Is 3x D&D a rules-heavy system? Is that a good/bad thing?

[hong]

At it's core its light

Ouchie's.

 

[diaglo]

Ouchie's.

at least he didn't post the bitter beer pic.

 

[SavageRobby]

77% GMs

Most recent poll

I actually meant specific to this poll (although I did not state that clearly), but thank you.

 

[an_idol_mind]

I think it depends on what you use. Using all the supplements and extraneous rules, it's probably pretty rules heavy. I use just the core books, and don't find it rules heavy at all (but neither is it rules light). The core is simple enough to teach people how to play and play well in a single session, but additions like feats and spells add complexity.

Overall, I like the system as is, although I wouldn't mind a few simplifications here and there. In terms of complexity, though, I think 3rd edition hit a pretty good balance.

 

[Umbran]

Psion and Greylock, could you two please chill out? Both of you are coming off with a fairly snarky and "holier than thou" tone that has an adverse affect on the conversation. Please do not propagate your issues with each other through the tread anymore. Thanks.

 

[Khairn]

Are you asking me, or directing that to the topic in general? I apparently no longer understand how quotes and direct remarks are supposed to be read on the internets.

Greylock, I was indeed asking you directly. Your comment about how anyone who doesn't believe that D&D is "Rules Heavy" must not have played rule-light games, is the specific part I was referring to.

I've played both rule lite and rule heavy games and find the 3E PHB & DMG to be in the middle when it comes to game complexity. Perhaps a better way to discuss this is "how do you define gaming complexity"?

 

[green slime]

I find 3.x to be rules heavy.

3.x relegates a lot of the rules to the player, which many players are really incapable of handling themselves, at least in a smooth and undisruptive manner. Remembering spell effects, durations, and oddball bonuses, exactly when feats kick in, and how the whole thing intermeshes can and does cause players to go into a spin while they recalculate their odds of doing something relatively simple.

Not really a factor at low levels, but once the characters hit 12th level, its a problem. Far more so than the ability to ethereal jaunt (for example) in and of its self.

 

[buzz]

Everything you need to know to play HERO takes about 300 pages.

Last I checked, my copy of HERO 5ER is 500+ pages.

No matter the genre, no matter the GM, everything you develop for HERO is in those 300 pages. Every magic item, spell, character ability, etc is an example of the rules. And while the writeup for handcuffs can be 200-300 words long, none of those words or phrases introduce new rules. And that is why there is more than just the core book for HERO. The other books just show you how to implement the existing rules to achieve some effect.

While this is true when you're talking about the Powers system, it overlooks the fact that HERO is generally far more detailed outside of that aspect of the system than D&D is. E.g., iirc, the rules for basic senses (i.e., Spot and Listen in d20 terms) are somewhere around, what, 4-5 pages? Add in the combat maneuvers, acceleration/deceleration, tracking END, CON stunning, turn modes, Transfer/Drain, adding damage to attacks (esp. Advantaged attacks), post segment 12 REC, etc... HERO gets pretty detail-dense. Add in Heroic options (hit locations, bleeding, disabling, etc) and things get even more complicated.

Ergo, I think all of this more than makes up for all of D&D's corner-cases and the complications that magic generally introduces. As for "total pages needed," a typical D&D player needs far less than 300 pages of understanding. DMs, otoh... Ergo, I see them as fairly equal.

I dunno, I find this terminology pretty useless. Both "heavy" and "lite" are basically derogatory terms used by their respective opponents. Ergo, you get threads like this where people jump up to defend their system of choice from either label.

An RPG either has an acceptable level of handling time or it doesn't; i.e., it either facilitates enjoyable play or it doesn't. I've played RPGs with varying page counts that succeed and fail in this regard.

D&D 3.5 currently tests my tolerance for fiddling, at least at higher levels. It definitely puts me off as a DM if I'm not running a published adventure, as the prep time is just too large. I still enjoy it, but am looking forward to the changes in 4e.

 

[Hussar]

D&D 3.5 currently tests my tolerance for fiddling, at least at higher levels. It definitely puts me off as a DM if I'm not running a published adventure, as the prep time is just too large. I still enjoy it, but am looking forward to the changes in 4e.

This.

I'm in the 3e=rules heavy camp. Even if it's medium, I'd say it's still pretty heavily leaning to to heavy side. As was mentioned, there are just far too many corner cases, exceptions, and whatnot to consider it a light system. It's not a really big difference between medium and heavy IMO. Sure, it might not be as heavy as Rules... err Rolemaster, but, then again, what is?

It's most certainly NOT a light system.

 

[delericho]

Depends on what supplements you allow, and at what level you play. At low-medium levels with few or no supplements, it isn't particularly rules-heavy. At high level, or at lower level with lots of supplements, it is rules-heavy.

At present, my ideal system would be considerably more rules-light than 3e is by-the-book (even at low level core rules only).