DM says: 4e: Too dull & Chess-y, & 3.5e: Too complex and arbitrary... now what?

[Gavinfoxx]

Hi there, I'm interested in a game that does SOME sort of 'fantasy', that enables a few things well:

1. Not arbitrary as far as rules go. D&D 3.5e has a very arbitrary rules system, especially to do with magic.

2. Has something for me as a player, who LIKES to do a little bit of 'looking around the system to get some useful advantage', to latch on to; to me, optimization and character concept generation encourage one another.

3. Is tactically interesting, with the idea that the player character can be competent and capable of doing many things, and has a system for when I WANT to try out something weird and wonderful in combat. Furthermore, it's best if it is tactically interesting for *online play*, ie, without a battlemat!

4. Has mechanics that are, for the most part, additive -- you want to roll high, stack bonuses, or roll above something. I'm most familiar with D&D, so additive stuff would be great.

5. Isn't terrible for one on one roleplaying -- ie, encourages teamwork, but works very well with small parties, if someone is appropriately prepared

6. Isn't too 'gritty' -- we tend to the heroic, do awesome stuff sort of roleplay

7. Is cheap or free, and can be found online in PDF form, legally.

8. Lends it self fairly well to either a very fleshed out setting, or a setting that is easily recognizable and understandable

9. Tends toward "gamist" and "narrativist" rather than "simulationist".

10. The player characters can be capable of doing SOMETHING supernatural and overtly magical, without extreme, major penalties for doing so

Does anyone have any suggestions?

[Dreadn4ught]

There is a game called "the window," that barely has any rules and you can pretty much do anything. Go to http://www.mimgames.com/window/ and look at the rules. It's insanely simple. It's not really additive (the better you are at something, the smaller the die you roll) and it's too simple for many multipliers.

Try it out. It's not for everybody.

[Kylarra]

There's always GURPS lite, although I don't remember if it has magic in it.

[Gavinfoxx]

There's always GURPS lite, although I don't remember if it has magic in it.

GURPS is a bit too simulationist for our taste... we're wanting a bit more gamist/narrativist. I updated my original post some.

[FelixG]

GURPS is a bit too simulationist for our taste... we're wanting a bit more gamist/narrativist.

That bit made me laugh

but look up d6 Space
http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=20447&it=1&filters=0_0_0_0_0&free=1

its a lot of fun and you can scale everything nicely, best part is that its free!

[Gavinfoxx]

That bit made me laugh

but look up d6 Space
http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=20447&it=1&filters=0_0_0_0_0&free=1

its a lot of fun and you can scale everything nicely, best part is that its free!

What, GURPS comes up repetitively in any 'realism' threads! And D6 is interesting... I've got most of the D6 fantasy books, but the DM doesn't...

[Zonugal]

Savage Worlds is another system that you may enjoy.

[Totally Guy]

I think Burning Wheel fits most of those criteria. It's not free or available as a PDF but it's very deep.

It's quite crunchy, the rules all work together to create a really good play experience.

[FelixG]

What, GURPS comes up repetitively in any 'realism' threads! And D6 is interesting... I've got most of the D6 fantasy books, but the DM doesn't...

I just looked a bit further into it aaand...

http://www.rpgnow.com/index.php?manufacturers_id=468

You can get most of the West End D6 books from RPGnow for free including adventure, fantasy, fantasy creatures ect

[The Big Dice]

GURPS is a bit too simulationist for our taste... we're wanting a bit more gamist/narrativist. I updated my original post some.
That's what you get for thinking GNS actually has any meaning in the real world.

GURPS is a toolbox that lets you play in any so-called mode that you want. The 3rd edition Basic Set talks about things like intelligent scenario design, realistic NPC behaviour and gives solid advice on topics from world building to planning campaigns and individual adventures. The combat system is what confuses people into thinking GURPS is nothing more than a modelling system. It's really all about the character, with the mechanics providing nothing more than an operating system for the players and GM to use in any way they choose.

