Different philosophies concerning Rules Heavy and Rule Light RPGs.

[1QD]

Which ones have you played?

Typically homebrew systems, self created and never published. I find when I try to do something they can not account for, there is a sudden and instant change of the rules. It is difficult to take it seriously when you can break the rules on your first play through. Sadly I once broke a game very badly. I looked at the rules, ordered only dragons, and wiped the board.

 

[soviet]

Typically homebrew systems, self created and never published. I find when I try to do something they can not account for, there is a sudden and instant change of the rules. It is difficult to take it seriously when you can break the rules on your first play through. Sadly I once broke a game very badly. I looked at the rules, ordered only dragons, and wiped the board.

You think rules light games lack substance but the only ones you've ever played have been made at home? Bold of you to make definitive statements about the whole category then.

 

[1QD]

You think rules light games lack substance but the only ones you've ever played have been made at home? Bold of you to make definitive statements about the whole category then.

Why thank you!

Many of the reasons I state are all due to watching other s play, or discuss them as well. That and well, just how much information can you fit on a single page? I am going to say, it is in fact safe to assume, not much. It would probably end up with a super simplified method of combat and actions, in which you will find arguably engauging or not. With little to nothing to write down, there will be less substance and by in nature it would not feel like the character was anything more than a piece of paper.

That said, there was a call for an opinion. I gave one, I never claimed to be the authority on the subject.

 

[pemerton]

With little to nothing to write down, there will be less substance and by in nature it would not feel like the character was anything more than a piece of paper.

Huh? I'm not sure how writing down more stuff makes the character feel less like a piece of (or a bundle of) paper.

The rules for Cthulhu Dark are pretty short. And all a character is is a name, a job and an Insanity ranking. But I've not found Cthulhu Dark characters to be less vibrant than characters from (say) RuneQuest or Rolemaster.

 

[chuckdee]

Why thank you!

Many of the reasons I state are all due to watching other s play, or discuss them as well. That and well, just how much information can you fit on a single page? I am going to say, it is in fact safe to assume, not much. It would probably end up with a super simplified method of combat and actions, in which you will find arguably engauging or not. With little to nothing to write down, there will be less substance and by in nature it would not feel like the character was anything more than a piece of paper.

That said, there was a call for an opinion. I gave one, I never claimed to be the authority on the subject.

It might help your opinion on the subject if you take a look at the minimalist systems that are out there. It will help to inform your opinion, and create a common ground where to discuss. As it is, it's just that- an opinion thrown out there that no one can help discuss and isn't really of any help because there's no context. There are all sorts of systems - both minimalist and not- that are home grown that are just not any good, and no amount of additional rules will help to make that way. One cannot tell without information if these rules are just not any good, it's a design choice that disagrees, or something else that makes it this way. Especially without specifics.

 

[Retros_x]

Totally get where that group is coming from. For some, rules-heavy means predictability and a shared understanding of the game's physics, letting players strategize based on defined abilities. It feels "fair" because everything's explicit.

On the flip side, rules-light fans often value flexibility and narrative freedom. The GM fiat isn't seen as a downside, but an opportunity for creative problem-solving beyond strict mechanics.

I feel like the whole transparency argument is a false one - you can make informed decisions in a rules-light systems too. The DM just need to do the ruling before the decision of the player aka telling them the consequences for an action beforehand, so they can decide what to do.

And in a rules-heavy systems you also need to do rulings, because when player do some actual roleplaying, they will always come up with approaches that are not covered by the rules, no matter the heavy they are. But then it is in my experience much harder to do an edequate ruling because you need to improvise for the gigantic complex rule framework and not some light approach that is easy to improvise. Also rules-heavy systems often need longer to resolve at the table and require much more buy-in from DM and players, much more homework, much more time to master them.

Rules-heavy feel more like videogames to me, but without computing power of modern PCs and consoles. It feels like a puzzle: What is the optimal decision to do in my current situation, what button on my character sheet is the smartest to press. Which can be fun, but the true fun of roleplaying is to me in rules-light or medium complex systems.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I feel like the whole transparency argument is a false one - you can make informed decisions in a rules-light systems too. The DM just need to do the ruling before the decision of the player aka telling them the consequences for an action beforehand, so they can decide what to do.

The problem is you have to do this every time, and project it down a series of events in many cases. Its not only one event that you have to have a sense of.

And in a rules-heavy systems you also need to do rulings, because when player do some actual roleplaying, they will always come up with approaches that are not covered by the rules, no matter the heavy they are.

