For the purposes of this discussion, let's assume a rules lite game is something less mechanically heavy, with fewer player options than Savage Worlds.
What rules lite games have you used for over 10 sessions that held up fine (e.g., the players didn't get bored)
Quote from: PencilBoy99;1050049For the purposes of this discussion, let's assume a rules lite game is something less mechanically heavy, with fewer player options than Savage Worlds.
What rules lite games have you used for over 10 sessions that held up fine (e.g., the players didn't get bored)
How do you estimate the duration of a PbP game for the purposes of this discussion:)?
Also, I'd note that your definition of a rules-lite game includes Pendragon. Which I find amusing;).
Edited to add examples I've ran or played:
A Bulgarian system I was beta-testing (but it changed even its name, and is still in revision, but it was mostly 2d6+skill).
Atomic Highway
Barbarians of Lemuria
Flashing Blades
StarORE
Unknown Armies (street-level, so no magic).
Mongoose Traveller/Cepheus Engine
Wushu
Dragon Age
A BRP/RQ/CoC mix (d100 roll-under, no "Edges" or "Hindrances", little or no magic).
So, how's that for a list:D?
There's no easy way to define it. I'm thinking of stuff like
LotFP
Swords and Wizardry
Most of the PBTA stuff (not the PBTA derived stuff which can get pretty complicated)
Barbarians of Lemuria.
Quote from: PencilBoy99;1050054There's no easy way to define it. I'm thinking of stuff like
LotFP
Swords and Wizardry
Most of the PBTA stuff (not the PBTA derived stuff which can get pretty complicated)
Barbarians of Lemuria.
OK, but how about the PbP question? I want to give you the complete list in one post:)!
Beyond the Wall and GORE have both held up fine
I've played plenty of Apocalypse World and Urban Shadows, and they held up fine over quite a few sessions. But then I always hated the grid-style combat of 3e, and really appreciated how combat in most PbtA stuff is fast, somtimes brutal, and lets me get back to the stuff I actually care about in a fraction of the time. I'm glad the tactical stuff with combats that can drag out an hour or more exist for people who want that kind of thing(I've known and played with quite a few), but I usually don't, so I'm glad stuff like this exists for me.
1e AD&D? Certainly seemed less rules heavy than Savage Worlds. Also Classic D&D (BECM).
Quote from: S'mon;10500641e AD&D?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]2664[/ATTACH]
Any version of D+D (perhaps other than 4E or 3E with all the splat stuff turned on)
The Fantasy Trip (my preference!)
What is PbP
Quote from: PencilBoy99;1050079What is PbP
Play by post, usually done on forum threads. There are also sites like rpol that let you set up pbp games in threads even though it's technically not a forum. Wherever you do it, the structure is pretty much the same.
Cthulhu Dark, that's why I posted it on the other thread. It may have to do with its specific use for Lovecraftian Horror.
It worked for me with Tunnels and Trolls, but that may be not because it works awesomely for long campaigns, but just because I like it a lot.
Maybe a good question would be "which light games have good advancement mechanics suitable for long campaigns?" T&T does pretty well there, as any wonkiness can be subsumed into the general gonzo nature of the game. The Fantasy Trip, another of my favorite lighter games, tends to break down in the long term as characteristics get out of hand.
Quote from: The_Shadow;1050110It worked for me with Tunnels and Trolls, but that may be not because it works awesomely for long campaigns, but just because I like it a lot.
Maybe a good question would be "which light games have good advancement mechanics suitable for long campaigns?" T&T does pretty well there, as any wonkiness can be subsumed into the general gonzo nature of the game. The Fantasy Trip, another of my favorite lighter games, tends to break down in the long term as characteristics get out of hand.
A good pick. I played my first real sandbox with Tunnels & Trolls. You have to be content with the level of abstraction in combat, but otherwise it's a fine system for long-running campaigns.
Quote from: PencilBoy99;1050079What is PbP
Quote from: GeekEclectic;1050098Play by post, usually done on forum threads. There are also sites like rpol that let you set up pbp games in threads even though it's technically not a forum. Wherever you do it, the structure is pretty much the same.
Yeah, that:).
And I mean, I've ran or played, off the top of my head:
A Bulgarian system I was beta-testing (but it changed even its name, and is still in revision, but it was mostly 2d6+skill).
Atomic Highway
Barbarians of Lemuria
Flashing Blades
StarORE
Unknown Armies (street-level, so no magic).
Mongoose Traveller/Cepheus Engine
Wushu
Dragon Age
A BRP/RQ/CoC mix (d100 roll-under, no "Edges" or "Hindrances", little or no magic).
And there's probably more that I'm missing;)!
I find that the campaign is often what goes stale, not the rules set. I've been running OD&D off-and-on for several decades and my players haven't gotten tired of the rules, but I find that a given "campaign" runs its course in 6-9 months for my group.
