Rules Light VS Heavy

>>51444808
Depends on my mood personally.

I was all about D&D 5e when it first came out. This was coming off of Pathfinder and dealing with 20,000 different character combinations. Thing was, once I really got balls deep into 5e, I kind of missed being able to mechanically customize my character, but I also didn't like how Pathfinder kind of stuck its mechanics into my role-play a lot of times. Like, why can't I hit someone with a shield without taking a feat?

File: 1485633924612.png (140KB, 497x467px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 497x467px

fixed

>>51444808
Standard and below. Heavy leads to bullshitting and arguing in my experience.

File: index.jpg (5KB, 218x231px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 218x231px

>>51444836

I have an appreciation for lighter games, but they lack staying power for me. A one shot or a short campaign is fine, but without enough mechanical weight to be interesting the experience loses something if it takes too long.

I prefer medium weight to crunchy games, but a particular sort. I despise rules that seem to exist just for their own sake, huge amounts of granularity and detail shoved into literally everything. I know there are people who adore that stuff, but pages of encumbrance limits and hit locations and specific forms of injury just feels so fucking dull for me.

I really love games which combine a solid, crunchy set of mechanics with a focus on other things. Legends of the Wulin is my favourite example of that, being the only crunchy narrativist system I'm aware of, with D&D 4e a close second. But I'm in the odd position where I dislike D&D in general, 4e being the only version I actually enjoy.

>>51444808
Depends. Heavy online, light in real life. This is because I prefer heavy but I'm shit at math and I ruin everything for everyone if I can't stop for some time to calculate stuff.

c >>51444529

If a system is too heavy, it's usually a result of inelegant design.

Some people are not bothered by this, but I personally am.

>>51444808
Heavy games for a longer campaign, light games for short campaigns. Exceptions exist, generally light games that have enough interesting bits to stick around, but even then they tend to be rules-medium rather than -light.

>>51444808
Light. I don't particularly mind heavier games if I'm a player, but I never am.
Since I also can't get a group that lasts for any appreciable amount of time, I've taken up running con games. The quicker I can get the newbie-heavy group up to speed on the rules, the better.

Then there's also the matter of most rules-heavy games I know having rules for the sake of rules. Plenty of complexity without any purpose, which then often ends up invalidating itself by creating first order optimal strategies because the authors can't possibly keep track of all the rules interactions.

Rules light systems are better for narrative games like Call of Cthulhu, or for games with unestablished settings.

Rules heavy systems are better for games where the setting is established (Dark Heresy, D&Detc) and for games where GM-player distance is made clear through systems strictly governing certain actions like combat rules

Light.
Character building is cancer, go play Diablo.

I prefer rules medium to heavy. I like a solid foundation to build off of, but also ignore or change, as me and my group see fit. The rules are just a set of tools, a means to an end, but that doesn't mean they're bad to have if you want or need them.

Rules light stuff usually reads great and seems fantastic on a conceptual level, but frequently falls down or feels inadequate in actual play. Also tends to feel more like a set of handcuffs than heavier games, which I know that sounds crazy and counter intuitive, but that's just my experience.

I appreciate rules lite games when I start, but once they're figured out I kind of want more. I agree with anons who say rules lites are good for short campaigns.

Light to standard sits well within my comfort zone. Plus, the more I have to explain and remind my players of rules the more I feel they aren't having fun. Heaviest I ran was Pokemon Tabletop United which required about three separate custom spreadsheets open at once so I could run the game at a reasonable pace. While it was fun doing prep it was hell actually running it so next campaign I opted for something that would run smoother in actual play.

>>51444808
The sheer content of the rule is irrelevant. The important thing is the standardization of rule resolution between similar instances.

This is why 40k is considered a clusterfuck of bad rules since it throws too many weird mechanics that are unique to each circumstances. Hell, even the stats can't agree whether big numbers = good since saves and AP work the opposite.

DnD is a mess of multiple books, but it's considered accessible because the weird dice are reserved for damage only, not resolution mechanics, which always use the d20.

>>51444884
>But I'm in the odd position where I dislike D&D in general, 4e being the only version I actually enjoy.

That's not an odd position at all

In general I only care about the rules so far as they don't get in the way.

For instance in Shadowrun, I really don't want to account for every damn weather, distance, visibility, cover, etc. modifier for shooting a gun at a guy.
If it's a shit chance at hitting I'll penalize it for sure, but I'm not going to fuck about with the actual rules for that.

>>51444808
sans price and upkeep heavy ships are always better. the only reason every ship wasnt a heavy ship in renaissance and early modern fleets is that they were very expensive and most "medium" and "light" ships are leftover ships from when that model of ship was the heavy ship.

>>51455579

This is likely ignorance rooted in simplified stuff taught to kids, but when I learned about the Spanish Armada in school (britfag education), part of it was that while the Spanish had larger, more heavily armed ships the British ships were smaller and more manoeuvrable, which let them neuter the advantages of the Spanish broadsides.

Does B/X D&D count as light or medium? I like about that weight.

>>51455611
the british ships of the time were indeed much faster and ranged than the spanish, but they weren't small by any means, its that british heavy ships were faster than spanish heavy ships.

The only "light" ships employed during the battle were dutch flyboats which were used to cut off supply and encircle, but these weren't warships but rather merchant ships with guns loaded on them.

>>51444836
>bigger boats are better

How's that ass Phillip? Blasted as usual I take it?

>>51444808
Rules-light systems have fewer rules than rules-heavy systems.

>>51444827
I'm pretty sure you don't need a great to do that

>>51455611
If you ask any Spaniard about the Invincible Army they will tell you that there was no combat,and that a storm sunk all the ships before they could crush the english army.
It's even in our Wikipedia page about it

File: FinalStand.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

can anyone reccomend me a good Rules-lite martial arts game? What I want to run is something like Ranma/early Dragon Ball.

I only found pic related, and is not rules lite at all

>>51457233
The ocean is full of water.

>>51444808
i like having lots of rules to choose from, then casually toss out the ones i dont use that often.

>>51444884
>crunchy narrativist system

Completely defeats the point of the latter......

>>51458956

I don't think so. Being focused on themes and narrative does not necessarily mean having simple rules, that's just how it usually goes, and in my experience there is a lot of fascinating design space to explore in that direction.

>>51456602
>Bigger boats can carry more and bigger guns
>Bigger guns have longer reach
>Faster ships can't get into range without being pummeled

Now you know the danger of a true ship of the line.

The big ships need fast ships to protect their communication lines though.

Heavy rules. I then don't follow most of them. I just like a huge amount of rules because that tends to cover corner cases.

>>51458591

What? Final Stand is totally a rules light game. It's not ultralight, but it's extremely simple and focused.

>>51444808
Honestly, I feel each can be done well or poorly

3.5 does rules heavy atrociously, while 4e does rules heavy extremely well

FATE does rules light poorly, while Hi-Lo Heroes does it extremely well.

5e does rules medium to an acceptably mediocre degree, while MHR does it very well

>>51461875
>Fate
>Rules Light
Fate is Rules Medium, it has a lot of rules. They're just all simple rules. I think it does a passable job at said rules intensity, though.

>>51455629
The extreme end of light is "one-page" RPGs, but B/X is still in the deep end of light.

>>51461382
Mah boi.