I still enjoy 3.5. But it's not the understanding of the rules that lessens the enjoyment of the game. I've been running 3.5 for almost 5 years now weekly. What kills it for me is the process of action resolution in 3.5. It's a slow and mathy process compared to some other systems. I use DM Genie to make all of the calculations, and we even use the autoroll feature in DM Genie which makes all of the game rolls, and it's still a bit of a process compared to lighter systems.
I've seen some nasty and downright ignorant threads by rules-heavy elitists that claim that people who gravitate towards lighter systems "can't handle" or "understand" heavier systems like Rolemaster or 3.5 (not here). I played a game of Rolemaster with one of my gamers and I only had an hour to read the rulebook on the way to the game. I don't think that game style preference is a direct correlation to intelligence, and that attitude, coming from intelligent people, is ironic to me.
For me, the design of the system is important in delivering the experience you are looking to give your players. I really like the crunchiness of simulation-style games. What I don't like is how the details can slow down game play; not in their amount of rules, but in the steps required to arrive at the proper numbers, and the steps necessary to resolve the action. Lighter systems seem to favor common sense over pages and pages of rules that try to account for every eventuality. One could easily argue that a lighter system requires a high level of intelligence as well, in that, one can't just rely on the memorization of rules and must think on their feet and make quick mental calculations to arrive at the optimum result. I wouldn't make either argument however, because I believe that both types of games require a healthy amount of intelligence to play without strain and stress.
When I first started using DM Genie to manage the mechanical aspects of my 3.5 games, I was amazed at the speed with which we were able to resolve actions, because it was so much faster than conventional methods. I've recently played in systems much lighter than 3.5 (FUDGE and Action! specifically), and I couldn't believe how much faster action resolution was even compared to our modified approach to 3.5. While I believe that the "lightness' of the systems plays a part in the increased speed of task resolution, I believe a bigger factor is that the system fit my GM'ing style more closely, which sped things up because they feel more intuitive to me.
The thing I've learned most since branching away from 3.5 is that it's really important for a GM to use a system that fits their gaming style. I've always preferred vivid description and deep immersion aspects than the strategic and tactical aspects of RPG's. I think that 3.5 is a great system. It seems pretty balanced and is very robust with a ton of options. But I don't think it's the perfect system for me, because with almost no experience with FUDGE, I ran what my players described as one of their favorite sessions to date. Our combat had even more detail and the players tried things they said they wouldn't have attempted in 3.5. I don't believe it was the system, but the way in which I presented and worked with the system to tell the story and facilitate the action.
I'm not an expert yet in gaming systems (not even close), but it seems to me that
any system can do a great job of running a Conan game, if the GM is comfortable with the system and can use the mechanics to capture the essence of the setting. Look how many systems have already been mentioned as compatible with the Conan world.
I'm starting to believe that the system being used has less to do with the setting than it does with being compatible with the GM's game style. I personally think it would be a lot of fun to try Conan in several different systems.
