goodmangames wrote:
* I am continually impressed that every pre-1980 edition of D&D managed to pack the entire rules set into 64 pages, give or take. I believe that modern rules "bloat" is one entry barrier for the hobby. Plus I know that many of us are grown-ups now, without an entire summer to blow learning a new game, and I'd really like to publish a game that is actually playable by a significant chunk of the gaming population - which means easy to grasp, easy to learn, and not a massive tome. As such, I am focused on a relatively short rulebook as the primarily (and probably only) rules product. There won't be a PHB, DMG, MM, etc. There will be one book. Maybe a rules supplement once a year or something to support any evolution of the game, but not much more than that.
I really like the sound of that.
dkeester wrote:One of the reasons that I think the rules fit into 64 pages was the fact that the authors knew they couldn't fit every game situation into the rules as 3e and 4e try to do. Or perhaps they just didn't want to try to account for every situation in the rules.
I agree.
dkeester wrote:And while we are at it. If you have any fun housrules to share, please post them.
I try not to use many hourserules. I think they lead to a worse situation than large rulesbooks. At least with many specific rules in a book, a new player can buy that book and read over them in his free time. With many houserules things are harder to learn in advance and to pick up in between sessions unless a lot of work has gone into forging a homemade thick rulebook.
I am, however, a big fan of table rulings > written rules. Matthew Finch's essay
A Quick Primer for Old School Gaming has a section at the beginning that sums up my thoughts nicely.