I'd suggest downloading Caravan to Ein Arris (http://e23.sjgames.com/item.html?id=SJG37-0031) and looking at how the designers of the game think it should be played before you go making accusations based on a theory that's widely held to be nothing more than nonesnse that has nothing to do with the roleplaying hobby.

[Kurald Galain]

I'd suggest looking into White Wolf and TORG.

[Timeless Error]

There is a game called "the window," that barely has any rules and you can pretty much do anything. Go to http://www.mimgames.com/window/ and look at the rules. It's insanely simple. It's not really additive (the better you are at something, the smaller the die you roll) and it's too simple for many multipliers.

Try it out. It's not for everybody.

Hey, that's what I was about to suggest! Possibly to do with the fact that we're in the same Roleplaying group.

Anyway, the Window's a great system, but it doesn't match all of your criteria. It's not particularly tactical, you can't really "optimize" your character with rules gimmicks, and it isn't additive: you want to roll a low number instead of a high one, and there aren't very many miscellaneous bonuses/penalties floating around that you can accrue. However, it also matches what you want in the sense that there's an optional magic rule that starts penalizing your Health if you use it too much, it encourages role-playing, it's free, it's heroic, and it lends itself well to pretty much any setting.

[Shadowleaf]

I second White Wolf. It's extremely easy to learn, provides a ton of options, and is balanced a long way down the road.

[J.Gellert]

1. Not arbitrary as far as rules go. D&D 3.5e has a very arbitrary rules system, especially to do with magic.

2. Has something for me as a player, who LIKES to do a little bit of 'looking around the system to get some useful advantage', to latch on to; to me, optimization and character concept generation encourage one another.

3. Is tactically interesting, with the idea that the player character can be competent and capable of doing many things, and has a system for when I WANT to try out something weird and wonderful in combat. Furthermore, it's best if it is tactically interesting for *online play*, ie, without a battlemat!

4. Has mechanics that are, for the most part, additive -- you want to roll high, stack bonuses, or roll above something. I'm most familiar with D&D, so additive stuff would be great.

5. Isn't terrible for one on one roleplaying -- ie, encourages teamwork, but works very well with small parties, if someone is appropriately prepared

6. Isn't too 'gritty' -- we tend to the heroic, do awesome stuff sort of roleplay

7. Is cheap or free, and can be found online in PDF form, legally.

8. Lends it self fairly well to either a very fleshed out setting, or a setting that is easily recognizable and understandable

9. Tends toward "gamist" and "narrativist" rather than "simulationist".

10. The player characters can be capable of doing SOMETHING supernatural and overtly magical, without extreme, major penalties for doing so

Mutants & Masterminds does the above, though #2 will probably be a sticking point for you, personally... Because as the system goes, you are not supposed to even try and break it.

[BG]

White Wolf stuff can be good, and the nWoD system is definitely more streamlined than the old.

This probably isn't what you're looking for since it's more of a joking homage to old school D&D, but http://storygame.free.fr/MAZES.htm

It's Mazes and Minotaurs, and the main criterion of yours it fits is that it's free. It's not particularly deep, but I've had some fun with some basic adventures with it.

[woodenbandman]

I want the same thing with the following additions:

11: Will cure cancer

12: Will feed me hammie treats and wipe my fat stupid butt

13: will crush my enemies, see them driven before me, and hear the lamentations of their women

[NotScaryBats]

I think Exalted would fit you well, it is by White Wolf.

[Tyndmyr]

What, GURPS comes up repetitively in any 'realism' threads! And D6 is interesting... I've got most of the D6 fantasy books, but the DM doesn't...

GURPS is not particularily realistic.

Yes, it is technically possible to have a realistic game in GURPS. It's a metasystem. If you want, you can have any type of game in it. This doesn't mean the game system has a particular affinity for that type. It also means that people are much more likely to suggest it in...every single RPG suggestion thread.

Ima suggest earlier versions of D&D. They will be of the similar style you're looking for, with little 4th ed feel, and less complexity than 3.5. You can pick up most older books remarkably cheap these days. Not generally free(legally), but I've picked up a lot of 2nd ed and earlier books for $5 or under.

[Yora]

There are several almost-copies of older D&D editions that are legal for some reasons, like OSRIC or For Gold & Glory. And they are for free.
But they don't offer much opportunity to get deeper into the rules and make optimized builds. You pick your class and race, and that's about it.

[Dragonmuncher]

First, what do you mean by "3.5 is arbitrary?"


It sounds like you'd like one of those games where you're encouraged to describe what you do, and if it's stylish enough, you get a bonus.

Hm... does Exalted have that? And Feng Shui?

[Tyndmyr]

There are several almost-copies of older D&D editions that are legal for some reasons, like OSRIC or For Gold & Glory. And they are for free.
But they don't offer much opportunity to get deeper into the rules and make optimized builds. You pick your class and race, and that's about it.

Well, that's the flip side of "less complicated". Options complicate things. 3.5 is a solid system for what it is, but it does have a certain amount of complexity as a result of it's many options.

My favorite system for dramatic, stylistic combat, without a great deal of grittiness is 7th Sea. However, it is neither legally free(though portions of it can be found legally), nor is it a die+modifier system. *shrug* Always gonna have tradeoffs. Gotta figure out what matters to you. And, imo, trying a lot of systems is the best way to do that.

[Yora]

Well, that's the flip side of "less complicated". Options complicate things. 3.5 is a solid system for what it is, but it does have a certain amount of complexity as a result of it's many options.
I know, and I love it! :smallbiggrin:
If I were to play D&D again, it would certainly by 2nd Ed. The only thing that still bothers me with that game is it's relying on character levels. Hate it when certain adventures only work at a higher level, or just no longer work once you passed a certain point.

[wizuriel]

Mutants and Masterminds sounds like it might interest you. Though the system is kind of easy to break.

[daxos232]

The first RuneQuest by Mongoose Publishing is availabe for free.

http://mrqwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

The new RuneQuest 2 is much better, but the 1st is still good. I recommend the Opposed Roll Combat System option, found in the MRQ1 Combat section.
Very simple and easy to learn, can be gritty or heroic, and is easily houseruled if you want to. Everyone I've played it with prefers it to 3.5 or 4e.

I would also recommend True20, an awesome system. Its not free, but I bought the pocket core rulebook for $5 and its less than 150 pages. Yet it has everything needed to run any type of game and is a simplified version of D20.

[Zeta Kai]

1. Not arbitrary as far as rules go. D&D 3.5e has a very arbitrary rules system, especially to do with magic.

I'm not here to defend 3E, but I have to ask: What magic system doesn't have arbitrary rules? Any rule that you could write for a magic system is going to be arbitrary in some fashion, as magic has no consistent existence in the real world. You can't model or emulate magic on any non-arbitrary basis, as there is nothing real to base it on. You could, I suppose, base it one some specific treatise on magic, or some published work that has its own magic system, but those are, arguably, just as arbitrary as anything original. Magic A is Magic A, & as long as it's consistent, then its arbitrary nature should be important.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Man, this is hilarious :smallbiggrin:

It looks like you want something like OSRIC (http://www.knights-n-knaves.com/osric/); something that is built upon the fantasy archetypes common to D&D but lacks the "arbitrary" rules elements of WotC D&D. However those "arbitrary" rules elements are what allows a Player to engage in the sort of min/maxing that the OP enjoys! :smalltongue:

I dunno what to tell you. Maybe if the OP tells us a bit more about what he doesn't like about 3.X/4E we can provide better guidance.

