Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Oryan77" data-source="post: 6213073" data-attributes="member: 18701">Out of curiosity, what exactly was the situation? What sort of "loose with the rules" stuff were you doing that he didn't like?A lot of people are saying things like, "2e was rules heavy". But did your group actually play the edition rules heavy? I know there were a lot of sourcebooks and optional choices. But other than buildings a character, when it came to using the rules, we were really loose with 2e.So when I'm saying "rules light", I'm kind of referring more to how you guys used the rules rather than if the edition had a lot of rules. In my experience, the rules-lawyering really didn't seem to get ugly until 3e came out and it was so easy for players to learn the rules. So then they knew when the DM was not using the rules as written. In my old 2e group, nobody questioned the DM if he was using the rules as written. He was only questioned when the player disagreed with how a DM was ruling a situation. That was only because both the player and DM didn't know the official rule (and didn't care). We just wanted the DM's ruling to be a fair ruling. Since the 2e rules were not as straight forward & easy to look up as 3e-4e, it was too much hassle to stop the game to find a ruling on something piddly.So I was just wondering if more rules causes more rules lawyering because they know the ruling is being used wrong. Or if less rules causes more rules lawyering because the players don't know the rules and disagree with how the DM is ruling. I don't have any experience with systems that really are rules-light. But it sounds like people are mostly saying that it has nothing to do with the system, it's just the players.</blockquote>

Verification