How Complex Should D&D Be?

[Oni]

I'm curious how complex ENworlders want their D&D to be. I am using 3e as a baseline since I'm assuming it is the version of D&D that the most ENworlders have had at least some experience with.

When I say complexity I mean how finely detailed is the rules set mechanically speaking. How many options are defined. Crunch vs Fluff (I.E. I'm a ninja because of rules support vs I'm a ninja because that's how I've chosen to describe myself even though I'm more or less mechanically the same as Bob's thief over there).

So, were you able to define just how complex the next iteration of the game was to meet your own personal taste, what would you choose?

 

[ggroy]

If I wanted more and/or a different type of complexity, there's always the option of choosing another system such as Rolemaster or GURPS.

If I wanted less complexity, there's always other systems such as the basic and expert D&D box sets, Castles & Crusades, Dragon Age, Fighting Fantasy, etc ... depending on the level of simplicity desired.

 

[Oni]

If I wanted more and/or a different type of complexity, there's always the option of choosing another system such as Rolemaster or GURPS.

If I wanted less complexity, there's always other systems such as the basic and expert D&D box sets, Castles & Crusades, Dragon Age, Fighting Fantasy, etc ... depending on the level of simplicity desired.

Does that mean you wouldn't change the level of complexity from the 3e level then?

 

[ggroy]

Does that mean you wouldn't change the level of complexity from the 3e level then?

If I was the lead designer of 5E D&D, it would depend on what constraints I'm working with and who had a veto over all design decisions. Though if there were no constraints and I had an absolute say in what would become 5E, I think my version would look more like the BECMI D&D box sets or RC.

 

[Nebten]

Even though I haven't run a game of it in awhile, I'm a big fan of the Star Wars SAGA system. It is hard to say if that is more or less complex then D&D 3.5. And we only played with a limited number of books too. While they streamlined some things, they added in others.

Another thing to look at is book allowance. D&D gets more complex the more books and supplimental rules you let in.
I honestly have a hard time voting since I'm so used to 3.x after playing it for so long. But then again, I'm not trying to find different games that are more or less complex then 3.x.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

3e was too fiddly and no fun to DM from my point of view. I like 4e, but I would have no objection to a 4e that was less balanced vs a via other classes or with a more swingy combat.
That is I had no reall problems with save or die.

Now I would still play 3e with the right DM and group, the big things I did not like in 3e was the complex nature of monster stat blocks at mid to high levels, to many fiddly things that I would forget in the heat of the moment.
I also never liked the dependance on magic items and long term effect of high medium and low progressions in BAB and saves.

Now I never played high level AD&D and only played or DM'ed BECMI at low levels. However, I did not experience a dependance on items in these systems.

 

[Dausuul]

Less complex than 3E, definitely - although I'm surprised you picked 3E as the sole point of reference, since pretty much everyone pegs it at the top end of D&D's complexity scale. All editions before it, and the one edition after, have been simpler.

I would even say less complex than 4E. I would like 4E's tactical depth, but without all the fiddly little modifiers and effects (and I do NOT believe all the fiddly little modifiers are required to achieve tactical depth; look at Go, or chess).

 

[Jack7]

Significantly less complex than 3E D&D, and with generally more flexibility.

Of course particular aspects of the game should have more or less openness and flexibility, but overall, I favor "'In media res' constructive flexibility" to "pre-programmed complexity," as a design principle.

Of course, for that matter, I like "comparative multiple-methodologies," or "modulated-construct design," as a design principle.

 

[megamania]

Complex enough to challenge players and DM alike but simple enough to not bog down gameplay and fun.

A lot of what folks say was too complex in 3.5 could have been avoided by simple DM control. If it got too much simply limit books availiable for character creation.

 

[the Jester]

Less complex than 3e by a fairly wide margin.

I think one design goal for me would be for a player to be able to generate a new 1st level pc in fifteen minutes or less, including basic gear selection.

Then again, I also want a version of d&d that makes "every character starts at 1st level" a viable playstyle.