From the suggestions given, I'd lean more towards GURPS than White Wolf; White Wolf is only "balanced" if the ST says so and is built to cater to either Urban Gothic (WoD) or Anime Fantasy (Exalted) themes. GURPS, for all its faults, will at least let the OP & Co. build the sort of game they want if they put enough time in on it.

Of course, I'd encourage the OP to try Burning Wheel since it has everything he wants aside from Additive d20 and Min/Maxing.

[Mulletmanalive]

-reasonable comment-

The difference there is the implementation. If you compare the more flatline magic of Savage Worlds, you'll note that the spells were made based around a slack handful of core effects and don't deviate from them. Sure, it's not wideranging, but it's fair and not arbitrary. Same is true for 4e.

Compare that to the 3e and White Wolf magic systems which have their spell levels assigned based on how the designer was feeling at the time and generally any queries on the subject got ignored [if i remember Keith Baker's grumblings in a blog somewhere].

The latter seems a lot more arbitrary, really...

[Dalek-K]

DUST on here has a Table top game called Final Fantasy 2d6 (or something like that) you should look for that... Search his name or go through the archives in the homebrew to find it...

Simple fun and it has the fantasy feel to it ^ ^

[Kurald Galain]

you'll note that the spells were made based around a slack handful of core effects and don't deviate from them. Sure, it's not wideranging, but it's fair and not arbitrary. Same is true for 4e.

The Sleep spell would like a word with you.

[Oracle_Hunter]

The difference there is the implementation. If you compare the more flatline magic of Savage Worlds, you'll note that the spells were made based around a slack handful of core effects and don't deviate from them. Sure, it's not wideranging, but it's fair and not arbitrary. Same is true for 4e.

Compare that to the 3e and White Wolf magic systems which have their spell levels assigned based on how the designer was feeling at the time and generally any queries on the subject got ignored .

The latter seems a lot more arbitrary, really...
OK, "arbitrary" is being put on my list of Words Not To Use When Discussing Game Systems.

It doesn't convey meaningful information about the topic and is used as a synonym for "thing I don't like." It's like versimilitude :smallyuk:

For reference:
Here's the useful way to use "arbitrary"

Subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion.
In many ways 3.X is an Arbitrary system in this regard; significant systems like Diplomacy have explicit clauses that require the DM to manufacture DCs (via ad hoc modifiers) without providing any guidance in the rules. However, under this definition [I]White Wolf is probably the most arbitrary rules system there is: the oWoD rules were little more than guidelines at best and every single check in nWoD has an explicit grant of "ST modify to taste" in the form of Situational Modifiers to dice pools. The Stunt System in Exalted is more of the same.

And here's how "arbitrary" is usually used in a systems discussion

Capricious; unreasonable; unsupported
This definition provides no guidance without more information. If a rules system is "unreasonable" then one needs to define what a more "reasonable" system entails.

[obliged_salmon]

Burning Wheel is awesome, so you should try that, regardless of how well it fits your criteria.

In gunning for your criteria, I feel I should point to Star Wars SAGA, which is an awesomely heroic hybrid of 3.5 and 4th Ed d20 rules, keeping the best of both worlds. Sure, the setting is pretty specific, but it's not really that hard to retool it to generic fantasy setting. It did come right out of d20, after all.

Another suggestion, specifically catering to the "free" portion of your criteria, would be the Marvel Super Heroes RPG. It basically works by ranking your stats and powers, and you roll over a percentile based on an easy-to-use chart to determine success or failure.

[Zeta Kai]

The difference there is the implementation. If you compare the more flatline magic of Savage Worlds, you'll note that the spells were made based around a slack handful of core effects and don't deviate from them. Sure, it's not wideranging, but it's fair and not arbitrary. Same is true for 4e.

Compare that to the 3e and White Wolf magic systems which have their spell levels assigned based on how the designer was feeling at the time and generally any queries on the subject got ignored [if i remember Keith Baker's grumblings in a blog somewhere].

