Do only DMs like rules lite systems?

[Turanil]

What do you think? Are DMs going to be more in favour of rules lite systems? Or are players going to be more in favour of rules lite? Somewhere in the middle? Tell me what you think.

My experience is that both me as the GM and my players praised lite rules, when we tried C&C over D&D3e. However, I suspect that another group I have been playing with would rather play D&D than C&C.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I disagree with this. A codified ruleset (or complex game if you prefer) will automatically take a load of power away from the DM and keep it for itself. Assuming of course that you actually use the rules that are written, it can't go any other way. Now, because the power has shifted away from the DM and into the rules, the players close the gap between the DM and the players considerably.

This is one of two ways to close the gap in power between GM and player. Within the 'D&D family' (various editions of D&D and the games immediately based on it, including as C&C, d20 Modern and, arguably, many of the early 'new!' systems like Palladium), this is pretty much universally true.

Because codified rulesets are known beforehand, the players can plan and act according to that ruleset. As was mentioned, the players in 3e will think in terms of move or double move actions. The DM is also constrained in the same manner. He cannot have stuff just happen if he wants to remain within the ruleset.

Agreed. However, some lighter systems - even within the aforementioned D&D family - are also codified, they just use general, all-encompassing rules rather than highly specific ones.

Rules light systems by and large will empower the DM who becomes the judge of actions rather than an objective ruleset judging actions. If the success of my action depends on both die roll and DM's call vs a die roll, then the DM is gaining power. The former better describes rules lite systems and the latter rules heavy.

I'm not sure "by and large" is really accurate. If "rules light" is code for "old versions of D&D," "games based thereon" or "unrelated lighter games from 1990 or earlier," I might agree, but many newer rules light systems close the power gap in a completely different way: the success of your action depends on both a die roll and YOUR call as a player - and possibly the GM's as well, but there's no guarantee of that. It may even involve the call of another (non-GM) player.

The default RPG model from OD&D to the present splits power between the rules and the GM - the players have no power whatsoever except to walk away. Some, though by no means all, newer RPGs invest in-game power in the players as well. In some cases (M&M, Cinematic Unisystem) this is restricted to narrative control via a limited pool of points - action points are a small step in this direction - while in others (Wushu), narrative control by players is the underpinning of the system.

 

[RFisher]

As was noted by esteemed game designer Robin Laws, games with more codified rules empower the player more, while less codified rules put more emphasis on GM rulings to resolve situations.

While I think there's certainly some truth to this, I don't think the effect is that great.

I think the biggest factor is that detail-oriented people prefer heavier systems while big-picture people prefer lighter systems.

Even when I'm playing or running a game using a heavier system, I'll tend to push it in a lighter direction.

(Please note that I don't mean "detail-oriented" or "big-picture" to be extreme Platonic ideals. Simply tendencies along a continuum.)

 

[McBard]

I think there is a rules light/heavy axis describing the breadth of the rules (how many options the game offers) and a light/heavy axis describing the depth of the rules' implementation (how complicated those options actually are to play out at the table).

I'm all for a heavy system in terms of the breadth of options (as both a DM and a player). I like a wide choice of classes, feats, equipment, etc.

However, I'm for more of a light system (and would like D&D to become lighter) in how all those options are often played out at the table.

For instance, I like the (rules heavy) options of being able to have a very experienced rogue-type who can make several sneak attacks (for instance).

But I hate what this requires at the table in a game of D&D: several attack rolls (+11/+6/+1) each involving 9d6 and the pause to tally up the damage (which 80% of time will more than likely be within a couple points of 30). Solution: make Sneak Attack damage constant, and thus, in this example, making the rules involving sneak attacking "lighter".

Over the haul of a 4 hour session the instances of rules heavy implementations add up, and the story-driven game of D&D bogs down.

Keep the breadth of rules, but thin out the way all those rules play out at the table.

 

[tvknight415]

I'd prefer something in the realm of rules medium-light. I like a bit more structure to resolve issues, but dislike the complexity of a rules-heavy system.

As a player, I don't want to have to pour over 20 different books of feats and options to design a PC - I'd just like to take 10-15 minutes, scribble out some stats and buy some equipment, and go. But, as a DM, I like having rules covering just about every normal situation, with a mechanic system to allow judgement calls for anything odd-ball. I also think rules light is easier to teach newer/younger players.

Rules light: better for playing & teaching
Rules medium: better for DMing
Rules heavy: visit to the chiropracter after hauling around all the **** books

Eric

 

[Gundark]

What's worked in my group is to find systems that was lite for the DM/GM and option heavy for the players. Spycraft has worked for us. I can prep a game in about a hour (prepare all the stats stuff). Iron heroes I can prepare for the game in a lot less time than standard D&D.

 

[Odhanan]

I think mostly GMs favor rules-light RPGs, but not only them do. There is a discrepancy between the title question and the actual poll question.

 

[was]

our game is pretty rules lite on both sides of the screen

 

[LostSoul]

If the success of my action depends on both die roll and DM's call vs a die roll, then the DM is gaining power. The former better describes rules lite systems and the latter rules heavy.

Well sure, it may better describe what we call rules-light and rules-heavy systems; but it doesn't mean it's always true, or that it has to be the case.

 

[Nightfall]

I don't want rules light. I just want to kill PCs!