Do you prefer your games to be Rule Heavy or Rule Light?

[Yospeck]

Now I've never played DnD, which given the number of mods looks like it could be really rule heavy, and I've only GMd 'Song of Fire and Ice', 'Star Wars Saga Edition' and 'Warhammer 40k: Dark Heresy'. I'd say these (especially SOFAI) is probably quite rule light.

What's you preference when it comes to rules/systems such as:


Character Creation - Do you prefer a system with lots of options for lots of varied character types, or something simple so char creation is easy?
Combat/Magic - Something involved, or easy to pick up and quick to play with fewer options?
Feats/Skills - The more the merrier to cover a lot of possibilities, or can less be more and something more open and let the GM determine what rolls make sens?

[GunnarGreybeard]

Personally I prefer a system that uses a highly detailed but classless character creation system with limited magic that makes use of a large list of skills for customizing your character (like HarnMaster). Unfortunately very few others seem to like those kinds of games. :-(

With D&D, I think that the further you go into the later versions it gets more rules heavy while the earlier version are more open. For me, I prefer 1st Edition AD&D with OD&D a close second.

[Doswelk]

Personally I prefer a system that uses a highly detailed but classless character creation system with limited magic that makes use of a large list of skills for customizing your character (like HarnMaster). Unfortunately very few others seem to like those kinds of games. :-(

With D&D, I think that the further you go into the later versions it gets more rules heavy while the earlier version are more open. For me, I prefer 1st Edition AD&D with OD&D a close second.

I'd agree with your assessment of (A)D&D somtimes I miss the good old days of 1st Edition :cry:

That said these days I like the Savage Worlds system which on the face of it is very Rules Lite, but once you play it you realise that the system is imho actually quite clever in that the few rules it has actually allow you do almost anything.

Yes it is cinematic in nature but the fact I can sit down and stat a NPC in a couple of minutes that is good for me! :D

[dr_venture]

I thought the Star Wars Saga Edition pretty much *was* D&D 3.5... or am I thinking of the pre-saga edition?

My personal journey was from 1st ed. AD&D into Rolemaster and Traveler and a pile of other old school games. Eventually I started working on very elaborate custom game systems. I got my skill lists up to about 7 handwritten pages at one point. But for me, I had to eventually admit that I could do most of what I wanted to with good old AD&D, much more simply but in less detail.

So my personal view is that I want a rules lite game that flows fairly quickly with a simple system of resolving pretty much any action for a GM who has a clue. For me, Castles & Crusades fits the bill perfectly, as it feels like a streamlined version of good old AD&D, but with the more awkward bits smoothed out. That made it very easy to jump into. With a very small bit of tweaking, and a little work on the part of the players in describing their character's background,, I can adjudicate any imaginable skill usage in a reasonable and quick way. It's also extremely easy to modify with house rules.

So C&C hits the important points for me: fast, familiar, simple, flexible, and inexpensive... I also very much appreciate that there aren't a bajillion game add-ons that make playing the game extremely expensive. The add-ons are all optional in the best sense of the word.

At some point I should probably check out Savage Worlds, but I've been through so many game systems, I just kinda feel like if C&C is doing it for me, why go looking for a new system that I'll have to convert everything to? I think I'm mostly happy to just stick with what I have at this point, and spend more time running the game rather than setting up and tweaking the rules.

Hmmm... has this response become 'off topic'?

[Zeus]

I have been feeling the brunt of rules overload after having played D&D 4E for the past two years ....

Not convinced 5E will be any different on the rules front given the one size fits all approach they seem to be taking.

I'm actually feeling rather nostalgic for old AD&D. Might have to update an old TSR themed AD&D set to the latest 2.9 ruleset standard just for a blast into the past for a while .... any interest anyone?

[dr_venture]

God, I wish you'd put your effort into the C&C ruleset, Dr. Z... very retro, very AD&D, very rules-lite... and it's still an active rules system. Having lost our patron saint Sorcerer, the FG ruleset is kinda languishing. I don't know if you saw my thread in the C&C forum, but I'm sitting on a fairly extensive partially finished upgrade that we were well into implementing ('he' really, me just testing) when he disappeared. All the bugs are well documented.

