Some role playing games (e.g. 1981 classic D&D) clearly have fewer rules than other games (e.g. 2000 D&D). Sometimes the former category are called “rules light” games. As I’ve come to discover that—at this point in my life—I prefer rules light games, there was one important thing that took me some time to realize.

Rules light does not mean rules heavy but with only a few rules being written & the judge making up the rest ad hoc. Yes, the judge in a rules light game may make up ad hoc rules for a situation. The crucial difference of right light play versus rules heavy, however, is that there are fewer rules! The point is that there are many situations that simply do not need rules. [Note to self: This could use some expanding upon.]

The line between what needs rules & what doesn’t is somewhat arbitrary. Indeed, the rules of some games create a unique feel by the particular area they focus on.

---

Also, it is tempting to think that the rules light judge should be collecting all his ad hoc rules in order to maintain consistency. To me, however, this looks merely like a road back to a rules heavy system. Creating rules that are simple enough to be playable yet flexible enough to handle a wide range of situations & able to give results with verisimilitude is tough.

The wonderful thing about role playing games is that we don’t have to create those rules. We have a judge who can consider more factors than any set of written rules. A judge who can ensure a level of verisimilitude that no set of written rules can approach.

A judge who can learn from experience. I don’t want consistency in a judge. I don’t want a judge is forever bound by past mistakes. I want a judge who is continually improving.

---

On RPG complexity
Classic D&D

last updated 2 years ago #