If it's a more complex rules set they may get burned out at the start before they actually master it, but having a rules set which is "too simple" hasn't really been a problem. For example, we played the old MB HeroQuest board game for months and it's pretty simple and the players spent more time developing a persona since they didn't have much to do with mastering the mechanic. I suppose somewhere there is a "critical mass" of rules whereby if you are under that quantity the players don't find the game interesting, but in general my players are more interested in having fun and socializing as we play something together than they are in trying to "work" a game system.
Quote from: finarvyn;1050145I find that the campaign is often what goes stale, not the rules set. I've been running OD&D off-and-on for several decades and my players haven't gotten tired of the rules, but I find that a given "campaign" runs its course in 6-9 months for my group.
GREAT point. I wish there was a way to like a post.
Quote from: S'mon;10500641e AD&D? Certainly seemed less rules heavy than Savage Worlds. Also Classic D&D (BECM).
*Compares Savage Worlds Core Rulebook to Rules Cyclopedia
The RC is like double the size and after reading through both, RC has more rules. It just doesn't cover everything Savage Worlds does but it does have way more on domain management and magic item creating.
Throw in the Fantasy Companion and the two start approaching similar page counts.
I would say basically every D&D post/during BECM is heavier than Savage Worlds. Some of the earlier stuff is pretty bare bones.
Forgot to mention Dragon Warriors but I am not sure that is "light/lite"
Page count is not a good way to gauge D+D; it has always been a game marked by huge investments in the 'infrastructure' of monsters, spells and magic items, all of which add heft but not complexity. In fact, I would argue this is the real reason D+D has remained the dominant system for decades, despite wave after wave of competing systems and cycle after cycle of expansion and contraction of the hobby: its competitors have never found a way to match their gargantuan back catalogue of this sort of material (plus classic adventures and settings). Anyway, 1E AD+D, as actually played at most tables (i.e., without weapon speeds, casting times, or weapon vs. armor tables), is a very simple game by any measure.
We played KAP and the GPC, weekly, for two years. I ran S&W weekly for a year. I find that lighter systems keep the players interest a lot longer than crap like Pathfinder.
My groups tend to be more into adventure, exploring, and characters than build optimization.
Heroquest holds up remarkably well in longer campaigns, at least in my experience.
Quote from: Larsdangly;1050178Page count is not a good way to gauge D+D; it has always been a game marked by huge investments in the 'infrastructure' of monsters, spells and magic items, all of which add heft but not complexity.
While I find that spells and many magic items do add heft.
Quote from: AsenRG;1050194While I find that spells and many magic items do add heft.
Spells - hm the MU player needs to read them. Items & monsters, no. Domain management & warfare are subsystems that can be ignored.
Building a Fighter-1 in RC is vastly simpler than making the equivalent in SW I think.
Quote from: S'mon;1050199Spells - hm the MU player needs to read them. Items & monsters, no. Domain management & warfare are subsystems that can be ignored.
Building a Fighter-1 in RC is vastly simpler than making the equivalent in SW I think.
A Fighter-1 yes, it's probably easier than a Novice fight-oriented character in SW:). But only "probably" because, if you're trying to make a fighter with some sneaky abilities, like many fighters in literature and films, RC is far more likely to be an exercise in frustration (unless you play a demihuman, which opens its own bag of worms). Thus it will take more time looking for kits and stuff...:D
In SW, it's dead simple. "I raise my Fighting, Athletics and Sneaking skills", done.
OTOH, building or playing a priest-1 or Magic User-1 involves reading quite a bit more spells than a SW character with Arcane Power (Faith/Wizardry) background.
And by 3rd level at most, the difference has grown quite a bit and SW characters with two advances are far, far behind, regardless of whether they've spent those advances on new arcane powers;)!
The Fantasy Trip
Quote from: Larsdangly;1050178Page count is not a good way to gauge D+D; it has always been a game marked by huge investments in the 'infrastructure' of monsters, spells and magic items, all of which add heft but not complexity.
They do add complexity for the GM, who has to decide which to use. But even for a GM it's easier to run for the beginning adventurers than for more advanced ones, if the spells, monsters and items are graded by level (or by random tables in the case of magic items).
Quote from: AsenRG;1050194While I find that spells and many magic items do add heft.
This comment perplexes me, because Larsdangly pretty clearly said spells and magic items add heft (but not complexity). Did you mean they add complexity?
Quote from: S'mon;1050199Spells - hm the MU player needs to read them. Items & monsters, no. Domain management & warfare are subsystems that can be ignored.
If the spells available are a limited set to choose from (or even entirely determined by the setting/background - what the character's mentor could teach), then the players don't have to worry about most of them; a few new spells only as they are found in the course of adventuring, like magic items. And initially in any edition of D&D the player only has to read the first level spells.
Quote from: Skarg;1050208The Fantasy Trip
Seconded. But I never got to play in a real campaign. Maybe after the kickstarter I'll be able to find one.
