Different philosophies concerning Rules Heavy and Rule Light RPGs.

[pemerton]

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

Yet someone coming from PF2e sees it that way! Maybe that tells us something about PF2e?

 

[Retros_x]

Yet someone coming from PF2e sees it that way! Maybe that tells us something about PF2e?

If you are on one end of the spectrum, every other option looks like the other end of the spectrum.

 

[pemerton]

If you are on one end of the spectrum, every other option looks like the other end of the spectrum.

Another interesting thing about the comparison of Daggerheart (as rules "light") to PF2e (as rules heavy) is that it can help someone whose main experience is PF-esque and D&D/d20-esque games to see what is possible with other designs. That might help them appreciate how even lighter RPGs are possible which don't have the sorts of issues that are sometimes attributed to them.

 

[Micah Sweet]

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.

I'm glad you're enjoying Daggerheart and Legend in the Mist, but maybe PF2 just wasn't the right rules-heavy game for you? I mostly prefer heavier rulesets, and I really dislike PF2.

 

[BenjaminPey]

I wouldn't say Legend in the Mist is rules-light, it's rather dense in rules and mechanics, and Daggerheart even more so.

What LitM is, that D&D or PF are not, is fiction-first, ever working on a (mostly) unified roll without any subsystem (where numerous spells in DnD use subsystems), and conflict-oriented (even though it's now more fluid than in City of Mist and you can very well use Quick or Detailed actions for simple tasks).

Playing the game might be simpler, though, when you're used to it, especially for GMs. It can even be quite liberating.