I've seen from your other posts that you're pretty busy these days, so I don't mean to try too hard to volunteer you, though! But it can't hurt to mention it...

[phantomwhale]

I love a bit of crunch in my system, but the later DnDs are too rules heavy for me.

Been flirting with Legend / MRQII to get my crunch fix these days, but mainly a Savage Worlds player when the story must take precedence to swimming through rules.

[Yospeck]

Whilst SWSE is pretty much the same d20 system, I think it's the lack of attention over the years that hasn't made it feel like rules overload. A lot of the added expansions were very era based so were pretty much irrelevant/obsolete depending on the setting of your Campaign (I'm not familiar with D&D but I presume it's not quite as canon era focused as Star Wars). Whilst a new book might open up new Force abilities or a couple of talents, about 80% of the new expansions would be no use eg. if your game is set in the KOTOR era then a lot of tech/lore/locations were unusable when new books came out.

I'm basically wanting to create my own RPG, and whilst there's no system that is a fit all for everyone, I'd like to get a better idea of what options there are (I'll definitely check out how C&C do it as I've not seen their system). I think finding the balance is definitely the key, and I'm considering having a basic and advanced system that are optional to the GM and players, similar to how some games have a Combat system and then "Advanced Combat" options.

[dr_venture]

I'll definitely check out how C&C do it as I've not seen their system

Click on the "C&C Quick Start Rules" link on this page: https://trolllord.com/cnc/

The Quick Start Rules are free, and cover the very basics of the ruleset, a few basic character classes, and some low level spells. It ought to give you a pretty clear idea of how the game runs... fo' free.

[Yospeck]

So did finding the full "free" .pdf online :P Not that I'm an advocate of ripping off stuff like this, but as I'm not going to be actually using the system I figured getting it for doing some homework wasn't necessarily TOO bad. Actually touched on the OGC in the pdf as well which I was actually asking about in one of my other threads. Amazing how much of the basics from these systems are considered to be copyright and they had to make it so people are "allowed" to use them.

[damned]

i played a bit of BECMI and AD&D1E back when they were new but then no gaming for 20+ years. really wanted to play a few games but struggled to find games in my tz that fit my schedule so opted to dm instead. i have many, many different games and every edition of d&d etc but only had experience with BECMI and 1E so I opted for C&C as it was described as having the 1E feel. i quite like C&C - it is relatively rules lite - mind you there is a full PHB, MM and CKG plus other manuals so there are plenty of rules if you want them - you just dont need them. you have character level advancement which provides your skill, combat and magic improvements while almost everything else is done with Siege (attributes - prime or otherwise) checks. there are plenty of additional rules but I prefer the players to role play the situation and ill throw in my checks where required....

as to creating a new rpg/ruleset - i see the attraction - i have three unfinished ones of my own (from 20+ years ago) - but i also think it just fragments the gaming community/pool every time. i think the ruleset matters less and less as time goes on....

[Yospeck]

I think there's always a place for something different and the systems I've been coming up with so far seem to be quite distanced and unique from the general core systems currently in use (at least the ones I am aware of :D ). I want enough familiarity that it still feels like the RPGs we love, but different enough to stand on its own.

As a GM I personally like a lot of rules that cover a lot of eventualities, but not so many that as a GM I'm basically just a glorified rulebook myself with no room for personal interpretation. For me the thing I love the most about some RPGs is when you're players begin character creation and there's so many cool things they just don't know what to pick, or there is conveniently (or inconveniently) just too little XP points to invest in all the starting skills you want. I'm not a big fan of "classes" and prefer a more open skill system myself, but I think it's important to have enough so that your players don't all drift to the same ones, enough choice that you have some very different characters instead of 3 out of 4 players all able to cover the same eventualities that might come up.

Combat I like a detailed system because whilst I as a GM am quite creative, this isn't always the same for my players; so it's nice for them to have a long list of things they can do. In combat I personally find this more ideal as opposed to the creative ones without a list of moves who always try and come up with crazy things to do in a fight, which can sometimes slow down the pace when you're trying to work how/if they can go about it.