enforcing player behaviour, GM/Player authority and so forth. But in pure terms of "stuff to do in the game" or more simply put "the game" part of D&D... I don't think there's going to be a lot of disagreement.</p><p></p><p>That being the case, I'm left wondering... "What's the point?" I mean, if you just want to _demonstrate_ how that's happened... groovy I guess. But after you do, what then? What's the discussion supposed to focus on?</p><p></p><p>If the discussion is supposed to be about whether or not this increasing complexity is in fact a barrier, I'd say that one problem you're going to have is numbers. Folks are going to point to a lack of any sort of meaningful data to track the increase/decrease of the number of players over the years compared to actively supported systems.</p><p></p><p>Another problem you might have with that particular discussion is, "Who's the actual target market?" I don't care what anyone (including WotC) says ... it seems clear to me that the main target market for _most_ rpgs is actually the already existing gamer market. Heck, your own assumption is that folks have already been exposed to D&D before.</p><p></p><p>That being the case, I think the question then isn't really about it being a barrier to _playing_ the game; it might be whether or not it's a barrier to people staying with RPGs in general (since they can only find a D&D game and it's too much for them), or whether or not it's a barrier to already existing gamers trying to recruit new ones into the hobby, or something else entirely.</p><p></p><p>I'd also generally say that I think the issue of complexity is a deceptive one. It's part of that whole "rules light" versus "crunchy" argument that's been going on for decades. In the specific case of D&D it winds up being more edition-based, since there's been a pretty observable uptick in the amount/number of rules as each edition has shown up.</p><p></p><p>The thing is, in the light vs crunchy (or "simple" vs "complex") the poor "new player" is dragged out and used to try and support one side or the other. The reality of course is that the issue of number of rules/complexity of rules is really a personal preference. Some folks do "need" an in-depth rules framework; they feel more comfortable and they don't have to worry about "doing it wrong". But there's equally just as many folks that find the rules incredibly frustrating and a major turn-off to what they wanted to do when they decided to try D&D: tell a story.</p><p></p><p>My wife (who would count as a "casual gamer" by any definition) introduced a few people to rpgs, who had never had any exposure to them (didn't play computer games and never tried rps or had siblings that did). She'd never GMed before, so it was an interesting excercise for me to watch how everything unfolded.</p><p></p><p>She used a rules-light game and away they went. I joined as a player but kept strictly out of the GM side of things. A couple of the people (with a theatre background) hit the ground running with no problem. Another person struggled and in later conversations it became clear that they would have been more comfortable with a stronger rules framework.</p><p></p><p>A few months later, my wife got together with some friends of hers. In this case a couple of people had previous experience with D&D, a couple of people were again completely new to rpgs. The group as a whole tried 4E and the reaction was mixed. The previously exposed folks thought it was ok and were happy enough to play it again. The never exposed people really disliked it and wouldn't choose to play rpgs again.</p><p></p><p>Again my wife went with the same game that she'd done before. This time everyone was onboard and enjoyed themselves immensely.</p><p></p><p>What's my point? It's not that "rules light is better" or "D&D sucks". The very little information we've got suggests that the number of folks involved with D&D is 6 million (a number from WotC.) although we've no clue what edition it might be. My point is, some people are naturally drawn towards the complexity. These are people that like the "game" part of "rpg". They argue for the inclusion of rules (and complexity) because they say the folks that don't like it ("They're just going to focus on the 'rp' part of 'rpg' and ignore a bunch of stuff anyway...") can just ignore the stuff they don't want to use.</p><p></p><p>So.... yeah. It's great for Mearls to be talking about increasing rule complexity and for folks to sit around arguing about it on the forum, but at the end of the day... where's it going? The fact is, the current design approach that rpg producers take is to creat a product and put it out there; doesn't matter whether it's rules-light, rules-medium, or "really crunchy".</p><p></p><p>There's no real attempt to actually target different groups with different sets of rules. D&D used to have it in the form of the "basic" and "advanced" games of D&D. But that's fallen by the wayside and the industry in general doesn't pursue it either. 4E Essentials and the upcoming Pathfinder Basic might be argued as an attempt to try that again, but I actually don't think they are; because they're still put out with an eye towards appealing to the already existing gamer market.</p><p></p><p>*sigh* I wish I had a good conclusion... but I don't. This post kinda rambles along, but I suppose that's sort of fitting given that the whole topic seems a bit rambling to me in the first place. I'm just left with shuffling my feet a bit aimlessly and repeating "What's the point?"</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Scurvy_Platypus, post: 5505358, member: 43283"] Hmmm. Maybe I'm just stupid.... I'm not quite clear on what the point is. I mean, I really doubt you're going to have a horde of folks showing up and saying, "No, no, the game used to be much more complicated in the old days and it's simpler now". That particular argument is most likely to occur when you start talking about the rules as a gatekeeper function for guiding/enforcing player behaviour, GM/Player authority and so forth. But in pure terms of "stuff to do in the game" or more simply put "the game" part of D&D... I don't think there's going to be a lot of disagreement. That being the case, I'm left wondering... "What's the point?" I mean, if you just want to _demonstrate_ how that's happened... groovy I guess. But after you do, what then? What's the discussion supposed to focus on? If the discussion is supposed to be about whether or not this increasing complexity is in fact a barrier, I'd say that one problem you're going to have is numbers. Folks are going to point to a lack of any sort of meaningful data to track the increase/decrease of the number of players over the years compared to actively supported systems. Another problem you might have with that particular discussion is, "Who's the actual target market?" I don't care what anyone (including WotC) says ... it seems clear to me that the main target market for _most_ rpgs is actually the already existing gamer market. Heck, your own assumption is that folks have already been exposed to D&D before. That being the case, I think the question then isn't really about it being a barrier to _playing_ the game; it might be whether or not it's a barrier to people staying with RPGs in general (since they can only find a D&D game and it's too much for them), or whether or not it's a barrier to already existing gamers trying to recruit new ones into the hobby, or something else entirely. I'd also generally say that I think the issue of complexity is a deceptive one. It's part of that whole "rules light" versus "crunchy" argument that's been going on for decades. In the specific case of D&D it winds up being more edition-based, since there's been a pretty observable uptick in the amount/number of rules as each edition has shown up. The thing is, in the light vs crunchy (or "simple" vs "complex") the poor "new player" is dragged out and used to try and support one side or the other. The reality of course is that the issue of number of rules/complexity of rules is really a personal preference. Some folks do "need" an in-depth rules framework; they feel more comfortable and they don't have to worry about "doing it wrong". But there's equally just as many folks that find the rules incredibly frustrating and a major turn-off to what they wanted to do when they decided to try D&D: tell a story. My wife (who would count as a "casual gamer" by any definition) introduced a few people to rpgs, who had never had any exposure to them (didn't play computer games and never tried rps or had siblings that did). She'd never GMed before, so it was an interesting excercise for me to watch how everything unfolded. She used a rules-light game and away they went. I joined as a player but kept strictly out of the GM side of things. A couple of the people (with a theatre background) hit the ground running with no problem. Another person struggled and in later conversations it became clear that they would have been more comfortable with a stronger rules framework. A few months later, my wife got together with some friends of hers. In this case a couple of people had previous experience with D&D, a couple of people were again completely new to rpgs. The group as a whole tried 4E and the reaction was mixed. The previously exposed folks thought it was ok and were happy enough to play it again. The never exposed people really disliked it and wouldn't choose to play rpgs again. Again my wife went with the same game that she'd done before. This time everyone was onboard and enjoyed themselves immensely. What's my point? It's not that "rules light is better" or "D&D sucks". The very little information we've got suggests that the number of folks involved with D&D is 6 million (a number from WotC.) although we've no clue what edition it might be. My point is, some people are naturally drawn towards the complexity. These are people that like the "game" part of "rpg". They argue for the inclusion of rules (and complexity) because they say the folks that don't like it ("They're just going to focus on the 'rp' part of 'rpg' and ignore a bunch of stuff anyway...") can just ignore the stuff they don't want to use. So.... yeah. It's great for Mearls to be talking about increasing rule complexity and for folks to sit around arguing about it on the forum, but at the end of the day... where's it going? The fact is, the current design approach that rpg producers take is to creat a product and put it out there; doesn't matter whether it's rules-light, rules-medium, or "really crunchy". There's no real attempt to actually target different groups with different sets of rules. D&D used to have it in the form of the "basic" and "advanced" games of D&D. But that's fallen by the wayside and the industry in general doesn't pursue it either. 4E Essentials and the upcoming Pathfinder Basic might be argued as an attempt to try that again, but I actually don't think they are; because they're still put out with an eye towards appealing to the already existing gamer market. *sigh* I wish I had a good conclusion... but I don't. This post kinda rambles along, but I suppose that's sort of fitting given that the whole topic seems a bit rambling to me in the first place. I'm just left with shuffling my feet a bit aimlessly and repeating "What's the point?" [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Complexity as a Barrier to Playing Dungeons & Dragons
Top