The latter seems a lot more arbitrary, really...

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly, no arguments here. You cut to the core of the issue, which is the degree of fiat used. But as Oracle_Hunter astutely noted, the OP used the word "arbitrary" in a way that suggested it was synonymous with "in a way that I don't like", which is not a helpful adjective.

Speaking of the OP, I don't think that there is a system that fits all of the criteria listed, as there are many things there that are very specific, & a few that seem to be a bit contradictory. All I can say is that D&D isn't for you, & you should be shopping for Something Else, whatever that may be. Good luck, & happy browsing.

[pasko77]

I want the same thing with the following additions:

13: will crush my enemies, see them driven before me, and hear the lamentations of their women

Why, the riddle of steel, obviously. :smalltongue:

[pasko77]

The difference there is the implementation. If you compare the more flatline magic of Savage Worlds, you'll note that the spells were made based around a slack handful of core effects and don't deviate from them. Sure, it's not wideranging, but it's fair and not arbitrary. Same is true for 4e.

Compare that to the 3e and White Wolf magic systems which have their spell levels assigned based on how the designer was feeling at the time and generally any queries on the subject got ignored [if i remember Keith Baker's grumblings in a blog somewhere].

The latter seems a lot more arbitrary, really...

Then you WON'T like exalted.

[Kylarra]

Then you WON'T like exalted.Well you could ignore sorcery (blasphemy!) and focus mainly on charms. Those are still "arbitrary" but laid out in more semi-connected patterns.

[lesser_minion]

OK, "arbitrary" is being put on my list of Words Not To Use When Discussing Game Systems.

It doesn't convey meaningful information about the topic and is used as a synonym for "thing I don't like." It's like versimilitude :smallyuk:

An 'arbitrary' rule is a rule that clearly exists for the sole benefit of the game, rather than existing to convey some element of the setting or (potential) narrative.

An 'arbitrary' system is one that uses too many of this kind of rule.

The problem with them is that they draw attention to the fact that you're playing a game, which isn't particularly good for the narrative or the setting.

[Oracle_Hunter]

An 'arbitrary' rule is a rule that clearly exists for the sole benefit of the game, rather than existing to convey some element of the setting or (potential) narrative.

An 'arbitrary' system is one that uses too many of this kind of rule.

The problem with them is that they draw attention to the fact that you're playing a game, which isn't particularly good for the narrative or the setting.
Aside from not fitting any commonly known definition of "arbitrary," this definition still doesn't provide useful information.

How much is "too many?" Is it really bad for the rules of the game to be designed for the benefit of a game? Are HP an "arbitrary" rule? What about range penalties?

This falls into the same trap as GNS Theory does generally - using general terminology with the illusion of providing precission.

[pasko77]

Well you could ignore sorcery (blasphemy!) and focus mainly on charms. Those are still "arbitrary" but laid out in more semi-connected patterns.

Well, not really. It's like playing magic... a few rules and a cartload of exceptions, to the point that you know that a color/caste is good at something only because you read all the cards/charms.

[nyarlathotep]

Mutants & Masterminds does the above, though #2 will probably be a sticking point for you, personally... Because as the system goes, you are not supposed to even try and break it.

You're not supposed to try because it is pathetically easy to break and there are very few choices that are mechanically interesting.

[Kylarra]

Well, not really. It's like playing magic... a few rules and a cartload of exceptions, to the point that you know that a color/caste is good at something only because you read all the cards/charms.Only... not really? The first part holds true, but the latter is patently false for the majority of character concepts. There are a few things that one caste does "best" thanks to synergy with its anima effect, but given that you have just as many favored abilities as caste abilities, for the most part you can do whatever from whatever, unlike magic which, with a few exceptions, stays more or less within the given abilities for a color, within a given time period.

[pasko77]

Only... not really? The first part holds true, but the latter is patently false for the majority of character concepts. There are a few things that one caste does "best" thanks to synergy with its anima effect, but given that you have just as many favored abilities as caste abilities, for the most part you can do whatever from whatever, unlike magic which, with a few exceptions, stays more or less within the given abilities for a color, within a given time period.

The point is: do you want to know what a lunar can do? Well, here's the book, have fun reading every charm. (so on for each exalt).
Maybe I misused the word "caste", I meant "ability tree", you have no way to know what a skill does unless you read ALL of its trees, and ALL of them are more or less arbitrary. Apologies for the misuse of "caste", I was thinking about correcting my post while you where answering.

[Denomar]

I don't know if its too complicated for you or not, but Mutants and Masterminds can be adapted to just about any setting period. I've played in a dark hyborian age style of game with it, and even a Starcraft themed game. It also uses d20's doesn't have levels and is just pure point buy.

[Arbane]

It [Mutants and Masterminds] also uses d20's doesn't have levels and is just pure point buy.

Well, it does have "Power Levels", but that's a way of sorting out just how powerful characters are now, rather than an advancement mechanic.

[kestrel404]

Earthdawn. Any edition except 3rd (the most recent one).

[whitexknight]

New world of Darkness is almost perfect for what you want especially Mage the Awakening, though it isnt a fantasy setting, there is a pdf book that talks about converting it, all of the books are available legally as pdfs, also i dunno about how cheap they are.

[Sarakos]

If you want to stick with D&D you could try Pathfinder

Otherwise I would like to give Shadowrun a mention. Ive never played the game myself but i read the books a lot in my free time and tried to get a group going. It's not really a fantasy game, more cyberpunk with fantasy elements (sword swinging, casting spells and various races) otherwise it fits your criteria moderately well.


Hi there, I'm interested in a game that does SOME sort of 'fantasy', that enables a few things well:

1. Not arbitrary as far as rules go. D&D 3.5e has a very arbitrary rules system, especially to do with magic.

Magic from what I've read is pretty clear cut and explained (I have yet to play a game mind you)

2. Has something for me as a player, who LIKES to do a little bit of 'looking around the system to get some useful advantage', to latch on to; to me, optimization and character concept generation encourage one another.

There is a ton of customization option and has the advantage of there being no "The build" for whatever archetype or character concept you go for

3. Is tactically interesting, with the idea that the player character can be competent and capable of doing many things, and has a system for when I WANT to try out something weird and wonderful in combat. Furthermore, it's best if it is tactically interesting for *online play*, ie, without a battlemat!

Being able to do many things is one of the big attractions in Shadowrun, a character who specializes usually ends up losing out in the long run because the game is all about adapting to new situations and the character generation rules give you enough leeway to do several things very well (I built a Weapon Specialist as an attempt to get the hang of the character creation system and she had the ability to use rifles and such exceedingly well while still being very good at any other type of gun and still had points left over to fulfill a combat medic role. Thus she functioned as a sniper but with good armor and a riot shield she doubled as a tank and was proficient with more easily concealed weapons when charging in guns blazing wasnt an option

4. Has mechanics that are, for the most part, additive -- you want to roll high, stack bonuses, or roll above something. I'm most familiar with D&D, so additive stuff would be great.

Shadowrun's dice pool system does all that

5. Isn't terrible for one on one roleplaying -- ie, encourages teamwork, but works very well with small parties, if someone is appropriately prepared

Large parties are a liability in Shadowrun. 4 man teams are best because they cover almost all the bases but its possible to play solo with just a GM and hire fellow shadowrunners to help you with missions

6. Isn't too 'gritty' -- we tend to the heroic, do awesome stuff sort of roleplay

Here is the main catch, Shadowrun is pretty gritty and characters die easily. Its possible to play a more heroic version of it as fluff supports the idea of Shadowrunners being rugged agents of good sticking it to the corrupt and tyrannical megacorporations and I beleive there are some alternate rule sets that would not penalize people too harshly for their chosen play style

