D&D General How crunchy vs casual do you like your D&D?

[schneeland]

Like @overgeeked, B/X D&D is roughly the level of crunch I'm comfortable with (not necessarily its idiosyncrasies). On the other hand, if we go lower in terms of crunch than, say, Whitehack or Dungeon World, I tend to find such systems not that fitting for campaign play (I do like at least a bit of mechanical underpinning for my character concepts and also some room for play stat development).

 

[Musing Mage]

I guess crunch and casual mixed, if I have to vote from those selections...

I like detail and 'crunch' in the general aspects of the game - for instance in my 1e game I use all sort of fun stuff like disease checks, morale rolls for monsters with all the various modifiers, Sage rules, Training and rating, wilderness exploration and random terrain - a very nuanced and chaotic combat system... but what I don't love are excessive powers and abilities for PC classes, and builds. 1e doesn't have a lot of that so it's to my tastes. Only some classes (Hello Monk) have new abilities as they advance... the main classes generally get their abilities from the get go, and simply get better at them as time goes on, with the occasional new power/trick at high levels.

I like how 5e made the core game simple to learn, but they went way overboard on PC classes and options. Min-Maxing on crack. New abilities just pile up as characters advance and can get overwhelming. I can't count the times I've forgotten half my abilities mid-game, only to look at my sheet and think 'damn, could have used that!' and I have familiarity with the game... I have seen countless new players get lost real fast as the sheer volume of abilities that get added.

So yeah, crunch in some areas, more casual in others.

 

[Umbran]

Crunchy meaning lots of match, numbers, things to keep track of, can make crazy combos. Can be a lot of rules, a lot to memorize and keep track of.

Casual meaning as little rules as possible, most of the fill-in-the-blanks are through DM and player creativity.

So, I'm not keen on the word choice - crunchy and "casual" aren't really opposites. I know a bunch of folks who are not "casual" about the role playing, but the things they are more formal about is role playing and story, not rules.

Be that as it may, however, I'm probably a middle-of-the-road type.

 

[Micah Sweet]

With the number of people who have responded they want rules light or casual gaming, I wonder how casual they think 5e actually is. To my mind, there are many, many other games lighter than any version of D&D.

 

[overgeeked]

With the number of people who have responded they want rules light or casual gaming, I wonder how casual they think 5e actually is. To my mind, there are many, many other games lighter than any version of D&D.

It is a D&D General thread, not specific to 5E.

 

[Umbran]

To my mind, there are many, many other games lighter than any version of D&D.

If you aren't getting into lots of fights, 5e is pretty darned rules light.

 

[Malmuria]

As a GM, I want everything I need for running the game condensed on a gm screen (or equivalent sheet), 1-2 pages of notes, and the players character sheets. I want to run the game without looking up anything in a rulebook (unless it's a totally new system). The system should allow me to make up a ruling that, even if it isn't exactly correct, doesn't break the game or invalidate what the players are trying to do.

 

[Rob Kuntz]

I like a lot of casualness with my crunchies! For the latter "Cheetos" rule!

 

[Micah Sweet]

It is a D&D General thread, not specific to 5E.

That just makes my point stronger. Many versions of D&D are at least as rules-heavy, which makes the claims about liking rules-light...odd.

 

[Lyxen]

That just makes my point stronger. Many versions of D&D are at least as rules-heavy, which makes the claims about liking rules-light...odd.

I'm not sure how you count this, but although 3e is certainly rules heavy, 4e is not that much actually (those that exist are fairly strict and, to my opinion, restrictive, but there are not that many of them), BECMI is certainly rules light compared to any modern edition, and as for AD&D, it's a more complex thing, but the core rules are not that complicated. It's just that there are lots of tables rather than simple rules because it was the lay of the land back them, and that the rules are not unified under simple principles, but if you discount all the optional rules in the DMG that very few people played anyway, it's not a complicated game. It is complex in apparence because it's badly organised, for sure, and the options are extremely involved and badly explained (Initiative and segments, weapons vs. AC, etc.), but not that complex to run.