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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RFisher" data-source="post: 2386358" data-attributes="member: 3608">I don't really disagree with the Dancey quote. The complexity of the rules is, for the most part, othogonal to how easy the game is to learn. e.g. I would never give Fudge or Risus to a group of novices. Now, Fudge is actually a pretty great first system if you've got an experience GM. But, guess what, that's pretty much true of every game.As Eric Noah pointed out, how fast you play the game really isn't an important metric. It is also somewhat orthogonal to complexity. It will take me a lot longer to create a RAW Fudge PC than a D&D3e PC because Fudge doesn't lay out some options for me to use as starting points. I actually have to spend time coming up with a character concept.(Please note that I don't consider either better. I actually prefer having almost no character concept & letting the concept evolve with the character rather than having a concept up front.)& even beyond chargen, I don't prefer lighter systems because I think they save time in play.It is certainly true that its easier to figure out how to build a business off a complex system than a simple one. I believe it is possible for the publisher of a simple roleplaying game to be successful, although it may require measuring success in different terms than Hasbro does.Though, business models don't matter much to me, & as much as it would sadden me, I think the hobby could survive the death of the industry.</blockquote>

Verification