13th Age or Fantasy AGE?

[WJ92]

Hello lovely people!

I was thinking about using a new role-playing system with my friends. My usual gaming group enjoyed Pathfinder but for some of them it's a very complex game - 'cause it is in comparison for example to D&D 5E, honestly. Our alternative to PFRPG is "Call of Cthulhu" but I was looking for a fantasy game.

So I was thinking about picking a game that would be fun and pretty fast but still have mechanics similar to D&D.

A lot of time ago I read some articles about 13th Age and Fantasy AGE. Both systems have easy mechanics and are faster than PFRPG. Also, the Game Master's work would be much easier - and we could play with only one game manual (unlike D&D 5E :smallannoyed: ). Also, a lot of stuff is free (OGL, Quick Rules etc.).

The character creation in both games is simple but still allows some flexibility and deep characterization. The combat rules are great and there is absolutely no need to use a combat grid and I really, really LOVE this thing :smallwink:

13th Age seems more similar to previous incarnations of D&D (3.5 and 4E, it's clear that the 13th Age devs worked on D&D before) but with some great additions (Backgrounds instead of the ability list, Escalation Die, only 10 levels), Fantasy AGE seems easier for beginners - Magic Points (alias "Mana" :smallbiggrin: ) for spellcasters is a more intuitive concept for beginners than Spell Slots and the "Stunt Dice" rules sound great.

So, I'm asking - which one of those two games seems "better" in your opinion? By better I mean smoother and funnier, with fast paced combat and that is light on rules?

[Anonymouswizard]

Personally I never found 13th Age appealing, I'll let others list it's strong points.

For Fantasy AGE? Don't listen to what some fans love to shout, it's mainly a combat engine with skill mechanics bolted on. Noncombat nonspell Stunts are either overly specific or along the lines of 'you can ask another question' (which I was going to do anyway). Characters mainly advance by putting points in Primary and Secondary Abilities and gaining Talents (or Spells for Mages), most class features just make some stunts easier to use.

It's also limited in options. 24 Talents (of the levels each), only about a dozen Arcana, twelve specialisations (four per class), and some Talents are literally worthless (Novice Music). It's a good base, but the book that was meant to give more options keeps getting pushed back.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

I'll second what Anonymouswizard said. Both, despite the occasional pretentions otherwise, are very combat-focused systems. If you're not running a campaign centred on action, don't pick either.

Of the two, I'd call Fantasy AGE a clear winner. 13th Age retains most of the things wrong with D&D 4e, with a lot of fiddly and annoying mechanics shoved on.

[gtroc]

I am a big fan of 13th Age. It is very good at aiding the GM in creating adventures and scenarios. The Icons and whatnot take a bit of getting used to but make for a dynamic and fun back and forth with the setting. It is still d20 based which means that it is still primarily focused around combat, so that could be a bit of a problem for some. It does make each class feel very different in play while also remaining roughly balanced in power and ability. NOt sure what else would be needed in a sell, but feel free to ask whatever question.

[Knaight]

For Fantasy AGE? Don't listen to what some fans love to shout, it's mainly a combat engine with skill mechanics bolted on. Noncombat nonspell Stunts are either overly specific or along the lines of 'you can ask another question' (which I was going to do anyway). Characters mainly advance by putting points in Primary and Secondary Abilities and gaining Talents (or Spells for Mages), most class features just make some stunts easier to use.

Of course it's a combat engine with skill mechanics bolted on - it's deliberately made similar to D&D, while being based on a combat heavy videogame. Still, if you're looking for basically D&D but lighter it's a very good option.

With that said - if you're willing to go a little (but only a little) further afield, Desolation is really cool. Admittedly it's a fairly new system for me and it (and the rest of the Ubiquity systems) still have that new system shine, but I suspect it will last.

[Telwar]

I've never played AGE, but we played a campaign of 13th Age and we liked it a lot. The Icons are kind of annoying and if you dispense with them, that neuters several classes.

[Anonymouswizard]

Of course it's a combat engine with skill mechanics bolted on - it's deliberately made similar to D&D, while being based on a combat heavy videogame. Still, if you're looking for basically D&D but lighter it's a very good option.

Yeah, I now, although there's part of the fandom who'll deny it being like D&D because, uh, stuff. Plus Dragon Age was almost certainly based on D&D, so I'm shocked at the fact they're even arguing it.

I see it very much as an alternative 5e (like Pathfinder is an alternative 3.5, 13th Age is an alternative 4e, OSRIC is an alternativeremake of 1e, LotFP is an alternative BECM, and so on). Looking at it, half the design choices are those I saw put up for 5e and rejected because of sacred cows, such as the three classes with specialisations being used to customise. It's what I wanted 5e to be, but I understand some people dislike the idea of a small number of classes and feat chains being inherent in the system.

I love Fantasy AGE, I just feel like it's important to note it's shortcomings.


With that said - if you're willing to go a little (but only a little) further afield, Desolation is really cool. Admittedly it's a fairly new system for me and it (and the rest of the Ubiquity systems) still have that new system shine, but I suspect it will last.

I might look that up if you don't mind. I'm currently planning LotFP for when I get to run a game, but I'm always on the lookout for new systems.

[Knaight]

Yeah, I now, although there's part of the fandom who'll deny it being like D&D because, uh, stuff. Plus Dragon Age was almost certainly based on D&D, so I'm shocked at the fact they're even arguing it.

I'm pretty sure the reasons are a lack of familiarity with the broader world of roleplaying games. If the entirety of your experience and knowledge is in the AGE system plus D&D it probably does feel very different from D&D.

Meanwhile if you've ever played a system that isn't fantasy, isn't level based, isn't combat focused, or that messes with the standard GM plus one PC per player format in any way, not so much. Plus, if you've played one of these there's a pretty good chance you hit two or three just because they tend to come bundled together.


I might look that up if you don't mind. I'm currently planning LotFP for when I get to run a game, but I'm always on the lookout for new systems.
Finding the Ubiquity engine was a reasonably big personal RPG discovery for me - they're solid, I like them, and I don't know how they flew beneath my radar for years.

In short, I'd recommend looking it up - although if you're willing to go further afield than the OP, there are other Ubiquity systems worth a look at as an alternative, most notably Hollow Earth Expedition and Regime Diabolique. I'm not saying they're better, but they do cover ground a little less thoroughly tread.

[Anonymouswizard]

I'm pretty sure the reasons are a lack of familiarity with the broader world of roleplaying games. If the entirety of your experience and knowledge is in the AGE system plus D&D it probably does feel very different from D&D.

Meanwhile if you've ever played a system that isn't fantasy, isn't level based, isn't combat focused, or that messes with the standard GM plus one PC per player format in any way, not so much. Plus, if you've played one of these there's a pretty good chance you hit two or three just because they tend to come bundled together.

Oh of course, I notice it as I'm the kind of person who has a Fate book on the table next to me and is interested in getting the anniversary edition of FUDGE to have a proper physical copy of where my favourite game came from. I see the same people talking about 'D&D versus Fantasy AGE', when I'm more likely to talk about 'Fate/GURPS/Savage Worlds versus Fantasy AGE'.

I bought it because I own a lot of games and wanted one that was more like modern D&D. Thankfully Fantasy AGE mixes the best bits of 4e and 5e for me, chucks out some holy cows, and cuts down the classes to three. I've discovered that I come from a different place to most of the fandom though (except for a few, who will also talk about how it's mainly a combat game).


Finding the Ubiquity engine was a reasonably big personal RPG discovery for me - they're solid, I like them, and I don't know how they flew beneath my radar for years.

In short, I'd recommend looking it up - although if you're willing to go further afield than the OP, there are other Ubiquity systems worth a look at as an alternative, most notably Hollow Earth Expedition and Regime Diabolique. I'm not saying they're better, but they do cover ground a little less thoroughly tread.

I'll look into those two then. I've got enough D&D-style fantasy in my collection already, only bought LotFP because I liked how the rules drew from B/X rather than one of the later editions, something different would be good.

[WJ92]

First of all: thank you guys for all the answers so far! :smallwink:

Second: it's not a big deal that both games focus their rules on combat situations. My gaming group like a lot to fight and find treasures :smallwink: But this do not mean that they never roleplay. I could say that our normal game session at PFRPG is 60%-50% about fighting and the rest is roleplaying.

Third: If we don't want to smash monsters, grab gold and save cities/countries/worlds, we just play Call of Cthulhu.


