On the following scale, I like to be in the 6-7 range.

9 -      WFRPG 4e, Shadowrun 2e, Inquisitor
8 -      DnD 3.5
7 -      Dnd 5e with feats, MCing, etc
6 -      Low Fantasy Gaming Deluxe
<=5    BX, Lotfp

3 or 4 on Razor's scale.

These days it's 5 and lower for me (Fate, PbtA, Cortex, etc).

Probably 4 or 5. Somewhere between B/X and 5e.

Makes me wonder...

One way to evaluate HOW COMPLEX each system is: The Magical Number Seven.

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2015/12/granularity-ideal-level-of-detail.html

Now, this isn't an actual scale, but helps you think in terms of "how many classes", "how many skills", etc.

So, better than number of pages, pick the number of "bits".

Another thing to consider is the number of unique options. A game with 6 abilities and no feats might generate one thousand different characters, but a game with only 50 feats, each distinct, is probably more complex.

Do unique options increase complexity? I dunno. Is 5e an extremely complex games because it has 500 spells (or a lot fewer, if only the PHB is allowed)?

What about options that are only there for "color"? For example, Carcosa has two classes and a dozen "races", but the races are really similar...

One thing I really dislike is games that are very complex at character creation. So, a level 1 character has to make 12 distinct choices, each with half a dozen possibilites... Nope, never going to play PF 2.

Also, remember one-page RPGs. The low end of the scale should be reserved for those.

Hey y'all, new poster here.  I play mostly C&C, but am an old 1E player as well.  I'm somewhere in the middle.  3E and Pathfinder are too crunchy.  Just started playing in a 5E game, so it's too soon for me to comment on that one yet.  I'll get to it though.

Eric makes a good point about level of complexity in terms of numbers of bits.

I've also remarked in several cases about problems with "Option Paralysis" in some systems and that the ideal seems to be about 2-4 options at a time.

As a result in my own system I've tried to create "nests" in my system where you only have to choose between 2-4 things at a time. If something really needs more options than that, you split the options up into groups (say "spellcasting classes" and "warrior classes") so they're only choosing between 2-4 things at each stage (so instead of picking from 14 classes, first you choose between spellcaster or warrior; which provides general benefit; and then you pick from the classes exclusive to that group; which provide more specific benefits).

That said, at the character creation stage I do think you can afford more than 2-4 options, since taking some time to make choices about a character you might be playing for years to come isn't entirely a negative. There using 7+/-2 isn't a bad goal (I'm close to that despite my kitchen sink system, but trying to squeeze every possible fantasy background down to less than about 10 has proven problematic).

Also worth considering is how much of that you actually need to specifically remember at the table. If your class provides 2-4 combat options and your background provides 2-3 non-combat options and those are the only ones you have to keep track of in play, it may not matter so much that the list of options those 2-4 things comes from has a dozen or so items to choose from during the creation stage (ex. a spell list from which you choose the handful you actually know).

I usually like almost minimal complexity when I run a game. I often do this by using a relatively simplified BRP, so maybe a 2.

However, some systems do add something valuable with their complexity, often to fit a very specific genre. The One Ring for example. Not sure where that fits on these scales. 8?

Everybody wants 5-6. They just disagree about where 1 and 10 are.

13 dials that only go to 11 just don't cut it.

Quote from: Trond;1078377I usually like almost minimal complexity when I run a game. I often do this by using a relatively simplified BRP, so maybe a 2.

However, some systems do add something valuable with their complexity, often to fit a very specific genre. The One Ring for example. Not sure where that fits on these scales. 8?

Nice insight. Yeah, I'm also willing to engage greater complexity when I see value in it (One Ring is a great example). What I can't stand these days are basic things like chargen or task resolution being too complex.

Are we talking about player-facing crunch or DM-facing crunch? I'd ideally want most system crunch off-loaded to the players since I have enough shit to worry about as the DM as it is.

IIRC, in the early days player-crunch was essentially nil and the DM handled almost the entire combat system. So, I guess my vote would be for as little crunch as necessary for both players and DM, just to get keep things moving.

Quote from: Eric Diaz;1078360One way to evaluate HOW COMPLEX each system is: The Magical Number Seven.

This is interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Looking at my OD&D PDF's, you can boil down the entire "system" to:

1.  d6 checks (all are based on a 2 in 6 chance)
2.  2 Attack charts (could use only 1 chart if desired)
3. 1 Saving Throw chart
4. 1 Reaction table
5. Spell chart
6. Turn undead chart
7. Encumbrance chart

So, in total that's only 6-7 subsystems in use during play, since many folks ignore encumbrance.

TBF, there are ability score, XP, and HD charts too, but those would only be used between sessions (the ability chart typically being used only once during chargen and if you assume "average stats" could be easily ignored altogether, like I often do.)

Even the XP and HD charts can be ignored for those DM's who level up characters based on something other than gold/monster kills (like me.)

Mostly 2 to 5. System means far less to me than people, snacks, settings, and fun ideas to play with. In D&D terms, no more complex than PHB 5e, maybe with half the feats turned on, and multiclassing turned off. Though I would prefer Basic 5e, and prefer AD&D 2e even better.

I think my big cutting off point is when Session Zero spills over beyond one session.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1078407I think my big cutting off point is when Session Zero spills over beyond one session.

Fully equipping a single Shadowrun 5e character with gear can take more effort than building an entire party of characters for a game like D&D 5e or Shadow of the Demon Lord.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1078408Fully equipping a single Shadowrun 5e character with gear can take more effort than building an entire party of characters for a game like D&D 5e or Shadow of the Demon Lord.

Yeah... been there, done that, once. Once. :mad: