You get a new game. It's a big book (not too big, a few hundred pages - the usual), has a detailed setting. Nothing off putting there. But if you find the rules are very simple, and not very detailed, do you feel a bit short changed? Does the size of the game, the detail of the background, require a cerain minimum detail of rules? If your character is defined in very simple terms - no reflection on the quality of the rules mind you - with very little rules detail, is that enough?
Personally, I would prefer a simple rules set in the first few chapters, or perhaps the first chapter, and then setting stuff to fill the book.
I have seen enough supplements that contain all the rules for a game, even though they use a generic system, so that it is a self-contained game. Fine for those who only buy that, not fine for those who have bought several versions of said generic game with several supplements.
As I now only use one or two rules systems for my gaming, I am interested in supplements that use the rules inventively and map the rules to the setting requirements. Those should have a "Uses the ??? Rules, available from ???" statement and then notes about how to use the rules in that setting, then chapters and chapters of setting material.
The minimum amount of simplicity I like is in D&D or Classic Traveller. 6 or so stats and some skills (or a class).
The Fantasy Trip (and later GURPs) always bugged me by only having 4 stats. Str, Dex, Stamina, and IQ
I'm fine with a "lite" rules set...in fact I prefer it. As long as it covers everything necessary for the game and it isn't a matter of trying to split up the rules over a series of sourcebooks.
Simple to moderate length rules work great for me. When I was a kid, I loved complex stuff, but I am just not interested in learning yet another complicated game.
I can handle a wide range in terms of how much rules are in a book. For me it really depends on the game.
Quote from: danbuter;624533Simple to moderate length rules work great for me. When I was a kid, I loved complex stuff, but I am just not interested in learning yet another complicated game.
As I get older I tend toward simple as well. Still crave some crunch and complexity once in a while, but something that is light and quick definitely feels a bit more natural these days.
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;624523You get a new game. It's a big book (not too big, a few hundred pages - the usual), has a detailed setting. Nothing off putting there. But if you find the rules are very simple, and not very detailed, do you feel a bit short changed? Does the size of the game, the detail of the background, require a cerain minimum detail of rules? If your character is defined in very simple terms - no reflection on the quality of the rules mind you - with very little rules detail, is that enough?
First i would like to define what may be called "Rules".
Core Rules is everything that is needed to resolve skill rolls, combat, and so on.
Complimentary rules are optional, or like resources.
Those are like the long list of spells that can be done, with some specific rules for some spells, or an advanced list of combat moves.
No matter how big the gamebook is, i prefer the core rules to be short, easy, and un-complicated.
However, if i buy a book on several hundred pages, then i expect my share of "complimentary rules", be they descriptions of a lot of spells, fighting moves, traits, and/or info about the world it is set in, with possible enemies, NPC's, and so on.
Quote from: danbuter;624533Simple to moderate length rules work great for me. When I was a kid, I loved complex stuff, but I am just not interested in learning yet another complicated game.
I am in a similar spot. I will make an exception if the complexity drastically improves gameplay. That seems to be a rare occurrence, though. Usually complexity makes it harder to play as you need to remember more things to engage in game activity.
I'm not sure I'd buy an RPG in the first place that was more than 200 pages at this point.
I like simple games, as long as the game feels substantial for what I pay for it. Don't gild the lily so to speak and make it complex to fill pages. Nor should one write too much and not leave me any setting areas to make my own.
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;624523You get a new game. It's a big book (not too big, a few hundred pages - the usual), has a detailed setting. Nothing off putting there.
Well, actually, this is off putting for me. I kind of get more and more weary of several hundred pages to read just to get into a new game that does the same thing a billion other games did before, "only better." I like it more and more sweet and short on the rules, heavy on the actual play material (and I do NOT mean "the fluff" or "background info" by this. I mean the material that is actually meant to be played at a game table instead). I'm purchasing more modules and adventures than ever before, as a result.
I really do have a certain amount of crunch, below which it's no longer much fun to me because I can't quite feel the advantage over going freeform. Doesn't have to be a lot of crunch, I mean MERP or Rolemaster 2e with secondary skills is fine, but I want to have some knobs that do SOMETHING.
A separate but related issue is that I like rules reflecting the game reality to some degree (and, by and large, dislike purely narrative rules). For instance I like Dragon Warriors for the simple system it is but if I have a Knight and so does the player to my left then the Knights are basically the same character on paper (could be literally the same depending on stat rolls). But they're completely different in game reality! Hence, the dissonance.
If that even makes sense to anyone else.
Quote from: Catelf;624545First i would like to define what may be called "Rules".
Ok, what i'm really referring to is character detail: the mechanics that detail characters, stats, powers, weird attributes/aspects, etc.
If you have a detailed setting and a big book that's lavish and lovely, is it bit odd to then have next to no rules to detail your character?
I can enjoy a wide variety of rules complexity.
RPGPundit
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;624523You get a new game. It's a big book (not too big, a few hundred pages - the usual)
What a fucked up hobby! Hey kids, let's join a hobby that requires you to read a giant textbook before you can play the game.
I am not making fun of you Ghost Whistler, your thread totally makes sense. It's just the absurdity of how "a few hundred pages" is the usual for our hobby and we don't blink. And we also don't get why the rest of the world has moved on.
I was playing this online game last week and it had a 5 minute tutorial and I thought I was going to lose my brain from boredom. I can only imagine how non-gamers look at our hobby with hours of reading and computations before ever playing.
That you have a huge book doesn't mean you need to read it all to start playing. Or even half of it. I think only the bad games have that.
was that an online video game, or a tabletop game played online?
I'm of the "simplicity is better" school of thought. When I was younger I had the time and energy to learn complex games, but now I just want to get friends together and play in a hurry. The OD&D booklets are so short as to be well under 100 pages when you factor in the page size. Amber Diceless looks thick but is mostly examples and background; the actual rules could fit on a couple of sheets of paper. I tend to default to those kinds of games nowadays.
great ruels systems are short and simple.
d20 - roll a d20 add modifier vs target number
Storyteller - add the number of pips from your stat to your power and roll that many d10s and count the number of 7+ you get
BRP - skill + modifers - roll under it on a %d
SW - roll a dX appropriate to your stat or skill target 4
Amber - highest stat wins
the base core rule of any game should be able to be sumarised in a single line like that.
Then the book can give you lists of skills and vary the attributes and the types of armour and the number of different 9mm pistols you can choose from.
The key is a good core because it frees the GM to make consistent rulings.
Now one d20 book might be 400 pages and that might include feat trees and spells and myriad classes, another might be 50 pages and have 3 classes and a system for doing feat like moves and one for creating magic effects. The later one is likely to be more complex that the first as the first is just a list of minor variations. One is not necesarily better than the other but the core in each caase is simple to understand.
If you get a new player and you can say 'in this game if you want to do something you get a d20 and you add a new modifiers to it depending on skill, class level etc and you try to roll over a number that I as the GM will set, usually a 14. ' then if you have a pregen character they can usually start playing straight away if the setting 'classic' (classic being anything from wild West to Musketeers, to Iron age Vikings, to Lord of the Rings-esque to bog standard D&D fantasy so any thing that people as opposed to roleplayers know about). That to me is a good rule set.
And yet a simple game (at least it seems that way!) like MHR seems to be a step too far for many.
Quote from: jibbajibba;625052great ruels systems are short and simple.
d20 - roll a d20 add modifier vs target number
Storyteller - add the number of pips from your stat to your power and roll that many d10s and count the number of 7+ you get
BRP - skill + modifers - roll under it on a %d
SW - roll a dX appropriate to your stat or skill target 4
Amber - highest stat wins
the base core rule of any game should be able to be sumarised in a single line like that.
I agree, but those systems invariably have to accomodate a ton of wrinkles. Storyteller for instance also has a rquirement to meet a number of successes as dependent on the difficulty. It's not complex, but it's not as elegant as I would like: roll, compare to stats, then compare to difficulty. They've always tinkered as well.
Then you have all the usual probably quite tedious wrinkles (combat notwithstanding):
group efforts
contested rolls
extended actions
criticals
And so forth...
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;624523You get a new game. It's a big book (not too big, a few hundred pages - the usual), has a detailed setting.
That's actually likely to turn me off right there. I prefer systems with simple rules (and not many of them) that allow me to create my own campaign setting. I'm less likely to be interested in games with lots of rules or very detailed settings and I'm seldom interested in games with lots of both.
People here are confusing resolution mechanics and systems. They are not the same thing! I have a system where you can choose which resolution mechanic you want to use. A closer approximation of system would be:
System = Chargen + Character Advancement + Modifier Use + Skills/Abilities/Powers + Specialized Sub-systems + resolution mechanics
You can express most any resolution mechanic in one sentence. That doesn't mean the system is simple.
-clash
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;625057And yet a simple game (at least it seems that way!) like MHR seems to be a step too far for many.
Regardless of its level of complexity, MHR is by all accounts a rather non-traditional rule set.
If I was ever minded to play supers gaming again (which is not very likely, as I think that outside of certain non-traditional settings supers is actually not very well suited to RPGs) I'd happily play FASERIP in a heartbeat, and that clocks in at about 20 pages of rules (even with copious illustration).
