Why simpler - much simpler - is better

[Dannyalcatraz]

Additionally, anybody who is in such poor financial straights that they can't afford rent or basic equipment, yet they are still attempting to be in a band, or join an RPG group doesn't have their priorities straight, and likely will bring unending drama to the group. Do not hire the drummer who always needs a couch to crash on in your band.

Now, see- that kind of advice would have gutted the LA hard rock scene of the 1980s.

 

[Blackbrrd]

and your point is?

Mine was that expecting everything to be priced for free and for everybody to be living in the "it's all free" economy was not realistic or helpful. Most people buy their own books, especially GMs.

Given how cheap RPGs are (something we both agree on), dickering on about cost of gaming is nonsense.

As you noted, skiing can be pricey. Somebody (like the OP) who seems to live his hobby life specifically through free-ness isn't really relating to the majority of society or the RPG playing demographic even.

Mostly that it was slightly amusing that for me, playing 4e was free because I borrowed the stuff I needed, while my other hobbies cost money, since I didn't borrow the things I needed. This being the exact opposite of the OP. Making another addition to your argument that pen-and-paper rpg's is one of the cheapest hobbies.

 

[Desdichado]

Let's play nice...

It is anecdotally true that for some number of people, gaming as a hobby may be inordinately expensive, but statistically speaking, it is a fairly inexpensive hobby.

I was being cheeky. Clearly his anecdote was anecdotally true, but he wasn't claiming that it was otherwise, because to claim that an anecdote is only anecdotally true and not statistically relevent is...

Oh, nevermind. It's not funny anymore if I have to explain it. It probably wasn't ever really very funny to begin with.

 

[Janx]

Mostly that it was slightly amusing that for me, playing 4e was free because I borrowed the stuff I needed, while my other hobbies cost money, since I didn't borrow the things I needed. This being the exact opposite of the OP. Making another addition to your argument that pen-and-paper rpg's is one of the cheapest hobbies.

Gotcha. some people get stuff free. that's OK.

 

[gamerprinter]

I have to admit that being a Rite Publishing freelancer, whenever any product is about to be released, I get a link to a free copy. So at least for Rite Publishing material I get that all at no cost - even stuff I don't ever plan on using. Its good for idea material at least. Of course all my own publications done through Rite Publishing, I do the page layout, so I already have the finished work even before it is uploaded for sales platforms.

When I was working on some freelance writing of the gazetteer for the City of Kasai for the Jade Regent AP, I didn't have the GMG to build a proper stat block for the city, so Paizo sent me the free PDF of the Game Mastery Guide - so Paizo provides what a freelancer is missing for a given project. And of course, I got the module when it was finally released.

Also whenever I create a map for a given project, I ask for the unpublished written material (adventure, guide, whatever) so I can read and try to discern if there's anything in the text of the work that would help me make the map better. So I get prepublished material this way too at no cost to me.

So I've got certain avenues for not paying for my RPG material, but it doesn't involve borrowing nor stealing anything - it's just a perk of being a freelancer.

 

[Dethklok]

Anyway, playing pen-and-paper rpg's is the cheapest hobby I have. I bought a car so I could go hiking in other locations, I bought a better computer to play video games and I have bought a lot more novels than I have bought RPG books. And cross country skiing is quite expensive when you want clothes that withstands -15 celsius and some wind.

(Actually, that sounds like my street clothes!)

i learned that lesson when I was a kid living on welfare. There's a metric ton of activities I didn't get to do.

Look, I introduced a young friend to roleplaying games - the simple kind that I play - and he kept coming around to borrow my dice. After he lost one and I suggested he buy his own, it came out that he couldn't afford them. He doesn't get an allowance, and isn't old enough to work legally. So I bought him a dice set for Christmas. We're not even talking about books here - for this guy, it's dice.

It's fine for you that you are an adult living in a Western nation and have only friends with money. But what are kids, or the majority of people living in Venezuela, supposed to do? Should I be apologizing somehow that most of the world doesn't have what you have?