OpenQuest held up well for our group.
Also Mutant Future.
Quote from: rawma;1050219...
This comment perplexes me, because Larsdangly pretty clearly said spells and magic items add heft (but not complexity). Did you mean they add complexity?
...
Seconded. But I never got to play in a real campaign. Maybe after the kickstarter I'll be able to find one.
I too have no idea what he meant.
Anyway, my top vote is also for TFT. I've played countless campaigns with it and have found it to be endlessly entertaining and adaptable. It is like a version of GURPS that you can play as a true beer and pretzel game.
Quote from: S'mon;1050199Building a Fighter-1 in RC is vastly simpler than making the equivalent in SW I think.
An RC fighter rolls for stats, HP, gold, and buys equipment.
A Savage Worlds Human Fighter equivalent, selects a major hindrance, two minor hindrances, spends 7 attribute points (d10 in strength, d6 in everything else), selects the brawny edge, spends 15 skill points, and then grabs 500g worth of gear.
So yeah fair. Starting out B is simpler than SW, but BECM starts getting real complicated with domains as a Lord or potentially spellcasting as an Avenger or Paladin. Even something like Fighter gets pretty complicated and that's not even comparing the life of Magic Users in both games.
In RC a leveling fighter checks his to-hit charts or updates THACO, gains HP, checks table for abilities.
While a Savage Worlds advancement either raises one stat, gets a skill or two skill increases, or gets an edge.
Quote from: Rhedyn;1050262An RC fighter rolls for stats, HP, gold, and buys equipment.
A Savage Worlds Human Fighter equivalent, selects a major hindrance, two minor hindrances, spends 7 attribute points (d10 in strength, d6 in everything else), selects the brawny edge, spends 15 skill points, and then grabs 500g worth of gear.
So yeah fair. Starting out B is simpler than SW, but BECM starts getting real complicated with domains as a Lord or potentially spellcasting as an Avenger or Paladin. Even something like Fighter gets pretty complicated and that's not even comparing the life of Magic Users in both games.
In RC a leveling fighter checks his to-hit charts or updates THACO, gains HP, checks table for abilities.
While a Savage Worlds advancement either raises one stat, gets a skill or two skill increases, or gets an edge.
I definitely think that SW is far more complex to get into than RC D&D and that it's the front loaded complexity that matters when getting into a game.
Domain rules are a complete red herring IMO since they're an entirely discrete & optional system that could just as well be added to SW.
What would help SW (& similar classless games) a lot IMO is the use of PC Templates as in the old WEG d6 Star Wars. Without them it's vastly more intimidating to make a PC in a classless game.
BECM D&D, the Fantasy Trip, and RuneQuest 2. ed have all worked well for longer campaigns for me. I'd be hard pressed to go lighter than that, IME longer lasting campaigns do require just a bit of mechanical heft, even if only to better mechanically differentiate the rookies from the movers & shakers.
WHFRP 1e
Dragon Warriors/Savage Worlds (just ignore some of the more obscure rules).
Quote from: S'mon;1050268What would help SW (& similar classless games) a lot IMO is the use of PC Templates as in the old WEG d6 Star Wars. Without them it's vastly more intimidating to make a PC in a classless game.
Savage Worlds does come with archetypes (generic templates) in the core book. Some settings like Saga of the Goblin Horde release their open archetypes to build characters from.
An archetypal great weapon fighter (Core Book), asigns 4 skill points, selects one major and two minor hindrances, and buys 500g of equipment.
An RC Fighter with both weapon proficiency rules and skill rules ends up being slightly more complicated to build.
Quote from: Rhedyn;1050309An RC Fighter with both weapon proficiency rules and skill rules ends up being slightly more complicated to build.
True; I never use that junk. :)
Edit: Pity they didn't finish off the SW archetypes so they could be pick up & play like d6 Star Wars templates.
Quote from: GeekEclectic;1050063I've played plenty of Apocalypse World and Urban Shadows, and they held up fine over quite a few sessions. But then I always hated the grid-style combat of 3e, and really appreciated how combat in most PbtA stuff is fast, somtimes brutal, and lets me get back to the stuff I actually care about in a fraction of the time. I'm glad the tactical stuff with combats that can drag out an hour or more exist for people who want that kind of thing(I've known and played with quite a few), but I usually don't, so I'm glad stuff like this exists for me.
Same for me. Though I still haven't seen an a PbtA that reached 10 sessions. Coincidence or not, most ended around session 8 or 9 for us.
Quote from: Nerzenjäger;1050162GREAT point. I wish there was a way to like a post.
Thanks. :)
Quote from: PencilBoy99;1050054There's no easy way to define it. I'm thinking of stuff like
LotFP
Swords and Wizardry
Most of the PBTA stuff (not the PBTA derived stuff which can get pretty complicated)
Barbarians of Lemuria.
Well, the first two DEFINITELY hold up for well over 20 sessions.