Being overly simple doesn't bother me.
Being over complex does.
That said, it has to be REALLY complex with lots and lots of tables and modifiers for EVERYTHING.
Basically, if a rule has 2 parts to resolution (D20+modifiers vs. DC) it's not complex. If it has too many more than that, well...we'd have to see it in practice. Sometimes things that appear complex while studying aren't that hard in practice.
Quote from: JeremyR;624531The minimum amount of simplicity I like is in D&D or Classic Traveller. 6 or so stats and some skills (or a class).
The Fantasy Trip (and later GURPs) always bugged me by only having 4 stats. Str, Dex, Stamina, and IQ
I prefer about 8 stats. Three or four always feels to me like I can't represent the character I want.
Yeah, I don't think the problem with MHR is that its rules-lite.
RPGPundit
Quote from: Grymbok;625086Regardless of its level of complexity, MHR is by all accounts a rather non-traditional rule set.
If I was ever minded to play supers gaming again (which is not very likely, as I think that outside of certain non-traditional settings supers is actually not very well suited to RPGs) I'd happily play FASERIP in a heartbeat, and that clocks in at about 20 pages of rules (even with copious illustration).
Does that include all powers?
Quote from: RPGPundit;625207Yeah, I don't think the problem with MHR is that its rules-lite.
RPGPundit
Being a comic book and superhero fan I was quite excited when I got a copy of MHRP; I was very enthusiastic.
Then, I discovered the pure screaming horror of 'battle of the dice pools' and my dreams were crushed.
I like the core mechanic of MHRP but then it jumps off a cliff for no reason with metagame stuff.
I know at least one gamer that likes it, but it does not work for me.
So sad.
Quote from: RPGPundit;625207Yeah, I don't think the problem with MHR is that its rules-lite.
RPGPundit
what problem?
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;625219Does that include all powers?
No, they were defined in either the GM book or on the character sheet in MSH core. Possibly both.
Quote from: Bill;625221Being a comic book and superhero fan I was quite excited when I got a copy of MHRP; I was very enthusiastic.
Then, I discovered the pure screaming horror of 'battle of the dice pools' and my dreams were crushed.
I like the core mechanic of MHRP but then it jumps off a cliff for no reason with metagame stuff.
I know at least one gamer that likes it, but it does not work for me.
So sad.
Pretty much my experience. OTOH, we've had 3 really good Marvel systems so far, so I saw no need for a new one.
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;625222what problem?
Read: "problem for anyone who wants to play an RPg and not a storygame or who gives a crap about immersive play". If those two things aren't what you want, then no problem I guess.
Because of the tastes of the people with whom I regularly play -- most of whom choked, for instance, on 3E D&D -- I'm not likely to be in the market for anything as centrally and player-facingly rules-heavy as a lot of popular RPGs.
Stuff that's easily decoupled from what the players need to handle is another matter. The Arduin Grimoire series, the original Dungeon Masters Guide, the Tri Tac games (e.g., Fringeworthy), and other books full of such bits and bobs have appealed to me.
Quote from: RandallS;625074That's actually likely to turn me off right there. I prefer systems with simple rules (and not many of them) that allow me to create my own campaign setting. I'm less likely to be interested in games with lots of rules or very detailed settings and I'm seldom interested in games with lots of both.
I can get behind this statement.
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;625222what problem?
The problem of it not being an RPG.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPundit;625410The problem of it not being an RPG.
RPGPundit
and you still can't define why. Nor have you read or played it.
Did FASERIP ever need that table? Could it not have been done without it?
I cant remeber if it was easier than DC Heroes, but I do remember the sheer amount of content that DC gave you.
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;625457Did FASERIP ever need that table? Could it not have been done without it?
I cant remeber if it was easier than DC Heroes, but I do remember the sheer amount of content that DC gave you.
FASERIP
could have been done without the table, I suppose, using some hideous system where each stat level has two values, one used as a dice roll modifier and one for resolution. Then you'd end up with Monstrous (for example) giving a +40 to all rolls, with a modified roll of 65 or more being Green, 95+ being Yellow, and you'd probably have to drop the way the yellow band grows on the chart and just call Red 125+. Then you'd fall back to the traditional value of Monstrous (75) for your effect.
But that's an overly complex system that you'd only ever pursue if you had a phobic reaction to the use of look up tables. Which describes most modern RPG designers, so I suppose someone will doubtless use it at some point. (Bias Alert: I always found universal table games like MSH, DC Heroes and Torg to be perfectly speedy in play, and find it regrettable that they're so totally out of fashion now).
FASERIP basic is a lot simpler than DC Heroes (MEGS). The main advantages of MEGS are the better scaling and the cool initiative rules they had (using pre-action declarations, another deeply out of fashion mechanic).
