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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Michael Morris" data-source="post: 6268636" data-attributes="member: 87"><p>That's not how I would describe the graph.  And no, I'm not inclined to switch it out.    The comprehensiveness and complexity of the rules system has little to do with player disruptiveness.  In my experience its always the same player invoking rules arguments whether it's a rules heavy system like Pathfinder, something midrange like Savage Worlds or even a rule light system. If there are rules, someone's going to argue.  This is a problem that lies outside the scope of the rule system itself.  I've seen players try to tell the GM what happens in HoL of all systems. It didn't end well.  Given this fact, the possibility of player rules lawyering shouldn't be a guide on how a system is built. Ever.    When I hear rule zero - especially in the context of your other statements - I hear "Me against them" mentality.  And that's a poor way to run a game or tell a story.  The game and the story belongs to the group.    To me dice should only be cast if the participants are OK with all possible outcomes of the roll.  Otherwise, why consult the dice? Just choose the outcome you want and play that.    I don't think you understand fully understand system complexity.  Go only has 3 rules but is one of the most complex games ever devised.  The rules of chess can be written on one page.  Each card in Magic The Gathering is effectively a rule case - and while the tournament rules take nearly 200 pages, the beginner's overview needed to play still is under 10 pages.  All of these have little to do with how thick or light the rulebook is.  Page count isn't the problem.  Consistency, for most RPG's but especially older ones, is the problem.  AD&D 1e and 2e are particularly bad offenders - some rolls must be high, some low, some skills use d20, others use percentile.  In building my own system I'm wanting a consistent core that can be described in under ten pages, with basic classes and races taking a page each.  I'm not concerned with how large the book becomes as long as it is consistent.  Another advantage of consistency is when situations come up that aren't accounted for in the book, the GM should be able to extrapolate the existing rules to cover those situations.  But if the rules cannot do this for lack of consistency or what have you, and instead 'rule 0' has to be invoked, then the rule system was lacking and inflexible to begin with - the designer has failed.</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification