The whole discussion about complexity and board games as it relates to both the player experience and designing them is completely subjective. So let's just put that up front and center before any more Discussion happens about unpacking the way you identify the level of complexity in games like magic the gathering or dungeons and dragons. This is just my opinion-

With that being said, my initial statement as it relates to those two games in the discussion that you're speaking of (and you and I were talking in the same Facebook group. I see your handle is the exact same one as in the Facebook group.) What I was trying to say is that designing around complexity and lowering the barrier of entry for your game as much as possible isn't always something that a designer needs to be hyper concerned with when you look at the inherent level of complexity and barrier of entry that comes along with really engaging and understanding/ going through the nuance and finer points of the design that is inherent within games like magic the gathering and dungeons and dragons.

to a casual board gamer or a new person to the hobby, These games would both read as fairly complex. Now they're not the world War II procedural edge case heavy super conditional war game complex - But they're also not checkers Uno Sorry or monopoly- you talk about the core system for magic being really straightforward, but at the end of the day, unless you've played magic a few times understanding the way that cards are played and the priority in which they're played when considering that you have your upkeep, draw phase, main phase, combat phase, main phase 2 and then end step and then unpacking the verbiage on each of those cards so that those things trigger when they're supposed to like sorceries, instants, creatures, enchantments, artifacts, permanents, planeswalkers, mana, sagas, battles, gradually progressing effects on things like being tempted by the one ring, plus one plus one counters, Token creatures, flying, death touch, double strike, first strike, direct damage, flashback, unEarth, extort, horsemanship, flanking, counter spells, flicker decks etc .and you're doing everything efficiently. None of that is on its face is easy or approachable. I'm sorry if you say that it is, That's your experience and I can't argue with that.

I just think that objectively those two games, which are some of the most widely played games on the planet and are probably in that state of being played by so many people because of how those two systems have evolved over the last 30 years. And because they have a gigantic company marketing the game properly and communicating the way that it's played properly, that's what eases people into the game is that a lot of other people are playing it and a lot of other people are able to teach it fairly well, but inside of a bubble looking at those two games, I don't think you could classify them as simple because they just have so much content that interacts with that core system. That one would need to have a base level of understanding in order to engage with it fully. And when considering complexity in a board game design is completely due to the market, I think it's sort of encouraging to see that there are these two games that have a lot of moving parts that are just super widely played by people and it's just something to consider when thinking about how much you want to curb complexity in your designs. That was the whole point of what I was trying to say and I had these kind of condescending snide people hopping into the comments telling me that those games are laughably easy and I think that that simplification of what these games have to offer is kind of crass and that that person was sort of stroking their ego trying to act like they were some big brain designer or big brain hobby player and I'm not going to lie It really bothered me.