For Fantasy AGE? Don't listen to what some fans love to shout, it's mainly a combat engine with skill mechanics bolted on. Noncombat nonspell Stunts are either overly specific or along the lines of 'you can ask another question' (which I was going to do anyway). Characters mainly advance by putting points in Primary and Secondary Abilities and gaining Talents (or Spells for Mages), most class features just make some stunts easier to use.

It's also limited in options. 24 Talents (of the levels each), only about a dozen Arcana, twelve specialisations (four per class), and some Talents are literally worthless (Novice Music). It's a good base, but the book that was meant to give more options keeps getting pushed back.

Yeah I heard that Fantasy AGE doesn't offer a lot of options to players and GMs. But at least there is a lot of fan-made material.
And maybe, just maybe, some splatbooks will come out sooner or later :smallbiggrin: A man can only hope!

Did you tried this system before? An adventure, a whole campaing?


Of the two, I'd call Fantasy AGE a clear winner. 13th Age retains most of the things wrong with D&D 4e, with a lot of fiddly and annoying mechanics shoved on.

That's an interesting point of view. Could you elaborate it? What kind of annoying mechanics in your opinion 13th Age has?


I am a big fan of 13th Age. It is very good at aiding the GM in creating adventures and scenarios. The Icons and whatnot take a bit of getting used to but make for a dynamic and fun back and forth with the setting. It is still d20 based which means that it is still primarily focused around combat, so that could be a bit of a problem for some. It does make each class feel very different in play while also remaining roughly balanced in power and ability. NOt sure what else would be needed in a sell, but feel free to ask whatever question.

How would you compare 13th Age to PFRPG? How flexible is 13th Age, and by this I mean - is it possible to create both an adventurous and funny campaing (a classical "D&D" type of campaign) and a gritty, more dark campaign (this would be the case of settings like Warhammer Fantasy).

What do you think about the character customization options? There is no gunpowder weapons in the 13th Age rulebook (and Fantasy AGE has those) but are there any in the splatbooks?


Of course it's a combat engine with skill mechanics bolted on - it's deliberately made similar to D&D, while being based on a combat heavy videogame. Still, if you're looking for basically D&D but lighter it's a very good option.

Well, I'm liking what I'm reading :smallcool:


I've never played AGE, but we played a campaign of 13th Age and we liked it a lot. The Icons are kind of annoying and if you dispense with them, that neuters several classes.

What are the aspects of the system that you liked most? 13th Age would be a good system for four people (GM + 3 players)?

[TheTeaMustFlow]

That's an interesting point of view. Could you elaborate it? What kind of annoying mechanics in your opinion 13th Age has?

From what I can remember (and it has been a while since I've played it, so don't take this as exhaustive):

The way recharging your abilities is totally dependent on metagame occurrences. It could be 5 seconds or 5 years from one fight or another, but it will have no effect on whether you've got your abilities and hp back. Even the abilities referred to as 'daily' abilities. (That last bit might be nitpicking, but I really hate it when the game's terminology is actively misleading - every time the game says 'once per day', it is lying to you).

The Icons don't really add much to the game, and are mostly a way to encourage annoying DM fiat.

The Escalation Die is a fiddly and utterly unimmersive kludge to 'fix' a problem that has no reason to be there in the first place (combats are slow due to inheriting 4e as a mechanical base, where the enemies all have excessive ACs and hp pools. The idea of scaling enemy defences down a bit honestly never seems to have occurred to them).

A lot of the out-of-combat mechanics, particularly the "One Unique Thing", obviously haven't been thought about much, and really don't fit with what is otherwise a highly restrictive and codified system.

The system is full of trap options. A degree of optimisation isn't helpful, it's strictly necessary.

A lot of abilities are very dependent on randomisation.

The system actually expects you to miss the majority of attacks.

It's combat-as-sport to an extreme - the system really doesn't like the idea of the characters using any kind of strategic thinking or preparation (beyond Char-Op, which is strictly necessary). Or, God forbid, ever avoiding fights.

[Anonymouswizard]

Yeah I heard that Fantasy AGE doesn't offer a lot of options to players and GMs. But at least there is a lot of fan-made material.
And maybe, just maybe, some splatbooks will come out sooner or later :smallbiggrin: A man can only hope!

Did you tried this system before? An adventure, a whole campaing?

