Okay, let’s cut to the chase—RPGs have changed a lot over the years. Back in the day, we had these monstrous, rule-packed games that could double as doorstops.
I don't know where the trend is heading but I can say that I like a bit of crunch and complexity. Not so much that it slows things down (I mean the game has to be fun and playable), but it seems that people tend to add complexity to the rules anyway. OS rules tend to gain crunch as the game moves forward based on precedent.
It reminds me of legal systems which move towards complexity as the rules are interpreted. Similarly, games that are super crunch seem to tend towards simplicity when played. Certain rules seem to cumbersome and are just scrapped or replaced by GM simpler rulings.
I think the trend going forward is very much "GM-Optimized" games, with varying levels of crunch. The incredible success of the OSR, in addition to the fact that it's basically just DnD, owes largely to the fact that it's exceptionally easy to run. When GM-optimized games exist, overly complex and crunchy games just feel like a worse option IMO
Really enjoyed the analysis- I think “rules lite” is a fad that comes around every so many years- gaming has a strange “life cycle”, not really an evolution, but it seems games go from simple, gain in complexity (as players want something more realistic- like a true combat simulation or complex magic system) reach a peak- then a new “rules lite” game takes over. Rules Lite games are the norm for a while, but players eventually crave complexity, giving a revival to more complex games. It’s been 50+ years of Dungeons & Dragons, there are countless spin offs- many more complex and many rules lite. It’s almost like craft beer- sometimes you want an IPA and sometimes a stout. Creators are there making a new batch to suit your tastes!
I think the norm is settling elsewhere. The desire for more crunch is, in my view, culturally handed down from a time in which systems needed to simulate much much more, because home computing was not the norm.
When photography came along, painters needed to understand their place in a world in which their medium was not the go-to for creating representational art, and so painting changed. Video games have come, and TTRPGs are finding their place in a world where we have better tools for simulating an open-world environment than pen and paper!
The crunch from the 80s and 90s was just something else. I played Rolemaster recently on a VTT and I'm not sure how you could play that with our computer help. Encounter rounds must have literally taken hours to resolve.
Is crunch dead? No. It's a lot better designed now. Like others have said, 5E and Pathfinder are crunchy but in a more more intuitive way. Even some story first games like Blades in the Dark I consider crunchy (not mechanically but procedurally).
Crunch is not dead!!! Rules lite I think is great for introducing newbies to RPGs. Then give them something crunchier and they won’t feel so overwhelmed.
Not sure ‘the crunch’ ever went away. Palladium keeps on keeping on and D&D5e is…. what it is (and nothwithstanding the kerfuffle over whatever the new edition is called, it would be idle to pretend it doesn’t outsell virtually all other systems combined). Instead, the TTRPG space just got more diluted and some of that dilution featured more rules-lite systems. I actually think the biggest spur to the growth of lite mechanics is not community (sic) preference but the explosion of micro-publishers made possible by the wider availability of publishing software and distribution platforms. Most really small operators don’t have the time or budget to develop fat core rulebooks and so - by necessity - opt for simpler mechanics. Of course, this then feeds back into more people discovering such games and finding that they like (or, at least, can live with) lighter mechanics.
I started with A&D1e in the early to mid-1980s, began adopting a very discursive, narrative GMing style and chucking rules out almost immediately (don’t think I ever used the weapon vs armour type table) and, by the mid-1990s, was playing CoC, VtM and other mid-crunch systems alongside early editions of Ars Magica (crunchy as all get out, but a great setting and neat magic system) and entirely free-form systemless games. These days, my preference is for very light mechanics - I recently ran a mini-campaign of Cthulhu Dark and liked that a lot - but I’ll happily run and play in most systems comparable to BRP in complexity. Even then, most games I run feature a standing joke among the players that - to everyone’s surprise - dice were actually rolled at all in the session.
