Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Andre" data-source="post: 2386633" data-attributes="member: 25930">I suspect every group does this to some extent. It's the old 80/20 rule. 80% of gameplay uses 20% of the rules. Whether or not to use the other 80% is up to the individual group. 3E is so rules heavy, I doubt there is a single group on the face of the planet that uses 100% of the rules (even if they could somehow collect them all in one place, resolve the contradictions between various published sources, etc). My group certainly doesn't.Is it easier to start with a rules-lite system and add some complexity myself, or start with a rules-heavy system and strip out some of the complexity? Probably the latter. For instance, my group recently gave up on AoO's for movement - it slowed down play too much for the benefit. Yes, it's changed gameplay somewhat, but not dramatically. Trying to add such a mechanic to a lighter system would be more difficult (which brings to mind the comment about GM's needing to be game designers posted earlier). But if I were to game with another group, I would still know how AoO's work, which is a benefit of rules-heavy systems.When is a rules-heavy system too much? When finding a rule is takes more time than it's worth. Note, you don't have to have all the rules memorized, but the GM does need to find them in a reasonable amount of time. This is an area where a good rules-lite system is inherently superior to its rules-heavy competition. But that's no excuse for the disorganized 3.x core books. Hero is certainly not rules-lite, but I have no problem finding what I need quickly. In 3.x? Just figuring out which book has which rules can be an exercise in illogic. Rules-heavy systems can be usuable, but they require more organization and play aids for that purpose.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Andre, post: 2386633, member: 25930"] I suspect every group does this to some extent. It's the old 80/20 rule. 80% of gameplay uses 20% of the rules. Whether or not to use the other 80% is up to the individual group. 3E is so rules heavy, I doubt there is a single group on the face of the planet that uses 100% of the rules (even if they could somehow collect them all in one place, resolve the contradictions between various published sources, etc). My group certainly doesn't. Is it easier to start with a rules-lite system and add some complexity myself, or start with a rules-heavy system and strip out some of the complexity? Probably the latter. For instance, my group recently gave up on AoO's for movement - it slowed down play too much for the benefit. Yes, it's changed gameplay somewhat, but not dramatically. Trying to add such a mechanic to a lighter system would be more difficult (which brings to mind the comment about GM's needing to be game designers posted earlier). But if I were to game with another group, I would still know how AoO's work, which is a benefit of rules-heavy systems. When is a rules-heavy system too much? When finding a rule is takes more time than it's worth. Note, you don't have to have all the rules memorized, but the GM does need to find them in a reasonable amount of time. This is an area where a good rules-lite system is inherently superior to its rules-heavy competition. But that's no excuse for the disorganized 3.x core books. Hero is certainly not rules-lite, but I have no problem finding what I need quickly. In 3.x? Just figuring out which book has which rules can be an exercise in illogic. Rules-heavy systems can be usuable, but they require more organization and play aids for that purpose. [/QUOTE]

Verification