(By the way, if it helps to assuage your irritation, the reason my tuition is waived is because I'm employed by the university.)

It is anecdotally true that for some number of people, gaming as a hobby may be inordinately expensive, but statistically speaking, it is a fairly inexpensive hobby.

Only if you restrict your sample to adults who grew up in Western nations.

It's true that expense really is a minor point. I'm not complaining that most games are expensive - even if suddenly every D&D rulebook and supplement were marked down to a penny, I still wouldn't buy or play them anymore. I enjoy making my own games, and reading about simple homebrews that I come across.

But maybe part of the turnoff I experience with complicated roleplaying games is the attitude of people who play them which says that of course everybody has the money to burn on these endless, unnecessary rulebooks, and screw anybody who doesn't.

This is an aging hobby. Some people worry that there aren't enough kids picking it up for it to last. Now, I don't think rpgs are genuinely dying out. But if the games were simpler, easier to understand, and yes cheaper, then doesn't it stand to reason that more people would grow up enjoying them, too?

 

[Neonchameleon]

(Actually, that sounds like my street clothes!)


Look, I introduced a young friend to roleplaying games - the simple kind that I play - and he kept coming around to borrow my dice. After he lost one and I suggested he buy his own, it came out that he couldn't afford them. He doesn't get an allowance, and isn't old enough to work legally. So I bought him a dice set for Christmas. We're not even talking about books here - for this guy, it's dice.

At this point I'm going to call out three of the games on the list I gave earlier as a reality check on the actual price you need to pay.

Fate Core. Rules available on a Pay What You Want basis. Dice you actually need: 2d6 of different colours for the d6-d6 suggested option for Fate.
Dungeon World. Ruleset available for free online. Dice you actually need: 2d6. (A set of polyhedral dice help but you can work round that).
Monsterhearts. Rules available for good deeds. All the rules you need are free online (although I really wouldn't recommend playing it without reading the rulebook). Dice you actually need: 2d6.

For a grand financial cost of precisely nothing if you're cheap you can get all three of those games for free.

Plus from good free games I've played Wushu (which I think requires 5d6 and is a good game at what it does - and you should enjoy I think), Lady Blackbird (7 dice I think - again simple to play), Gurps Lite (not your thing at all but free and takes 3d6). And many many more free games.

So. For a decent gaming system you need spend a grand total of absolutely nothing. To play all you need are a couple of ordinary 6 sided dice. Exactly how could these games be cheaper? You get paid to play them?

It's fine for you that you are an adult living in a Western nation and have only friends with money. But what are kids, or the majority of people living in Venezuela, supposed to do? Should I be apologizing somehow that most of the world doesn't have what you have?

An internet connection and a couple of six sided dice? Yes, I think that everyone should have an internet connection. But given the costs I've shown, I'm literally not sure how the hobby could be any cheaper. Possibly you could simply not use dice? (Nobilis? Chuubo's? Amber Diceless?) Even Pathfinder gives away its rules for free.

Yes, it is a bad thing that there are people who literally can't afford dice. Absolute poverty is a real problem. I'm not saying otherwise. But how that's a problem with the roleplaying hobby is beyond me.

But maybe part of the turnoff I experience with complicated roleplaying games is the attitude of people who play them which says that of course everybody has the money to burn on these endless, unnecessary rulebooks, and screw anybody who doesn't.

This is an aging hobby. Some people worry that there aren't enough kids picking it up for it to last. Now, I don't think rpgs are genuinely dying out. But if the games were simpler, easier to understand, and yes cheaper, then doesn't it stand to reason that more people would grow up enjoying them, too?

We'll see what happens. The hobby was at its biggest in the early 80s with the Red Box and AD&D - the latter hardly being simple.

