The Better Roleplaying Game

[JellyPooga]

Don't you just hate that "epiphany moment" that happens every now and then, when you realise that a game you've known and loved for years, a game you've played through epic campaigns and gutsy shorts, a game you've spent countless hours arguing over rules interpretations and houserules, a game who your most beloved characters are designed for, their character sheets stained with unremembered snacks, the HP box worn through from endless erasing, the margins filled with pointless doodles from when you were waiting for your next turn, a game which you lovingly spent months of spare time crafting your homebrew setting for, no, not a mere setting a living, breathing world in which to set your campaigns and adventures, a game you've played through thick and thin, edition wars, errata and endless publications...a game that you realise, well, that it just isn't as good as another system that no-one else plays.

For me the game I've known and loved is D&D. I've played it for almost 30 years, from Basic all the way through to 5ed and I've loved it (except 4ed...that was awful); dozens of campaigns and adventures, hundreds of characters imagined (if not played), vast swathes of my bank-balance and spare time sunk into it (no regrets on that front, but it's true)...but for me it's just not as good a system as The One Ring.

D&D is buggy; it's full of these weird little quirks and foibles, some things just don't make sense and somehow, the rules manage to simultaneously be excruciatingly exact in places and confusingly ambiguous in others. It's clunky, slow, restrictive, nonsensical and...well it's really a bad system. But it works. Don't get me wrong, for all its faults D&D works. It's fun, it's daft, you don't have to take it too seriously, it's epic, it's full of content to inspire you so you don't have to do any heavy thinking; it's all there on a plate and that's great.

The One Ring, though; sure it's got its faults. I won't deny that. I can't deny that it's got some weird quirks, nor that the rules are precise in some places and ambiguous in others, just like any edition of D&D you care to mention. I can't claim that it's not that restrictive either; it's a game tailored specifically for one style of roleplaying and that's heroic adventure in the Lord of the Rings setting. It doesn't really allow for "evil" characters, for example (well, that's not strictly true; it does evil player characters remarkably well in fact, but at face value it's an easy assumption to make of the game).

But on the other hand, The One Ring is a triumph in game design; it's rules are elegant and easy to use, characters are both easy to create and largely unrestricted (within the confines of the setting, of course), the rules take into account things that make sense without having to book-keep all the minutiae, players have agency to affect not only their own characters, but the world and setting as it develops and it's focused on the narrative and inclusive roleplaying instead of the nitty-gritty of exclusive simulationism.

Yet for all the D&D I've played, I've only ever played in one campaign of The One Ring because no-one else plays it.

So...what's your "Better Game" that you never get to play?

[2D8HP]

(King Arthur) Pendragon has topped my list for over three decades as my "want to try" RPG.

[JellyPooga]

(King Arthur) Pendragon has topped my list for over three decades as my "want to try" RPG.

Ooh, Pendragon is a game I've heard good things about, but never known anything about it. Like I hear it has a good "character scions" system going on (or something), where you play through generations of characters, but I've got no idea what the implementation, or even the point, of that system is like.

[Morty]

To me, it's Riddle of Steel and its spiritual successor, Song of Swords. The former is really obscure and has a pretty specific appeal. The latter is still unfinished and very much an indie game, even though it doesn't have the high bar and frankly elitist attitude RoS did.

[Lord Raziere]

.....It feels like the "all of them except DnD" rpg, even though I know its not really true and I have gotten to try some or a couple of them.

If I had to be specific:
Godbound (does everything Exalted does with less rules, more elegance in a far easier to understand package, yet I've never played it)
Fantasy Craft (does everything I want in DnD: mana based casting, things like orcs playable, better attempt at balance, but if I had a nickel every time someone wanted to play it, I'd be broke)
OVA Rpg (the light elegant rpg for playing anime, yet no one wants to play this, because the only people I find are freeformers for playing anime)

.......yeah, I basically have this in spades. There are so many rpgs that I wish I could try and play if only people would be willing.

