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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TheAlkaizer" data-source="post: 9846965" data-attributes="member: 7024893">I don't think complexity belongs anywhere. Complexity is undesirable. But it's often unavoidable to introduce complexity as you add rules, or try to add depth to your designs. So it's a necessary evil that you try to curb. The golden goose is always to have simple rules have offer great depth. People often confuse their enjoyment of the depth of something with the complexity that stems from it.Complexity can also bring other things: nuance, design space, etc.As for the main question, as time goes on I'm definitely shifting to simpler rulesets. However, I also often have a reaction where rulesets look too thin for me. I think the component where I'm often disappointed like a lack of depth is player progression. Purely fictional progression, or very limited ones where players don't change much mechanically as they progress don't work with me. That's often where I'm asking for more depth, and thus, more complexity.I also like more rules and more structure to the exploration facet of RPGs. But I wouldn't say that I like it to have much complexity, I just think that that's a facet that's often underdeveloped and I'm seeking a more middle-of-the-road option.Procedures are a great way to introduce depth while keeping complexity at check. You mentioned rituals and I agree that they're often quite boring and I think procedures would be a great solution. Something akin to a Skill Challenge.</blockquote>

Verification