Haven't got to tried it out yet, my group went for 5e over this or Lamentations of the Flame Princess.

I don't suggest holding out hope for supplements arriving soon, the release date gets pushed back months shortly after it's officially announced.

There's only a few real problems, mainly lack of options. The big thing to remember is that it's a lower power curve D&D, starting at being able to take more damage and then not gaining a lot of power over 20 levels (10 talents, +19 to be spread among 9 Abilities, 19 focuses, only 5 Talents but about 15 spells for mages). Plus you'll stunt on about half your successful rolls, and they're the equivalent of crits, so people should always be doing cool stuff.

[Garimeth]

Copied from a previous thread comparing 5e and 13th Age.


Glad I found this thread. I have DMed 13th Age almost exclusively for 3 years now, playing an average of 3 evenings a month. I also have DM'ed 5e, and I only use homebrew settings. Like the OP, I also am a fanatical world-builder, and obsess over having a consistent setting. I have even started novelizing my campaign and recently completed the first draft of the first of 7 books, which came in at 125k words.

I really like running 13th Age, that said, it does have flaws.

The Good:

BALANCE. This game is mathematically sharp, everybody can pretty much contribute equally.
BACKGROUNDS. Simple, intuitive, and make the player think more about their character.
FAMILIAR. All the fantasy stapels are there, and its easy to pick up.
SUPER EASY TO HOMEBREW. I have made a 13A version of all the totem barbarians, a better ranger that actually uses favored enemy as a feature not a talent, a warlock, and a completely new class called alchemist (think artificer). These were all super easy to make and balance.
MULTICLASSING: its basically old school dualclassing, but it is simple, its elegant, and its balanced.



The Weird:

ICON RELATIONSHIPS: I use them for character and world building, not any of the other stuff. Implementing them the way the book suggests is hard for me, my campaigns react to the players, not random dice rolling telling me who is involved in the adventure - I already knew that when I came up with the villains and supporting cast. HOWEVER I also had to homebrew new talents to make up for my not using them the way the book suggested.
FLEXIBLE ATTACKS: Like another poster, some of my players hate them, some like them. As a player in the system I don't mind them, but I can see why some people would not like it. I just have those people play a refluffed ranger or rogue. You are essentially choosing what resource minigame you like when you select a class, and then we fluff or reskin it to fit your idea of your character. Damage dice is based on your class, not your weapon. Also fighters and bards get "on demand" stuff that does not require the randomness as well as their flexible attacks.
NOT ALOT OF RULES FOR SKILS: I like this. It makes my players think for themselves, and encourages them to think outside the box. some people want things a little more direct, they would not like backgrounds - my groups loves them.
WHAT IS A DAY REALLY? This is my group's, but not me as DM, biggest gripe. A "day" is 3-4 adventures, no time limit. This is part of how the game maintains its balance. I implemented a houserule to give my players some benefit to a good night's rest, but honestly the balance is way better treated like this than with long rests like in 5e. It can be a little strange for PCs to get used to though.



The Bad:

NOT ALOT OF WRITTEN CRUNCH: This is my first of two complaints. If you do not like homebrew, or reskinning and fluffing stuff, then the player options can be very limited. My group has had the success we have because I help guide people to classes they will find mechanically interesting, and help them use them to make the PC they want to play,and then we tell awesome stories together. This ties into the next complaint.
OVERLY SIMPLE CLASSES: Now this applies, intentionally, to mostly barbarian, paladin, and ranger. Some people would argue fighter, but I will tell those people that the number 2 villain in my ongoing campaign is a by the book fighter that has absolutely wrecked my PCs, and escaped, every time they encounter him. Fighter is fine. But the three classes I listed above, are overly simple. There is a reason I did significant homebrew on two of those three classes, and paladin is on my list to write some new talents for. That being said - this is a very minor complaint, and its only resulted in one person wanting to reroll a character - which happens in other systems too.


I am a huge advocate for 13th Age, and an unapologetic fanboy. 5e is also very good, but man 13th Age is SO EASY to GM! I spend very little time balancing encounters, and I get to spend that time coming up with cool plots, locations, and game stuff instead. Also the way the system is set up with icons and backgrounds, I don't even have to ask payers for backstories anymore, they just figure them out on their own while making their characters! You also only need one book to get started, and they have a OGL pdf for free.