I don't know where the trend is heading but I can say that I like a bit of crunch and complexity. Not so much that it slows things down (I mean the game has to be fun and playable), but it seems that people tend to add complexity to the rules anyway. OS rules tend to gain crunch as the game moves forward based on precedent.
It reminds me of legal systems which move towards complexity as the rules are interpreted. Similarly, games that are super crunch seem to tend towards simplicity when played. Certain rules seem to cumbersome and are just scrapped or replaced by GM simpler rulings.
I think the trend going forward is very much "GM-Optimized" games, with varying levels of crunch. The incredible success of the OSR, in addition to the fact that it's basically just DnD, owes largely to the fact that it's exceptionally easy to run. When GM-optimized games exist, overly complex and crunchy games just feel like a worse option IMO
Really enjoyed the analysis- I think “rules lite” is a fad that comes around every so many years- gaming has a strange “life cycle”, not really an evolution, but it seems games go from simple, gain in complexity (as players want something more realistic- like a true combat simulation or complex magic system) reach a peak- then a new “rules lite” game takes over. Rules Lite games are the norm for a while, but players eventually crave complexity, giving a revival to more complex games. It’s been 50+ years of Dungeons & Dragons, there are countless spin offs- many more complex and many rules lite. It’s almost like craft beer- sometimes you want an IPA and sometimes a stout. Creators are there making a new batch to suit your tastes!
Good thoughts here and glad you enjoyed it!
I think the norm is settling elsewhere. The desire for more crunch is, in my view, culturally handed down from a time in which systems needed to simulate much much more, because home computing was not the norm.
When photography came along, painters needed to understand their place in a world in which their medium was not the go-to for creating representational art, and so painting changed. Video games have come, and TTRPGs are finding their place in a world where we have better tools for simulating an open-world environment than pen and paper!
The crunch from the 80s and 90s was just something else. I played Rolemaster recently on a VTT and I'm not sure how you could play that with our computer help. Encounter rounds must have literally taken hours to resolve.
Is crunch dead? No. It's a lot better designed now. Like others have said, 5E and Pathfinder are crunchy but in a more more intuitive way. Even some story first games like Blades in the Dark I consider crunchy (not mechanically but procedurally).
What they said
5e and Pathfinder 2e are more popular than any OSR game. Star Wars RPG is up there too and has medium crunch akin to 5e or a 90s White Wolf Game
Crunch is not dead!!! Rules lite I think is great for introducing newbies to RPGs. Then give them something crunchier and they won’t feel so overwhelmed.
Not sure ‘the crunch’ ever went away. Palladium keeps on keeping on and D&D5e is…. what it is (and nothwithstanding the kerfuffle over whatever the new edition is called, it would be idle to pretend it doesn’t outsell virtually all other systems combined). Instead, the TTRPG space just got more diluted and some of that dilution featured more rules-lite systems. I actually think the biggest spur to the growth of lite mechanics is not community (sic) preference but the explosion of micro-publishers made possible by the wider availability of publishing software and distribution platforms. Most really small operators don’t have the time or budget to develop fat core rulebooks and so - by necessity - opt for simpler mechanics. Of course, this then feeds back into more people discovering such games and finding that they like (or, at least, can live with) lighter mechanics.
I started with A&D1e in the early to mid-1980s, began adopting a very discursive, narrative GMing style and chucking rules out almost immediately (don’t think I ever used the weapon vs armour type table) and, by the mid-1990s, was playing CoC, VtM and other mid-crunch systems alongside early editions of Ars Magica (crunchy as all get out, but a great setting and neat magic system) and entirely free-form systemless games. These days, my preference is for very light mechanics - I recently ran a mini-campaign of Cthulhu Dark and liked that a lot - but I’ll happily run and play in most systems comparable to BRP in complexity. Even then, most games I run feature a standing joke among the players that - to everyone’s surprise - dice were actually rolled at all in the session.
Good thought here. Thank you for it. I think we started with the same games and took the same paths.