7. Is cheap or free, and can be found online in PDF form, legally.

Theres a free downloadable Quick start rules set found here: http://www.shadowrun4.com/quickstart/

The books can also be bought from the same site

8. Lends it self fairly well to either a very fleshed out setting, or a setting that is easily recognizable and understandable

Most of the fleshing out was done in North America and Seattle specifically but Shadowrun does this pretty well

9. Tends toward "gamist" and "narrativist" rather than "simulationist".

Doesnt get much gamier than a group of armed to the teeth shadowrunners swinging Katanas, firing spells and automatic weapons as they battle their way out of the Corporate offices with whatever prize they came for

10. The player characters can be capable of doing SOMETHING supernatural and overtly magical, without extreme, major penalties for doing so

See above spell slinging

Does anyone have any suggestions?

Shadowrun fluff says that magic comes to Earth in cycles and Shadowrun is set in the sixth cycle. I beleive a game someone mentioned called Earthdawn was set in the Fourth cycle of magic coming to the Earth its a more fantasyish game and probably worth looking at as well.

Sorry for the wall of text. :)

[Raum]

Three systems to for you to look at and compare: FATE, Savage Worlds, and Unisystem.
1. Not arbitrary as far as rules go. D&D 3.5e has a very arbitrary rules system, especially to do with magic.Not entirely certain exactly what you're objecting to...so moving on.


2. Has something for me as a player, who LIKES to do a little bit of 'looking around the system to get some useful advantage', to latch on to; to me, optimization and character concept generation encourage one another.Unisystem, FATE, and Savage Worlds are all in the middle of RPGs on the 'crunchiness' scale. This gives you a fair number of options while keeping choices manageable and, usually, balanced.


3. Is tactically interesting, with the idea that the player character can be competent and capable of doing many things, and has a system for when I WANT to try out something weird and wonderful in combat. Furthermore, it's best if it is tactically interesting for *online play*, ie, without a battlemat!Any of the three above can be tactical games. However, FATE's tactics are mechanically (not narratively) similar and Savage Worlds probably has the most flexible tactics of the three.


4. Has mechanics that are, for the most part, additive -- you want to roll high, stack bonuses, or roll above something. I'm most familiar with D&D, so additive stuff would be great.All three of the above and a host of other systems meet this criteria.


5. Isn't terrible for one on one roleplaying -- ie, encourages teamwork, but works very well with small parties, if someone is appropriately preparedSavage Worlds is probably the most group oriented (and therefore least 1v1) but any of the three would work.


6. Isn't too 'gritty' -- we tend to the heroic, do awesome stuff sort of roleplayUnisystem is probably grittier than either Savage Worlds or FATE but all three fall in the heroic range with FATE on the pulpy side and Savage Worlds in the middle.


7. Is cheap or free, and can be found online in PDF form, legally.Unisystem's Witchcraft is free, Savage World's core book is only $10, and FATE's SRD is free though some of the settings may be pricey.


8. Lends it self fairly well to either a very fleshed out setting, or a setting that is easily recognizable and understandableThere are some good setting for all three systems though Unisystem tends to concentrate on modern settings. Savage Worlds and FATE have published settings covering a larger variety of genres.


9. Tends toward "gamist" and "narrativist" rather than "simulationist".Games are what you make of them...don't get caught in the GNS morass. That said, all three of the games I've mentioned are abstracted. (Most games are.) They're also towards the middle of the 'crunchiness' scale so won't try to simulate reality in too much detail.


10. The player characters can be capable of doing SOMETHING supernatural and overtly magical, without extreme, major penalties for doing soWith FATE and Savage Worlds, magic depends on the setting. All three systems have rules for overt magic...FATE's Dresden Files RPG is probably the most powerful implementation with Savage World's core magic system the least powerful.


