Do you like rules-heavy systems?

[Numion]

I like D&D just fine but I think they've shot DM's in the foot by putting rules for every situation. All a rule lawyer has to do to ruin the momentum of a game is to whip out the PHB and look up the rule that covers whatever situation the DM has put them into.

Uh, whats wrong with that? (Besides that its the DM that should know the rules to use in every situation )

Now, if the player would use the PHB rules to disrupt the game, then it'd be annoying. I personally have no problems with players correcting my rules. I've even given bonus XP for rules corrections that go against a follow PC

 

[Hypersmurf]

I've been involved in a 600-post debate over what Strength bonus applies to a Lance in 3.5... I'm not sure which way that means I should vote...

-Hyp.

 

[shadow]

I personally like rules-heavy games. To often in the rule-light games that I've played in, most situations that my character got in were arbitrated by an arbitrary and often inconsistant ruling of the GM. Of course, I suppose that it may just be the GM and players. Still, it seems to me that rule-light games require experienced GMs that can be relied upon to make consistant rulings, as well as players who are willing to put a lot of faith and trust in the GM. Of course since I like being able to have a hard and fast answer for most situations, rather than relying on the GM's best judgement, I prefer rule-heavy games. (However, when the rules get to the point of bogging down the play, that's a different story!)

 

[Morrow]

We're talking about games here. We play them for fun. There's a limit to the amount of time and effort I want to put into learning yet another set of rules. D&D is as rules heavy as I get. That's why I love the Open Gaming License. Its great that you can learn the rules once and apply them to all kinds of different games. More fun, less work- that's my motto.

Morrow

 

[Desdichado]

I don't think D&D is really rules heavy. Well, scratch that; I don't think d20 is rules heavy. I ignore most of the DMG, for instance.

But look at d20 Star Wars, d20 Modern, d20 Wheel of Time, or d20 Call of Cthuhlu. It certainly is possible to have a complete game in d20 with one reasonably sized book, including setting and everything. Take out the massive lists of spells, dungeon characteristics, magic items, and the entire core book of monsters and D&D can be that way too. I mean, do you really call all that rules, or is that splat?

I don't think it's terribly difficult or complex from a rules standpoint to make a character, and it's even less difficult or complex from a rules standpoint to run the game. YMMV, I guess. Naturally, there's a spectrum of rules-lite vs. rules heavy, but I think d20's more in the middle rather than on the heavy side, personally.

 

[d4]

i'd pick a middle option, if there were one.

i consider d20 to be rules-medium, like Psion and Zappo.

games that are too rules-light turn me off. they seem to me to lead to too much GM fiat and arbitrariness. i prefer consistency, and that's easier when the rules are more codified.

 

[MarauderX]

Tear away those rules, let the game be free! Stop strapping down every action ever conceived with iron chains! Pull the game loose, to the open sky, where it can soar once more! 4.0 shall be the new OD&D!!! Shout it from the highest spires in every campaign world!!! Hurraaaaayy!!!!!

 

[Psion]

I agree. Seriously. I've played games way heavier on the rules than D&D, and I don't like them. Too clunky for little benefit.

Heh. Yeah, I was sort of needling the tacit assumption that D&D is rules heavy. If you map it versus number of games on the market, it probably is. If you map it versus number of players, it tells a different story. D&D is still the big cahuna, but Hero and GURPS still remain pretty big players and are heavier than D&D, and other popular games like WoD and Exalted aren't significantly lighter (and you stack up the charms in Exalted, it's just as hairy as anything I have really seen in use in D&D). There are lots of really light games, but due to their lightness, they are easy to churn out, and they don't hold big market shares.

 

[skinnydwarf]

I think the poll is missing an option. I chose the "fluid rules" option. But that doesn't necessarily mean that I like rules-light systems and oppose rules heavy systems. I like rules light systems, but I also love D&D 3e. It is nice to have a relatively rules heavy system, but one that does not have so many rules that it bogs down play. I like to play rules light, but have the framework and the option to go rules heavy if I need or want to. I like 3E because it has the rules to fall back on, but not so many rules or mechanics that things like combat take an inordinate amount of time.

So basically, I prefer to play my games rules light, but within a rules "heavy" framework, so if I need or want more rules, they are there.

 

[Henry]

I'm convinced that some people have never seen a REALLY rules heavy game.

Star Fleet Battles from Amarillo Design Bureau is a Rules Heavy Game. 3E is comparatively light.

I fall in the middle. I HATE games like RISUS for extended periods of gaming, but I certainly dislike running one-shots of things like GURPS and D&D, and Something like SFB is crazily complex for me to enjoy a good game.

http://www.starfleetgames.com/sfb/sft/images/R3_j5_d77.gif is an example of a middle-sized klingon cruiser. (That's just the ship's sheet. The rules are so comprehensive they look like a town charter, with subssections and subrules.)

SO for involved games, I like my rules heavier. For something that won't last but a few sessions, make 'em light but customizeable.

EDIT - changed "small" to "mid-sized." There are smaller, and there are definitely bigger.