Summarizing Systems

[Rusvul]

So, a few friends and I will be starting some sort of RPG group soon. We come from a bunch of different systems, and agreeing on one might be a bit tricky. I thought it would be a good idea to list and describe the systems I'm experienced or interested in. I'd like to represent the games clearly, succinctly, and accurately- plus I'm just curious what stands out about different systems to different people. Do the following descriptions make sense to anyone but me? Are there any things you would change to make them clearer/more accurate? Do you disagree with me completely? Any opinions welcome.

D&D 5e is a moderately complex fantasy RPG with a focus on combat and dungeon-crawling. A good balance is struck between simplicity and character options- each character still manages to feel unique.

D&D 3.5 is similar to 5e in many ways, but it is more complex and it is possible to build very powerful or very weak characters. Magic items are integral in character progression. Pathfinder is a refinement of 3.5 that streamlines the system slightly.
There is a particularly interesting setting called the Tippyverse where the eccentricities of the system are taken to their logical extreme. (Agriculture doesn't exist because food can be conjured, for example.) Playing around with that might be fun.

GURPS is an interesting ruleset. Very simulationist, character creation looks like it requires a lot of thought. I'm not sure how that translates into ease of gameplay, but it looks like fun.

Numenera is a weird sci-fi/fantasy setting set on Earth one billion years in the future. The unknowable relics of bygone eras are strewn everywhere, and the game's ruleset has a heavy emphasis on exploration. Mechanically the game is simple, it's more focused on storytelling than rules.

Savage Worlds is a setting-neutral system focused on wild, fast, and swingy gameplay. Characters are simple to create, but can feel a bit samey mechanically at low tiers if everyone plays similar archetypes. Combat is fairly random and lethal compared to other games.
Deadlands is an official Savage Worlds setting. It's a "weird west" setting, with cowboys and gunslingers and shamans and poker-warlocks... It's a unique blend of wild west, weird fantasy, and magicpunk.

Shadowrun is an 80s cyberpunk/fantasy setting with cyberninjas and street samurai as well as trolls and wizards and dragons. It's an unusual setting but I personally love it. The game is mechanically complicated and may take some learning.


Stars Without Number is a sci-fi setting somewhere inbetween science fantasy and hard sci-fi. The game is very sandboxy, if players don't make their own goals then nothing happens, but if the PCs are invested then great stories can happen. Mechanically it is based around a simplified AD&D 1e- There aren't a lot of character options but with the way the game plays you don't really need them.

[Tiktakkat]

D&D 3.5 is similar to 5e in many ways, but it is significantly more complex and it is possible to build very excessively powerful or very excessively weak characters. Further, actual play decisions may compound power discrepancies. Magic items are integral in character power progression.
Pathfinder is a refinement variation of 3.5 that streamlines modifies the system slightly, simplifying a few things while adding complexity in other places.
There is a particularly interesting setting thought experiment called the Tippyverse where the eccentricities of the system are taken to their logical extreme, though without consideration for intermediary stages. (Agriculture doesn't exist because food can be conjured, for example.) Playing around with that might be fun.

[Lorsa]

If you want to accurately describe systems you should probably avoid using value words. For example, you can't say "Gurps is interesting", because the word "interesting" has very little meaning in the context. Why is it interesting? Also, that is your view, others may feel different and it does nothing to help convey what the system is. Similarly, you might avoid saying "I personally love it" in regards to Shadowrun (if you want to be neutral), but that is better than saying "it is interesting".

Stars Without Number is written with a sandbox play in mind, but that is certainly not the only way you can play it. Perhaps you should try to differentiate more between game system, setting and intended style of play? Right now it looks as if Tippyverse is the only setting you will play with 3.5/Pathfinder (perhaps it is so?).

[BWR]

D&D 3.5/Pathfinder/Tippyverse


Tippyverse is not a system, it is building a setting on overly literal interpretations of the rules rather than using the rules to serve a setting.

[Elvenoutrider]

Gurps - the second or third best system to use for just about any game - very rules intensive, very easy to break, hard to find premade enemies or creatures for your campaign so you really will be building most of it from the ground up. Combat is quick and lethal. Even in high magic or tech settings, healing is not easy

[Rusvul]

If you want to accurately describe systems you should probably avoid using value words. For example, you can't say "Gurps is interesting", because the word "interesting" has very little meaning in the context. Why is it interesting? Also, that is your view, others may feel different and it does nothing to help convey what the system is. Similarly, you might avoid saying "I personally love it" in regards to Shadowrun (if you want to be neutral), but that is better than saying "it is interesting".

Stars Without Number is written with a sandbox play in mind, but that is certainly not the only way you can play it. Perhaps you should try to differentiate more between game system, setting and intended style of play? Right now it looks as if Tippyverse is the only setting you will play with 3.5/Pathfinder (perhaps it is so?).

You know, that's a really good point on the value words. I hadn't thought about that. I'll make some edits. Thanks.

The reason I've presented the Tippyverse as such is because I very much doubt this group would be interested in a more standard 3.5 game- if we wanted high fantasy dungeon crawling, I'm pretty certain most of the group would prefer 4e, 5e, or perhaps GURPS. However, a Tippyverse game doesn't really work in other systems- I mention it specifically because it's the primary reason we would want to use 3.5.

[LibraryOgre]

Shadowrun is an 80s cyberpunk/fantasy setting with cyberninjas and street samurai as well as trolls and wizards and dragons. It's an unusual setting but I personally love it. The game is mechanically complicated and may take some learning.

Just a bit of a reword:

Shadowrun is an 80s cyberpunk/fantasy setting set 40+ years after the return of magic and development of cybertechnology. The setting features mainstays of both settings, including a worldwide computer Matrix, multinational megacorporations, several fantasy races and species, and player character magic. The system is relatively complex, based on dice pools consisting of d6s against target numbers, with subsystems, using the same rolls, for different aspects of play.