Quote from: Tristram Evans;953354I've never seen the term used in anything but a neutral description of the relative complexity of a system. Whether any given hobbyist prefers a higher degree of complexity or not, that preference has nothing to do with the terminology used.

I've never seen it used in any other way than as a positive description of a game, as in this game is rules lite and in people requesting a rules lite game.  No one asks for a rules medium or rules heavy game and often denigrate games as not being rules lite.  The term itself may be neutral, if it wasn't so vague, but I almost always seen it used in a context where there is a strong pejorative implication for anything that is not rules lite.

Quote from: Xanther;953355I've never seen it used in any other way than as a positive description of a game, as in this game is rules lite and in people requesting a rules lite game.  No one asks for a rules medium or rules heavy game and often denigrate games as not being rules lite.  The term itself may be neutral, if it wasn't so vague, but I almost always seen it used in a context where there is a strong pejorative implication for anything that is not rules lite.

Is that a request? I usually view "rules lite" as "interestingness lite", "detail lite", "verisimilitude lite", and "artificial gaminess heavy". I only want rules lite when I have little time or interest in the game situation.

If I want to describe a set of rules that do what I want them to do, and yet are easy to learn and use, I might call the rules "elegant", but not "lite" or even "light".

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;953192The terms 'rules lite' and 'crunchy' are the worst kind of jargon in that they seem to mean something but actuality don't.



So you know what works for you. Why are you asking this question? Why does being 'rules lite' matter?



Magic: The Gathering.

And the fact exceptions were on each card and only mattered when you played them was far more important than any arbitrary lite/heavy dichotomy. It's all about how/when you present rules.



Depends what the intent is. Besides, if it were truly #Orwellian, there'd only be one

#StrengthIsWeakness

The full rules of Magic: the Gathering, not counting the cards, weigh at 222 pages small size text with no art, as of today.
Most people just use the Quickstart Basic rules. For some reason, RPG players refuse to do likewise;)!
http://magic.wizards.com/en/game-info/gameplay/rules-and-formats/rules

Quote from: Xanther;953355I've never seen it used in any other way than as a positive description of a game, as in this game is rules lite and in people requesting a rules lite game.  No one asks for a rules medium or rules heavy game and often denigrate games as not being rules lite.  

You have in this thread.

Quote from: Tristram Evans;953621You have in this thread.

Indeed, and I question the idea that it's just this thread:).
https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?660997-Rules-medium-fast-paced-superhero-rpg
https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/comments/4kddw1/can_someone_recommend_a_rulesmedium_rpg_to_me/

https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/comments/2lxq25/looking_to_try_out_a_rules_heavy_system_what_does/?st=j0qhs8az&sh=1c673de3
Those were the first two results with Google, then I changed the search terms and copied the first result.
All amounts of crunch have their fans, and some of us prefer to have a rules-heavy game for one idea, and a rules-light one for another;).

Quote from: Ashakyre;953212This thread taught me my game is better described as rules medium. So now I can present it properly.

And what does that get you? Why is this important to your branding strategy?

Quote from: Ashakyre;953212No one can say "well, he called his game rules lite, but it wasn't, so I was dissapointed." That's all.

Yet the same possibility exists by calling your game rules medium because there's no common consensus on what that means.

Quote from: AsenRG;953603The full rules of Magic: the Gathering, not counting the cards, weigh at 222 pages small size text with no art, as of today.

...

Dear god.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;953972And what does that get you? Why is this important to your branding strategy?



Yet the same possibility exists by calling your game rules medium because there's no common consensus on what that means.

You're thinking in absolutes. The operative words here are "good enough." "Rules medium" isn't very descriptive, but I could try "low crunch" or "medium detail" or "fast paced" and see how people respond. Good enough. I'm more interested in heuristics than definitions. I've got a starting point. Good enough.

I think probably the only 'objective' way to define rules-light and rules-heavy is not by the standard of what you feel inside or some shit like that.  I'm not sure how useful the terms are anyways, but if we're going to make a standard, that standard would have to be to take the most played RPG in history, and define that one as the exact Middle-Point.

The most played RPG in history is Basic/Expert D&D. So by definition, rules-light would increase the more basic rules are from that version of D&D and rules-heavy would increase the more complex they are from that reference point.

There's an objective standard, it's "how much a hardcover book of this size would hurt if it landed on your toe".

Quote from: RPGPundit;954504I think probably the only 'objective' way to define rules-light and rules-heavy is not by the standard of what you feel inside or some shit like that.  I'm not sure how useful the terms are anyways, but if we're going to make a standard, that standard would have to be to take the most played RPG in history, and define that one as the exact Middle-Point.

I'm not really convinced by your argument that 4 hours is a medium-length movie because Gone With the Wind is the most watched movie in history.

To me there seems to be rules light and rules light. Some people recommend BRP, D6 or GenreDiversion. Others recommend PDQ, Wushu or Risus. So do you want fast task resolving within a codified skill system or do you want a freeform game? Maybe we should look at this with four categories instead of three? Heavy, medium, light and freeform?

Quote from: Justin Alexander;954800I'm not really convinced by your argument that 4 hours is a medium-length movie because Gone With the Wind is the most watched movie in history.

D&D is the the most played game right now and also historically, as far as I can tell. Good enough.

Quote from: jan paparazzi;954852To me there seems to be rules light and rules light. Some people recommend BRP, D6 or GenreDiversion. Others recommend PDQ, Wushu or Risus. So do you want fast task resolving within a codified skill system or do you want a freeform game? Maybe we should look at this with four categories instead of three? Heavy, medium, light and freeform?

I use six, namely rules-ultralight, rules-light, ruleslite, medium, rules-heavy, rules-extraheavy, in ascending order.

Can you give examples for each category? And how do you define each of those six?

Quote from: jan paparazzi;955027Can you give examples for each category? And how do you define each of those six?

Sure:).
And I just define them by the amount of rules and the rules interactions, but admittedly, you can often argue for placing stuff in the next or previous category.

Rules-ultralight: Risus, Wushu, and various 1-page, 2-page and 3-page rulesets.
Rules-light: FU RPG, rulesets around 20 pages (including many quickstarts).
Ruleslite: Anything from GURPS Lite, through Flashing Blades, to OD&D, Original Traveller and Fate Core.
Medium: Savage Worlds, Mongoose Traveller, various OSR games, Mythras, Bethorm.
Rules-heavy: GURPS with only GURPS: Martial Arts and maybe one other book (or similar), The Riddle of Steel, Earthdawn 2e (the only one I've read;)).
Rules-extraheavy: Pathfinder, 3.5 with supplements, Legends of the Wulin, GURPS with all the supplements, and Phoenix Command:D!