Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jer" data-source="post: 8558866" data-attributes="member: 19857">Complexity is a funny thing and pinpointing exactly what I consider "too complex" is funny as well.  It basically comes down to the fact that I'm the GM for any game we run and most of my players are going to be folks who are not going to get the books and learn the game on their own - they'll sit down to play and I can teach them, but for most of them it's like a boardgame - if we sit down to play Arkham Horror nobody expects them to go buy their own copy of the game and read a tome of rules before sitting down at the table. Once they know the game they'll buy a copy of the book if we're going to be playing it for a long haul - so my regular table has 13th age books, my kids tables eventually get their own 5e books.  So what I'm generally looking for in games to run as one-shots or mini-arcs for my players are ones that:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Have a consistent core mechanic that drives task resolution - no separate sub-systems. And powers that the PCs have that change the core mechanic are easily noted on their character sheets as skills/powers that they might have.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Even with a core mechanic, keep the number of bonuses/penalties/adjustments to the roll limited.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Have simple character creation rules that limit the choices that starting players need to make - generally either class/level systems or if point buy they have a template mechanism of some sort.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If the game has a skill system, keep the number of skills manageable.  Having 100+ skills in a game might have been exciting to me when I was 12, but I'm now far older than 12 and I don't have the time to parse out the differences between "Radio Use", "Radio Operations" and "Radio Repair" let alone enforce it at the table when a player who picked the wrong one wants to substitute it in for a check.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Have combat rules that value ease of play at the table over simulation when they have to make choice between the two.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Be able to run the game with only one copy of the book available for reference (this one can be mitigated by having an SRD available, but if every character has specific rules that need to be referenced and you can't put onto the character sheet, it's too complex).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">(And this is a big one actually) Don't make the GM have to create opponents using the same system as PCs unless it's a superhero game (exceptions to every rule). Either provide a decent set of opponents in your core rules or provide simplified rules for creating opposition.</li> </ul>Basically my two axes of complexity boil down to "how hard is this game going to be for me to teach at the table" and "how hard is this game going to be for me to run at the table".  Anything we play outside of D&D has to be low for both of those things.</blockquote>

Verification