[Knaight]

I don't have that moment. Finding games better than D&D is routine - I'd say somewhere between one in five and one in three RPGs I've looked at meet that standard, and while that does leave a lot of dross that still involves finding a superior game with some frequency. However, I got out early, and I've aimed for variety. I also generally GM, which means that I generally get to pick systems, and while there are some I'd love to play that I'm unlikely to ever get a chance to (e.g. Burning Wheel), and doing this prevents ever developing an excessive level of attachment to any one system. Is there comparative dross that I've played that could have been replaced by better games? Sure. That's a non-issue though; no worse than the garbage books I read and the garbage movies I watched.

[2D8HP]

I don't have that moment. Finding games better than D&D is routine.....

I've gotten to play lot's of other RPG's besides the '70's D&D I started with, and the 5e D&D I play now, but nothing I've actually gotten to play has been as fun (Runequest and Traveller came closest).
As a GM I found Call of Cthullu easier than all but the simplest versions of D&D, but not as interesting to witness.
Other games that I could find a seat at the table for just had settings that I didn't like (Champions, Cyberpunk, and Vampire), and the games that have looked good to try (Pendragon, Castlr Falkenstein, etc) no one else wanted to try.
Even the most popular version of D&D today (3.x) seems way too "four color" super hero-ish to me, and far too often people I can actually play with want to start at higher levels or otherwise "house rule" more powerful PC's than what I like, making 5e feel even more like 3e, which I don't enjoy.

[Lacco]

To me, it's Riddle of Steel and its spiritual successor, Song of Swords. The former is really obscure and has a pretty specific appeal. The latter is still unfinished and very much an indie game, even though it doesn't have the high bar and frankly elitist attitude RoS did.

RoS has two spiritual successors - Blade of the Iron Throne (almost completely devoted to Conan-esque sword&sorcery) and Song of Swords. And my "better game" would be both of these. I'm waiting for Song of Swords to get finalized and want to try it out.

Been GMing Shadowrun most of my GM career, and never could understand why people played anything else. Except when I tried RoS. And then FATE. Must say that every time I try something, even the bad games, my games (I still run mostly RoS and Shadowrun) improve - because I usually take something new from each system/game.

OP: I can completely understand your feelings.

[Maglubiyet]

Yeah, I've always known that D&D wasn't a better game, just a more popular one.

IMO, Fate is everything a RPG should be. It's hard to find players, though, especially ones who can overcome their years of indoctrination into the D&D mindset.

Savage Worlds is another immensely fun game. It strikes a nice balance between crunch and ease of play. Set up and go.

[Max_Killjoy]

Yeah, I've always known that D&D wasn't a better game, just a more popular one.

IMO, Fate is everything a RPG should be. It's hard to find players, though, especially ones who can overcome their years of indoctrination into the D&D mindset.

Savage Worlds is another immensely fun game. It strikes a nice balance between crunch and ease of play. Set up and go.

Cause, you know, no one could find FATE not to their liking, unless they were an "indoctrinated" D&Der... No one could dislike D&D, and dislike FATE, or whatever other game is being discussed at the moment....


(I need to save a link to this for the next time someone tells me that I'm imagining the "_____ vs D&D" false dichotomy being pushed.)

[Maglubiyet]

Cause, you know, no one could find FATE not to their liking, unless they were an "indoctrinated" D&Der... No one could dislike D&D, and dislike FATE, or whatever other game is being discussed at the moment....

Not sure I made any such statement or intimation. Are you taking this personally for some reason?

[Max_Killjoy]

Yes, take offense even when no one is attacking you. Good, GOOD...I can feel your anger.

Yeesh.

Ahem...

IMO, Fate is everything a RPG should be. It's hard to find players, though, especially ones who can overcome their years of indoctrination into the D&D mindset.

"This new game is so good, it's a revelation, and anyone who doesn't like it is just still stuck in old and bad ways of thinking."

Are you really that tone deaf? You outright state that people who don't like what you like are "indoctrinated", and then when someone says "wait a minute", you make some snide meme comment that amounts to "U mad, bro?" with a trollface on the end...

E: I'm sick of this "our new way of gaming is what RPGs are supposed to be, it's our David vs D&D's Goliath, and the entire gaming world can only be with us or against us" nonsense, the assertion that the entire gaming world is divided between those who've escaped bad ways of gaming for Best New Thing Ever, and those who are still "indoctrinated" in the "old bad ways". I'm sick of the assumption that anyone who isn't into {game being pushed} is a D&D partisan.