But you can't get much simpler than "The rules fit on two sides of A4". You can't get much cheaper than "Free other than a couple of six sided dice and the cost of printing half a dozen sides of A4". Mysteriously this hasn't grown the hobby much (although the Fiasco market is different to the ordinary RPG market). What the RPG hobby doesn't really have is visibility. And one reason for that is that it's too cheap to play RPGs meaning that gaming stores get very low margins on them. It's also not got the turnover for bookshops. And MMOs are easier to get into. So no, the problem isn't cost. If the problem were cost then free RPGs like the ones I've listed would have taken the world by storm.

 

[Janx]

It's true that expense really is a minor point. I'm not complaining that most games are expensive - even if suddenly every D&D rulebook and supplement were marked down to a penny, I still wouldn't buy or play them anymore. I enjoy making my own games, and reading about simple homebrews that I come across.

Given this, AND the fact that you can get simple and complex RPGs for free or make your own, then money is not a factor in your thesis. Which was my point. Arguing cost in a hobby where money isn't really a significant problem, either because the hobby is cheap, or can be done for free just muddies the discussion into class disparity, instead of your true point, that you believe really simple rules are better than complex ones (per my understanding of your point, not to put words in your mouth).

So, to that point, do you really believe that if you published your super simple rules, that the average gamer would like them? Think they are better than their current favorite ruleset?

People aren't rational. People like the 1e D&D rules despite the fact that I think they are written confusingly and at times overly complex. Other people think my favorite 3x rules have problems as well, or are too complex.

The thing I find, is that most of us like some complexity, in varying forms and areas. Thats why there's so many different rules for RPGs. "Not designed here" mentality and "not the way I would have done it" rule the day.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

People aren't rational. People like the 1e D&D rules despite the fact that I think they are written confusingly and at times overly complex. Other people think my favorite 3x rules have problems as well, or are too complex.

People aren't rational, this is true.

But that isn't really what is going on here. People can and will rationally prefer a more complex game over a simpler one because that complex game supports the kind of play they enjoy. Ditto preferring a simple game over a complex one.

For example, look at iterative attacks & Autofire rules. Some people want to roll damage for each individual successful strike. Others are content with doing a certain set amount of bonus damage per extra hit because it speeds game play. Personally, I prefer the first, but it isn't a huge thing for me. However, it was a such a major point of contention in a M&M game I ran a couple of years ago, that several players playing PCs with Autofire attacks were the first to say they were quitting the game. They didn't care about the speed of the combats overall. They felt cheated out of their successes.

 

[Argyle King]

It may it work for you, but it definitely works for some.

Immersion doesn't have so much to do with the complexity of the rules than the preparedness & rules familiarity of the players and GM. The more prepared & familiar they are, the fewer times they need to reference the rules duering the game. The fewer times they reference the rules, the more mental energy can be spent on immersion.

For example, I'm a HEROphile. That is my go-to; my #1. Definitely not a rules-lite, simple system. Very crunchy, even.

However, IME, most of the time spent with the HERO rules is when PCs are being created or modified: most of what a player needs to run a game is on his character sheet. Many times, the only person who touches the rulebook is the GM.

And the players in my 1900-era supers game using HERO were as immersed as any players I have ever seen.

I don't play HERO, but I do play GURPS 4th Edition, and can very much relate to your post. Much like in your post, once a character is made, the vast majority of what you need to run the game is on the character sheet.

I can't say if this is true of HERO (only having dabbled in it a long time ago and forgetting most of it,) but one thing I noticed about GURPS is that, even though it's more "crunchy" than D&D, it's not necessarily more complex. How can that be? Well, for me, I say that because the system is built in such a way that it tends to be far more consistent than the D&D editions I'm most familiar with; even when I'm not sure of what a rule is, I can typically take a guess and be reasonably close to how it actually does work. Also, I would argue that D&D 3rd Edition (the edition I started with and highly enjoy) is far more complicated to DM than GURPS (in my opinion.)

Anyway... my point is mostly that amount of rules crunch and amount of complexity aren't always the same.