ONE BIG CAVEAT!!!!
13th Age intentionally builds in limited resurrection magic, limited teleportation access, and more importantly, almost NO mind control magic. This can drastically affect the setting that you are writing, and may sway you one way or the other. For my setting this was fine and even desirable, for others it may not be. Nobody is using dominate person on the king, or suggestion on the giant with the exception of some very rare things. I like this for my game, and I like the resurrection and teleportation restrictions even more - it makes it actually fantastic when they occur. YMMV.

[Scots Dragon]

I'd personally lean more towards Fantasy AGE since it's the current system supporting Blue Rose, and that itself makes it worth checking out.

[Avonar]

Copied from a previous thread comparing 5e and 13th Age.

Having DM'd a 13th Campaign for the past 18 months I think I agree with you on almost all counts, the one exception being the Written Crunch. I like how the game is based around reskinning things, it all plays into the One Unique Thing idea of characters rather than them having a somewhat cookie-cutter feeling.

The other thing to mention which had a much bigger impact than I expected is that each character have their One Unique Thing. The book encourages people to come up with something for their character which is truly unique. This has led to the most interesting characters I have seen across any system.

In short, 13th Age is built from 4th edition but is designed to allow players freedom.

Also, I have never enjoyed running a system more. The whole system is designed to build a campaign around your characters.

[Garimeth]

Having DM'd a 13th Campaign for the past 18 months I think I agree with you on almost all counts, the one exception being the Written Crunch. I like how the game is based around reskinning things, it all plays into the One Unique Thing idea of characters rather than them having a somewhat cookie-cutter feeling.

The other thing to mention which had a much bigger impact than I expected is that each character have their One Unique Thing. The book encourages people to come up with something for their character which is truly unique. This has led to the most interesting characters I have seen across any system.

In short, 13th Age is built from 4th edition but is designed to allow players freedom.

Also, I have never enjoyed running a system more. The whole system is designed to build a campaign around your characters.

I actually agree with you even on the Written Crunch thing, for me it's a bit of a feature because I love homebrewing, but I threw it in there because a lot of people don't.

Also, I can't believe that I didn't list the OUT when I made that original post. Definitely have seen some cool use out of that.

[gtroc]

How would you compare 13th Age to PFRPG?
I prefer it hands down over Pathfinder. Pathfinder still carries many legacy issues from D&D 3x, where 13th age(to my mind) fixes the problems and adds to the game in new and interesting ways. Your mileage may vary.

How flexible is 13th Age, and by this I mean - is it possible to create both an adventurous and funny campaing (a classical "D&D" type of campaign) and a gritty, more dark campaign (this would be the case of settings like Warhammer Fantasy).
The game is very amenable to multiple tones in play, that would be depend on your table more that the system. It baseline tone is fairly light high fantasy. If you are looking for easy death and all that, 13th Age doesn't really do that. Player characters are pretty durable and surprisingly capable.

What do you think about the character customization options?
I love the options available in the game. Each level you are making decisions on how your chracter will play. I am always going back and forth on the options and thinking, "I wonder what it would be like if I had taken this option rather than this other option." I had players come to me all the time wanting to get all the options rather than just one. To me this means that each option is cool and fun.

There is no gunpowder weapons in the 13th Age rulebook (and Fantasy AGE has those) but are there any in the splatbooks?
13th Age doesn't really do weapons the way some other games do. Each class as a list of damages for various weapons that they use. This means that a great sword has different stats depending on what class is using it. It lists the damages and penalties by class, so for guns it would be really easy to stat out. Just go to that class and find the appropriate class of weapon for the gun and use those stats. Weapons in 13th Age are descriptions and permission to take certain types of actions. If that makes sense.

[Garimeth]

The game is very amenable to multiple tones in play, that would be depend on your table more that the system. It baseline tone is fairly light high fantasy. If you are looking for easy death and all that, 13th Age doesn't really do that. Player characters are pretty durable and surprisingly capable.

I agree with everything in your post, but I wanted to share some house rules I use to make it grittier.

- Max level is 8, that means that a single classed caster will only get one level 9 spell, if they use an incremental advance, and multi-classed characters never will.

- KOs carry a max HP reduction, a stacking penalty to defenses and you can only be revived from a KO once per battle. Additionally KOs leave some variety of lasting injury such as scars etc. I let the player decide that one though.