Sorry - I think the point was missed...

[tonym]

Miniatures with pencil sharpener base . . .

A new thread was started to answer this question...


Tony M

 

[RyanD]

Ryan,
What sorts of valuable things are you talking about?

Started new thread for this response.

 

[JohnSnow]

Deleted...Took offense to something silly...Sorry Gg.

 

[Gentlegamer]

You obviously don't read Knights of the Dinner Table . . .

 

[JohnSnow]

*LAUGH*

Actually, I do. It's just been a while.

Sorry if I took your joke out of context. I thought you were just being snarky. My bad. I'll change that post.

 

[Akrasia]

... Rules-light systems empower GMs tremendously. One aspect of that empowerment is making the GM's prep work easier...

Umm ... not all 'rules light' systems 'empower GMs'. There are some pretty significant counter-examples to that generalization (i.e. rules light systems that give more *power* to the players).

Rules light systems cut down on GM prep time *independent* of whether they empower the GM or players.

He didn't say anything about the DM wanting to "lord power over the players." He said there's a subconscious attraction to a system where you have power. I think that's fair - most people with power like having more.

Oh please. You're splitting hairs here -- the psychological motivation Dancy mentioned is *exactly* the same as the one that I noted (a desire to "lord power over players", whether the GM is fully aware of this desire or not). Or, if you have a problem with my wording for some reason, feel free to reinterpret my original statement so that it conforms to whatever you think Dancy meant with his original statement.

In any case, I don't know why you are focusing on this, since so long as it is qualified with the caveat "some" it is not very interesting (after all, I am sure that there are *some* GMs somewhere for whom this is true -- just as it is probably true that the ability to GM while drunk probably explains why *some* GMs somewhere prefer rules light systems; big deal).

And anyway, my long-standing irritation with unjustified pop psychological generalizations stands.

Finally, as I have already pointed out, there are some 'rules light' systems that in fact *empower* players more than rules heavy systems do. And, furthermore, many rules light systems only work if players and GMs 'work together' to make the game work -- hence my earlier comment that maturity and trust is important for the success of such games. I don't see how that kind of arrangement leaves players with less power.

 

[Gentlegamer]

No problemo, Snow.

In the same vein: scratch and sniff dungeon tiles

 

[BonesMcCoy]

Hi Ryan, how's it going? Thanks for posting here on ENWorld. As one of the major forces behind 3e it's interesting to see your viewpoints. I disagree most vehemently with absolutely everything you said but at least I understand a little better why 3e turned out the way it did. Your entire approach to D&D sounds like it was all science and no soul. You can't measure fun with a ruler or chart it on a graph. You sound like a scientist trying to analyze what makes music beautiful. I don't think you understand RPGs at all.

 

[JohnSnow]

And anyway, my long-standing irritation with unjustified pop psychological generalizations stands.

But the reason for that is that psychology is something everyone sorta understands. We all have some understanding of human behavior and thought, being that we're human (well...most of us), so we all feel qualified to comment.

Anyway...

So you're saying that reduced GM prep time is a desireable goal of a gaming system - one that rules-light systems contribute to. I can't disagree with that.

That said, it needs to be weighed relative to what people want from their gaming experience. The marketing study that Dancy linked to at the top of this thread mentioned the 8 core values people expect from RPGs. They are:

- Strong Characters and Exciting Story
- Role Playing
- Complexity Increases over Time
- Requires Strategic Thinking
- Competitive
- Add on sets/New versions available
- Uses imagination
- Mentally challenging

If this is accurate, even rules-light systems should meet these criteria in order to appeal to a broad segment of the gaming market. Systems that don't can still sell, but their appeal will be limited to a niche at best. Unless those core values have changed - that survey was 6 years ago.

 

[National Acrobat]

Answer to Question #2:

Yes: I believe strong GM power is a key to the attraction of most rules lite game systems.

I tend to believe that the most staunch defenders of "rules lite" design philosophies are those people who either are exceptionally good at on the fly game design, or those who often play with others who are.

The "rules lite" design approaches I am familiar with (and my RPG library includes well over 100 different game systems) almost all rely on GM fiat as the fallback position for covering aspects of play that the game doesn't have a rule for. That empowers GMs tremendously.

For some GMs, I'm sure that's a subconscious attraction. (I doubt very many people overtly think: "I play Game X because when I run Game X the players have to give in to my whims.") But even subconsciously, I suspect it's a powerful motivating force for choosing a rules lite system.

This is my reason exactly for switching to Castles and Crusades, and you hit it on the head. I have literally 15 minutes to prepare for the game each week, and so does the other member of the group who DM's (we alternate running campaigns every six months). We are literally so busy with work, etc. that we get dinner on the way to gaming after leaving work with 15 minutes to get to the game.

Both of us literally have our campaigns as nothing more than an outline on an index card with key names, etc. of events and people, and I literally make up the game as I go along. For me, it's easy and the simplest way to do things. I get encouraged and creative mostly based on what my players do in the course of the game, and my campaign is ever evolving. I learned early on that I could not use the 3.0 rules and meet the prep-time requirements for stat blocks, etc. that were needed. Also, we only game for 3.5 hours once a week, and the combats were waaaayyy too long.

My background as a musician and performer, who was used to doing things off the cuff, extends into my DMing method.

So, your assumption there is correct. Heck, when I run SW D20 there are a lot of things that get 'dumped' for cinematic effects and my campaign there runs in the same manner.