The difference is you don't have to do it constantly. Because a lot of things are predefined.

 

[Kichwas]

That's probably about right and roughly sums up why I dislike rules light and prefer crunchier more defined systems.

I've played both rules light and rules heavy systems and for me, I lean to the crunchier side of the table, up to a point. That point is probably just before you reach the Hero System - which is a system so heavily defined that gameplay can really slow down. That said the last time I saw Hero was 20 years ago. Maybe it would work inside a VTT with good automation.

When it came to more rules light systems, as a GM I didn't trust myself to be able to remember what I'd done the last time a given issue had popped up. And while for some people that's a freeing experience, for me it was a stress point.

What a difference a bit of time can make.

The me of late 2025 is on the other side of this split from the me of early 2025.

Over the course of 2025 I saw my Pathfinder game start to unravel, and right as that was happening Daggerheart hit.

For a long time I've only seen 'rules light systems' that just seem to want me to 'wing it' and make ruling but offered no good guidance on how to do that other than 'just do it'.

I'm sure the systems and articles were out there - but the one I'd read were not well articulated - until the GMing advice in Daggerheart more or less walked me through a process within a rule set that had tools in place for it.

Meanwhile I was getting ever more frustrated with watching my Pathfinder 2E players just 'move tokens around, roll dice, and debate power moves, tactics and builds' while I was trying to give them a story. I'd get a few biters but always one or more would just stick to the mechanics.

And then I played what is considered Pathfinder best story adventure - season of ghosts - and we get to some moments to discuss the situation with some key NPCs and try to persuade them this way or that. At my advice our GM broke out the influence system, but by the time we got to that point a few weeks later I was feeling like I'd advised him poorly, and sure enough - mechanics that not just seek to overrule your narrative, but also constrain what roleplay would be relevant and what is 'wasting people's time at the table'.

They have a mechanic for everything in Pathfinder. And that's great. Until it isn't.

I encountered Daggerheart's fluid experience system right after feeling frustration in Pathfinder that you get not just role locked by your class, but heavily constrained in what out of combat things you can do because it's all pre-written tied to specific stats.

I encountered narrative roleplay advice in Daggerheart and later Mist engine that could let mechanics work WITH the roleplay right as we suffered through the influence system of Pathfinder.

I read a section in Daggerheart telling me to only call for rolls when there was relevant narrative consequence right after a Pathfinder session where we wasted a half hour watching a player roll repeated pick lock skills on a single lock on a no-consequence regular door just sitting there.

I read read about Daggerheart and Mist trading the spotlight around after sessions in 3 different pathfinder games where bad rolls on initiative didn't cost the party a win, but made multiple PCs feel useless because they couldn't act when it made sense to the scene because it didn't meet the numbers.

So now I'm coming out of this a bit different.

I still don't like the rules-light games of the 90s and before that I was used to. They just used 'rule 0' as a crutch for bad writing.

But now I've seen Daggerheart, and then even better Mist engine - which is heavily based on PBtA. I still haven't seen PBtA itself.

But what I have seen is rules light systems with consistency and solid guidelines for how to work through something and exactly HOW to make rulings that fit narrative theme, don't break the light rules that are there, and don't feel like I will be constantly inconsistent for lack of remembering what I said last time.

So when it comes to modern Rules light games like Legend in the Mist and Daggerheart - I'm there now.

 

[Aldarc]

I'm not sure that there is any universe where I would call Daggerheart "rules light."

 

[Retros_x]

The problem is you have to do this every time, and project it down a series of events in many cases. Its not only one event that you have to have a sense of.

If an event has only one rule in a complex system it will only have one event of ruling in most cases. I don't see why a rule should have one single simple resolution will a ruling has 4 events that needs to be resoluted? But maybe I am missunderstanding what you mean here?

The difference is you don't have to do it constantly. Because a lot of things are predefined.

Yeah, so the DM will probably do worse rulings. And again rulings in light-rules system are also light-weighted. Yes, you do it constantly, but it is a main part of the game and thus simple and fast. In 90% of cases its just some sort of ability check. Meanwhile in complex rulesystems you need to first know a)is there already a rule for that and b) if not, how can I make a ruling that is balanced towards the complex rules.

And while rules-light will have constant rulings, rules-heavy systems have constant referencing rules. I know what I enjoy, do a quick ruling instead searching the rule in my 500 page rule tome. Or learn the complex rules as if I am back in college. Also trying out new systems is a much bigger hurdle for tables who learned and mastered complex systems.