Interesting Ryan Dancey comment on "lite" RPGs

[Gentlegamer]

Sorry, but that just sounds sad, and a good reason to play computer games.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! Can't sell computer games running on "rules lite" game systems, since a computer cannot act as Game Master; "rules heavy" allows the system to be ported into the computer realm, and produce a new product line, as well as RPGs that feel like playing a video game . . .

 

[JamesDJarvis]

Hmmmm... thriving rules-lite systems ? Has there ever been one?

I don't think any game is rules-lite if it is over something like 64 pages or so.

I know C&C is simpler them 3e but i'd never call it rules-lite, True-20 certainly isn't rules lite they just aren't ruels heavy.

 

[delericho]

The comment that I found most telling on this thread was "that D&D seemed like 20 minutes of fun packed into four hours". (Taken from a post by SweeneyTodd - I don't know exactly where he was quoting from.)

The following statement is one that I do not make lightly, and indeed is one I never thought I'd say: If you are playing D&D like that, you are playing it wrong.

A good DM with a group of players who are able to abide by his rulings will fit much more than 20 minutes of the "fun" activities into 4 hours. Likewise, a good GM and a good group of players will do the same, (almost) regardless of the system they are using.

So, which is better, rules-lite or rules-heavy? Well, if you want to make money, the answer would seem to be rules-heavy. (But then, if you really want to make money, the answer is to be either D&D or Vampire. I doubt any other system is making huge amounts of money.)

If your goal isn't to make money, if for instance you are interested in playing the games, the best system is the one that you have most fun with. If you like D&D, great. If you prefer C&C, that's great too. Attempting to find one true game system that will appeal to everyone is pointless.

Personally, I like D&D, but with reservations. I really like the fact that the game has provided me with a huge array of tools for building exciting adventures. I like the fact that I can spend my time dreaming up evil plots, and be sure that someone has done the hard work of describing all this in game terms, and I like the fact that the game provides reasonably good tools for ensuring that the challenges I develop are neither too hard nor too easy for my PCs (the CR system). This latter element was something I found very difficult in Storyteller, for instance.

What I hate about D&D, though, is that there's so much work involved in taking my wonderfully fiendish ideas and turning them into a concrete set of statistics. Especially when it is so obviously the case that that job could be best done with a PC application, but there does not currently exist an application that has all the features I would require (for instance, the ability to select a few elements of a monster build, and then click a "finish it for me" button) and is kept right up to date with the most recent releases. (And yes, I know that such an application is unrealistic to expect, but without it, I'm left with the work to do myself.)

 

[fredramsey]

I don't think any game is rules-lite if it is over something like 64 pages or so.

Page count?

Let's try to agree on one thing: "Rules Lite" is as subjective a term as "Rules Heavy", or "Obscene". We know it when we see it.

Savage Worlds, for example, is definitely over 64 pages, but it covers everything from vehicle rules, chase rules mass combat rules (those last 2 taking only 2 pages each - that's lite), powers, etc., etc. Rules Lite? I think so, but you may not.

But page count? Sorry, no.

 

[scadgrad]

.. "If you think that D&D has remained popular simply becasue it was the first, or that it's a recognizeable brand, you have no business being a designer."

"Be there the firstest with the mostest baby."

One of the primary reasons that D&D and Warhammer Fantasy continue to dominate their respective markets is because of the brand and the world-wide community of players who cling to the game. This is particularly telling in GW's case since their rules are just laughably bad at times.

.. Well, they recreated ther hottest-selling campiagn setting and novel series, Dragonlance, as a rules-liteish RPG called SAGA, and we all know what a huge success that was. They even tied it with some of earth's most popular comic books with the Marvel SAGA game, and that went kaput, too.

(Granted, we also need to consider TSR's poor business practices.)

It's not all about branding.

But one could make the argument that SAGA went down in flames because it wasn't a part of the D&D brand. It was viewed as NOT D&D. There is certainly more to sales figures than the brand, but I maintain that the brand is far more importent than how many crunchy bitz the designer throws under the hood.

 

[Desdichado]

I sit corrected. But still

Still what? That was your whole point that just evaporated in the wind, wasn't it?

 

[BiggusGeekus]

But one could make the argument that SAGA went down in flames because it wasn't a part of the D&D brand. It was viewed as NOT D&D. There is certainly more to sales figures than the brand, but I maintain that the brand is far more importent than how many crunchy bitz the designer throws under the hood.

Addtionally, that game had problems because W-H blew up their world again.

Never buy real estate in Krynn.

 

[Garnfellow]

But I also consider just about every game mentioned in this thread rules heavy. Risus (6 pages) and similar games are rules lite. Any game where rules (and non-setting material) take up 100+ pages is not rules light.

You know, I'm really not sure I've ever played a true rules-lite game. I've looked at Risus, but never actually ran it. The closest I got was probably either SAGA or The Fantasy Trip, both of which were pretty solid games. Would they be considered rules-lite?

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! Can't sell computer games running on "rules lite" game systems, since a computer cannot act as Game Master; "rules heavy" allows the system to be ported into the computer realm, and produce a new product line, as well as RPGs that feel like playing a video game . . .

Have you ever played a video game? Final Fantasy 4 is a rules-lite system; Final Fantasy Tactics is comparatively rules-heavy but rules-lite by pen and paper standards; Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil is considerably heavier, being based on 3.x D&D.

If you were to translate FF4's mechanics into a pen and paper RPG, it would be a relatively rules-lite system with a single unified combat mechanic and a small number of spells or powers per character (at 40th level about equivalent to a 1st-level d20 character). Less complex than BD&D, and with the same amount of out-of-combat conflict resolution inherent to the system (that is, none). Unlike any version of D&D, but much like, say, Tri-Stat, positioning and movement would be abstract, limited, at most, to declaring one line of PCs/NPCs as being ahead of the other for protective purposes. Like C&C or BD&D or AD&D, every character is representative of an archetype, and he cannot change it or customize it within the framework of the rules. In the electronic game, non-combat interaction is either ignored (most skill checks) or run by 'GM fiat' (diplomacy, traps) - just like in a rules-lite system.

An FFT character has the same amount of out-of-combat conflict resolution built into the system as an FF4 character, but considerably more complexity in combat. By level 40, he likely has levels in about a half-dozen classes and he can set a custom suite of abilities for combat, some of which would likely have out-of-combat implications as well in a pen-and-paper game. Movement is precise and Z-axis is important. However, an FFT character never has as many options during the course of play as even a BD&D character, and less in character creation than a D&D 3.x character.

A RttToEE character is a 3.x character, basically.

Rules-lite systems not only translate perfectly well to video games, they are the clear standard. Non-D&D computer games also usually run on 'rules-lite(er)' systems.

 

[fredramsey]

Still what? That was your whole point that just evaporated in the wind, wasn't it?

No, only if you use the talk-radio model of discussion does one detail invalidate the entire point.

He is still a big name in the industry. He publishes d20 material. Point still stands. Why do those at the top find it necessary to cast those below in a bad light, especially in such a small market?