[Maglubiyet]

"This new game is so good, it's a revelation, and anyone who doesn't like it is just still stuck in old and bad ways of thinking."

Are you really that tone deaf? You outright state that people who don't like what you like are "indoctrinated", and then when someone says "wait a minute", you make some snide meme comment that amounts to "U mad, bro?" with a trollface on the end...

By "indoctrinated" I mean they have a certain way of approaching gaming that's hard to change. You can deny that it exists, but I see it all the time.

I'm not making any value judgement on what people like or don't like, but you seem bound and determined to be offended by this.

E: I'm sick of this "our new way of gaming is what RPGs are supposed to be, it's our David vs D&D's Goliath, and the entire gaming world can only be with us or against us" nonsense, the assertion that the entire gaming world is divided between those who've escaped bad ways of gaming for Best New Thing Ever, and those who are still "indoctrinated" in the "old bad ways". I'm sick of the assumption that anyone who isn't into {game being pushed} is a D&D partisan.

Well, you can be sick of it, but it's an imagined slight. I said "IN MY OPINION, Fate is everything a RPG should be". You are, of course, free to have your own opinion.

[JellyPooga]

Cause, you know, no one could find FATE not to their liking, unless they were an "indoctrinated" D&Der... No one could dislike D&D, and dislike FATE, or whatever other game is being discussed at the moment....


(I need to save a link to this for the next time someone tells me that I'm imagining the "_____ vs D&D" false dichotomy being pushed.)

Steady on. This is a thread for talking about things we like and would enjoy playing more of. This isn't supposed to be "system wars" (though I appreciate that the OP could come across that way). I like D&D, as I'm sure many of us do. I also like many other games, FATE included. It's also true that systems work in very different ways and I think a lot of the reason some systems are as unpopular as they might be is because they are different to D&D; a game many people are familiar with. Calling it "indoctrination" is a tad on the negative side, but it's an entirely accurate word to use to describe the mindset of someone whose only roleplaying experience is with D&D.

[Morty]

RoS has two spiritual successors - Blade of the Iron Throne (almost completely devoted to Conan-esque sword&sorcery) and Song of Swords. And my "better game" would be both of these. I'm waiting for Song of Swords to get finalized and want to try it out.

Interesting. I think Blade of the Iron Throne rings a bell, but it's a vague recollection. Does it use the same dice-pool mechanic RoS did?

[2D8HP]

Ooh, Pendragon is a game I've heard good things about, but never known anything about it. .

Well here's a pdf sample of some of the 5th edition rules (the latest I have, a 5.1 is out now).

Note: Like the 1st and 3rd, the 5th edition of Pendragon has rules for Knight (including women Knights), Lady, and Squire PC's, but only the 4th edition had rules for PC Spell Casters, though IIRC correctly the 1st and 3rd editions had the possibility of some "Lady" PC's being able to brew a magic potion (I never saw a "second edition" and I don't think it was ever published).

But really if you want to play a Spell-caster Pendragon probably isn't for you, I would look into Ars Magica instead.

FATE.

Fate.

FATE

Speaking of FATE, I own the "Core" rulebook, but rules alone doesn't motivate me.
I want a setting (and my days of "mix and matching" systems is in the past).

Some of my favorite setting genre's are:

1) Swords and Sorcery
2) Swashbuckling
3) Arthurian
4) Gaslamp Fantasy
5) Planetary Romance
6) Steampunk
7) Raygun Gothic
8) Viking

My least favorite genres are:

1) Modern-day anything
2) Dystopian Near Future
3) Dystopian Far Future

Any FATE setting books I'd like?

Also, except for rules based on TSR D&D, and Chaosium's BRP system (Runequest and it's descendents) which were imprinted on my mind decades ago, I prefer rules to be very light.

For example I'm pretty sure that I would enjoy playing low level Pathfinder, but the rules just seem too complex, as do the GURPS rules despite my loving many of the "Worldbooks".

[JellyPooga]

GURPS has a bad rep for being rules heavy, but it doesn't have to be. It has a lot of rules, but 95% of them are entirely optional. I think you might enjoy playing GURPS run by a "rules-lite" GM if you like lighter rules, 2D8HP.