EDIT: Of course, in many cases your action FEAT is using a different stat to your effect FEAT. But you'd still need both the die adjustment and the effect values on each stat for the different cases.
I like to note a pattern I found in one of my favorite video game publishers, SEGA.
They'll make games with very simple controls, but expect a level of finesse that builds upon itself. Ultimately the best players are masters of finesse for these simple controls. With basic tools that build upon each other and a wide canvas, true complexity can be accomplished.
Ever seen someone go from Crazy Taxi beginner, to after Crazy Box practice, go to Crazy Taxi insane master? Or note how you go from Jet Set Radio beginner and end the game by pulling stunts that blow you away? Yeah, that. That's what I like.
I need another rule set like I need more bulk mail advertisements. However, I'll gladly welcome it at home if it's KISS designed and develops complex mastery through experience. A whole bunch of complex controls sometimes only means a whole bunch of complex controls.
Nowadays, I'd rather sift through the ones with simple controls to find that magical one with high finesse.
Quote from: Grymbok;625469FASERIP basic is a lot simpler than DC Heroes (MEGS). The main advantages of MEGS are the better scaling and the cool initiative rules they had (using pre-action declarations, another deeply out of fashion mechanic).
EDIT: Of course, in many cases your action FEAT is using a different stat to your effect FEAT. But you'd still need both the die adjustment and the effect values on each stat for the different cases.
What are the initiative rules?
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;625484What are the initiative rules?
In MEGS initiative, you declare actions in reverse Speed order (or whatever the initiative stat is), but then act in Speed order. This allows for things like the GM to declare that Captain Cold will shoot hostages with his cold gun, but then the Flash gets to declare his action that he will take Captain Cold's gun off him. The Flash goes first, and so if he succeeds Captain Cold's action is now invalid.
It's not suitable for everything but works well for the back and forth of comics and speedster characters in particular.
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;625457Did FASERIP ever need that table? Could it not have been done without it?
I cant remeber if it was easier than DC Heroes, but I do remember the sheer amount of content that DC gave you.
FASERIP could be converted to a D20 roll pretty easily, but you gave up alot of the granularity of the system. OTOH, with the table, its still one of the fastest systems ever designed, so the desire to get rid of it is probably more of an aesthetic thing.
MEGs is a great system as well, but is crunchier. I love both, but FASERIP was specifically geared towards Rulings vs Rules play, while MEGs is more for those who want a solid system like HERO for their supers games...without actually having to deal with Hero's ruleset.
I played Bloodbowl (Team Manager) last night and the dice mechanic there made me think how it could translate:
essentially if you have two players going toe to toe to try and tackle you roll custom dice (to give specific results - nothing, defender knocked down, attacker knocked down). However if your guy is stronger you roll two such dice and pick the result; if you're equal, you roll one. If you're weaker, then you roll both and the opponent picks the result.
So maybe:
PC vs weaker NPC - roll 2d, pick the result. If even, NPC takes a hit.
NPC vs weaker PC roll 2d, GM picks the result. If odd, PC takes a hit.
Quote from: Grymbok;625485In MEGS initiative, you declare actions in reverse Speed order (or whatever the initiative stat is), but then act in Speed order. This allows for things like the GM to declare that Captain Cold will shoot hostages with his cold gun, but then the Flash gets to declare his action that he will take Captain Cold's gun off him. The Flash goes first, and so if he succeeds Captain Cold's action is now invalid.
It's not suitable for everything but works well for the back and forth of comics and speedster characters in particular.
I meant for FASERIP, sorry.
Quote from: Ghost Whistler;625782I meant for FASERIP, sorry.
GM and one player roll 1d10. Winning side goes first. Re-roll on ties.
There's optional rules to adjust for high intuition, and Advanced MSH may be more complex too, I forget.
Quote from: Grymbok;625786GM and one player roll 1d10. Winning side goes first. Re-roll on ties.
There's optional rules to adjust for high intuition, and Advanced MSH may be more complex too, I forget.
The only thing the Advanced Rules add is that if the group declare's a Leader, that Leader's Intuition is added to the Initiative roll. Plus, if two player characters are taking contrary actions, then they roll between themselves.
Quote from: Grymbok;625485In MEGS initiative, you declare actions in reverse Speed order (or whatever the initiative stat is), but then act in Speed order.
Interesting, that's how "Forward... to Adventure!" did initiative.
RPGPundit
Quote from: vytzka;625019That you have a huge book doesn't mean you need to read it all to start playing. Or even half of it. I think only the bad games have that.
Well you do if you intend to
run it.
Players have it easy.