Does anyone have any suggestions?I think any of the three could work for you. Unisystem is closest to d20 mechanically and may be easiest to learn. FATE is probably the farthest step away from d20 - it's mechanics give players more responsibility than you may be used to. Savage Worlds has the best tactical options and the worst magic system (both my opinion) but probably the least 'intrusive' mechanics. Try them all! :smallwink:

[tbarrie]

Bit late to the party here, but how can something be both dull AND chess-y?

Regarding your request, Ars Magica springs to mind (as it so often does).

[Gavinfoxx]

Regarding the optimization thing, I don't mean it has to be possible to optimize for REAL ULTIMATE POWER(tm) like you can by playing a Druid in 3.5e, I just want to be able to get a sense of accomplishment and be slightly rewarded by running the numbers, having a plan, going for a coherent theme, and able to get some small but useful benefit in doing so.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Regarding the optimization thing, I don't mean it has to be possible to optimize for REAL ULTIMATE POWER(tm) like you can by playing a Druid in 3.5e, I just want to be able to get a sense of accomplishment and be slightly rewarded by running the numbers, having a plan, going for a coherent theme, and able to get some small but useful benefit in doing so.
"Running the numbers" is only engaging in a system which has sufficient complexity to have numbers to run.

Rules-Lite systems lack the depth of rules to make running numbers an engaging past time. For example, Bliss Stage has a relatively deep mechanic of building power but, in the end, the sorts of optimization you can engage in is roughly equivalent to a Vow of Poverty 3.5 Monk - it's just not going to be engaging.

So, unless you can better define what exactly is bothering you about 3.5 and 4E it's very hard to recommend a system with sufficient mechanical depth to reward min/maxing behavior.

[Ozreth]

AD&D 2nd Edition for sure. Its right in between 3.5 and 4e.

Just stick with core and you've got a system that is very easy to pick up and play, has few rules governing moments, you can take out or add anything you want and its not broken, you can make up whatever rules you want and the books encourage it.

BUT if you want to pick up some of the splat books later on you can add a bit more complexity if you are so inclined.

Easy, streamlined rules, quick combat and GREAT fluff : )

[Gavinfoxx]

Well, by running the numbers, I was thinking of stuff like squeezing out a little bit more of usefulness out of a point buy, without the crazy point buy weirdness that GURPS seems to have. FATE looks interesting, I glanced at a friend's copy of Dresden Files at one point, that was pretty cool. And Mutants and Masterminds... that might work out well. I haven't checked out Star Wars SAGA, that would fit I guess, from what I heard secondhand. And D6 Fantasy seems like it might work, though from what I remember of Star Wars D6, it's fairly swingy.

And by simulationist... I don't like the idea of games that are trying to simulate reality in excessive detail; IE, roll to see if your hit touches them! roll for location of the hit! roll for penetration! roll for wound damage! UGH.

[Yora]

I think Saga is the best d20 game out there. It's certainly simpler and more streamlined than D&D 3.5e. Too bad it follows the 20 level progression, or I would play it all the time. :smallbiggrin:

[Chrono22]

I suggest using pathfinder with some modifications- take the good of 4e and hitch it to pathfinder's system.

[Tyndmyr]

I suggest using pathfinder with some modifications- take the good of 4e and hitch it to pathfinder's system.

That wouldn't really...work. They're not intercompatible.

The OP asked for a system he could use, not a concept for a brand new system to make.

[Chrono22]

Actually, some of the rules of 4e would fit snugly into pathfinder, with little effort. Being able to apply more than one ability score to a save, for example. Simplified conditions.

A houseruled system is still a system. {Scrubbed}

[Psyx]

If you want a very story-based game with a bit of min-max crunch still, then I'll recommend Feng Shui, Torg, Starwars d6 and nWoD. All can be broken over the knee if you really want, but are also mechanically interesting AND are built around the characters and the story. They're all about good honest adventure, are high powered and very heroic without being an exercise in maths, and a lot of fun.