What even is "Rules Medium"?

[Neonchameleon]

This is a spinoff of the thread on classifying stakes. I know what a rules light game is and I know what a rules heavy one is, and so do most of us. But "Rules Medium" is often used and there isn't a clear definition.

For me, a rules medium game shouldn't just be somewhere between the two, but have some of the meaningful features of both. I know games I consider good rules medium games have the following two characteristics in common:

• There is enough mechanical weight to the game that the rules lead to non-obvious emergent rules interactions.
• The rules themselves are simple enough that other than for monster statblocks the physical rulebook (or electronic version) is almost never needed in play even playing precisely RAW (although character sheets/a DM's screen/ a page or two of handouts is acceptable because you should always know where they are and never have to spend time finding things).

And yes this does mean that the same game played with expansive character sheets and all the modifiers pre-calculated may count as rules medium when if you need to go flicking through the PHB and possibly two or three other books when casting spells it isn't.

But this is my definition and I'm well aware there are others.

 

[Morrus]

I think of D&D 5E as rules medium.

 

[BookTenTiger]

Rules Medium is the alternative title for Sage Advice.

 

[Haiku Elvis]

Isn't it where there is still a bit of pink in the middle?
Somewhere near the encumbrance rules...

 

[payn]

I dont think rules medium is even a thing. I think folks have so much experience with D&D editions that its like second nature to jump into them. Thus, they consider it medium because they know it aint lite, but its easy (for them) to get into.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

A Rules Medium is, of course, the Seer who looks beyond the RAW and into the deep aether of the norms and customs of the game.

A truly powerful Rules Medium can even talk with rules that have been long dead and tell you how those rules would apply today!

 

[aramis erak]

I think of D&D 5E as rules medium.

I think of it as a little heavier than medium, but not nearly to heavy . On a 0-10 scale, about 6.
I think of BX as a little under medium, about a 4 on that same scale. full BECM or Cyclopedia at about 6.
Rolemaster at about 4 in core, 6 by RMC IV, and no heavier after that through RMC VII.
I'd put TOR 1E at 4 in core, and 5 with everything.
ALIEN I'd put at 6, and T2K 4e at 6, with Vaessen at 4.

(my 10 would be Web of Stars; I'd put Pheonix Command at 8 or 9)

On my 0-10 scale...
Superlight 0
Light 1-3
Medium 4-6
Heavy 7-9
10 superheavy

 

[Umbran]

I know what a rules light game is and I know what a rules heavy one is, and so do most of us. But "Rules Medium" is often used and there isn't a clear definition.

So, while you know what heavy and light are, you don't note there as being a definition of those terms. Knowing two, but defining only the middle sounds a little strange.

 

[Neonchameleon]

So, while you know what heavy and light are, you don't note there as being a definition of those terms. Knowing two, but defining only the middle sounds a little strange.

Not really. It's fairly easy to see when something is on one extreme or the other. If we're going to use an intermediate term then it probably needs a definition.

The strange part is that it is, I suspect, possible to fit neither test I've lined up which would in a weird way also be rules medium.

 

[Blue]

For me, a rules medium game shouldn't just be somewhere between the two, but have some of the meaningful features of both.

Since it's seen as an axis of rules light to general to rules heavy, classifying "rules medium" as anything except between them leaves gaps that require yet more levels of explanation and may not be intuitively obvious. Especially when people use descriptions like "mid to heavy" and other this-is-a-spectrum descriptors.

If you want other parts of the classification, for clarity's sake you need to pick a new term besides "rules medium" to define them.