(POLL) Rules Light vs. Rules Heavy systems

[Ruvion]

I also consider D&D to be rules medium....I vote for medium!

 

[Golem Joe]

Rules Light

I definately went through a phase where I was more into heavy/medium rules -- right after I discovered AD&D 2 was never going to make me happy. I even went so far as to check out the Rolemaster basic rules and used Paul Jaquey's Fantasy Character generator. I was a major rules tweaker and spent considerable amounts of time tweaking whatever game system I was using to fit my settings.

But after pleasant experiences with Castle Falkenstein and SAGA, both rules-light games, I strongly veered in that direction. Maybe I'm just getting lazy in my old age. I want a small number of rules that handle a broad number of topics very well.

Unfortunately, IMHO, 3e does not meet that criteria.

 

[techno]

For those who prefer rules-lite fantasy, Tunnels and Trolls is a simple and extremely fun game. Believe it or not, monsters can be boiled down to a single stat! GMing on the fly is so easy in that game. It is only $9.95 for the rulebook--and it contains all that you will ever need to play.

 

[Celtavian]

Re

Are you asking whether we enjoy playing 1st ed or 3rd ed D and D?

Rules light or rules heavy? That all depends on the game system. I have played GURPS and that is a very rules intensive system, must moreso than 3rd edition D and D.

Then there are games like Boot Hill, with very few rules. You can make up characters and be playing the game within an hour.

Even 3rd Edition D and D lies somewhere inbetween rules heavy and rules light. I prefer 3rd edition D and D because the rules cover more situations.

The lack of imagination arguement I hear used to deride 3rd edition D and D for having more rules is weak. All the rules do is allow the DM more time to create interesting encounters rather than have to spend time thinking up a mechanic for someone who wants to attack someones weapon or jump over a table. It makes D and D easier without hurting the fantastic nature of the game.

 

[Arnwyn]

I consider D&D to be rules-heavy (of course, there is "rules-heavier", like GURPS, etc). Hmmm... so maybe rules-medium might be more appropriate.

To me, rules-light is L5R or BESM/Tri-Stat ("How far can we travel in one day? *checks rules* Beats me.") Way too loosey-goosey for me.

I prefer rules-medium to heavy.

 

[Mulkhoran]

I prefer rules-heavy, although I see why people call 3E "rules-light" or "medium", since far more complex systems such as Champions or Rolemaster exist.

I classify 3E as rules-heavy, and I like it that way. It gives the players something to work with, and a foundation to stand on in the greater context of the game.

A non-rpg friend that I described DnD to one time (days of 2nd Edition) responded with "That sounds really arbitrary." I winced. I've always tried to find ways to make the game as non-arbitrary as possible, as I feel it creates a more enjoyable experience.

Just my two cents.

 

[Agback]

G'day

A friend of mine (who had reason to know) once observed that anyone can treat rules as though they were guidelines, whereas it takes work (and talent) to design rules that really work right.

So if I'm paying for a gaming product, I want rules. Guidelines I could have made up for myself.

Regards,


Agback

 

[MerricB]

I think this has degenerated into a "half-full or half-empty" thread; if you said D&D was rules-medium, a lot of people would agree; and such may be the most voted for option.

Cheers!

 

[Olive]

I tend to REALLY like rules-lite, because there's more imagination to it (see my views in Olive's thread about unimaginative players for more), but I can't say I think D&D would be as good as a rules-lite system... so I can't choose. Didn't vote.

as much as i appreciate the name check, it aint' my thread... in fact i only just read it after you claimed it for me! but i do totally see your point...