FATE is a great game to "session zero" with no preconceived ideas of the game you're going to play or even who's going to be the GM! You might not like having no setting to pore over before a game, but being able to get a group together and all sit down and create a setting and style you'll all enjoy is great. It's not unique to FATE, per se but I find the worldbuilding rules in FATE Core to be an excellent guideline on how to go about it.

(P.S. Thanks for the link!)

[Max_Killjoy]

Steady on. This is a thread for talking about things we like and would enjoy playing more of. This isn't supposed to be "system wars" (though I appreciate that the OP could come across that way).

Well, it's not your OP that gave a "system wars" vibe.

I like D&D, as I'm sure many of us do. I also like many other games, FATE included. It's also true that systems work in very different ways and I think a lot of the reason some systems are as unpopular as they might be is because they are different to D&D; a game many people are familiar with. Calling it "indoctrination" is a tad on the negative side, but it's an entirely accurate word to use to describe the mindset of someone whose only roleplaying experience is with D&D.

(Final comment on the matter.)

Whether that's true or not... what is not accurate is the implication (yet again) that people who aren't fans of Game X are all D&D holdouts, dupes, or hardliners -- it's a classic false dichotomy.

As much of a shock as it might come to some of Game X's ardent proponents, it is possible to both dislike D&D, and also have concluded that Game X is at the same time not a viable alternative for fulfilling one's personal system preferences.

[kyoryu]

I try to look at games not as being "better" or "worse", but rather... better suited for particular types of tasks. Like I love old-school D&D - but it's suited and designed around a playstyle that's fairly uncommon these days. I love Fate and GURPS, but I'd use them for very different things.

Cause, you know, no one could find FATE not to their liking, unless they were an "indoctrinated" D&Der... No one could dislike D&D, and dislike FATE, or whatever other game is being discussed at the moment....

There's lots of reasons someone might not like Fate. I don't think you would like it, for instance, for very specific reasons.

But I've also encountered a reasonable amount of resistance against Fate (and a number of other games) just because they don't work the way D&D does. It's a real thing.

I mean "does Fate work for long-term play" comes up quite frequently, because Fate doesn't really have the kind of personal advancement progression that many players think is the cornerstone of long-term play. That's a pure D&D assumption.

[Airk]

I too wanted to make the "All of them except D&D" joke, but lets face it - there are a lot of bad non-D&D games out there.

I'd like to play more Tenra Bansho Zero, myself. :P

GURPS has a bad rep for being rules heavy, but it doesn't have to be. It has a lot of rules, but 95% of them are entirely optional. I think you might enjoy playing GURPS run by a "rules-lite" GM if you like lighter rules, 2D8HP.

I don't really buy into the whole "don't use all of them" thing; I mean, yeah, you're unlikely to want to use the space flight rules in your Iron Age fantasy game, but there's still an enormous amount of culling that needs to be done by the GM to try to maybe get the rules set they want out of GURPS, and then the players need to learn that set of options. But then, I'm generally a non-fan of "generic" systems.

[kyoryu]

I don't really buy into the whole "don't use all of them" thing; I mean, yeah, you're unlikely to want to use the space flight rules in your Iron Age fantasy game, but there's still an enormous amount of culling that needs to be done by the GM to try to maybe get the rules set they want out of GURPS, and then the players need to learn that set of options. But then, I'm generally a non-fan of "generic" systems.

The big one is "do you use Advanced Combat?" Not doing so gets rid of a huge amount of rules bulk.

[Hawkstar]

Ironclaw and the Cardinal system it uses are my favorite. The way it handles skills as a combination of small dice pools and scaling die is great.

[JellyPooga]

The big one is "do you use Advanced Combat?" Not doing so gets rid of a huge amount of rules bulk.

Most, if not all, of the Campaigns book can be happily ignored, along with about a third of the Skills and Advantages for any given game, for being setting inappropriate as Airk mentions. Any more than that is up to you.

I've run GURPS games using only the basic combat rules and eyeballing difficulty mods and it works just fine; in a lot of ways better than attaching all the bells and whistles IMO because gameplay is that much faster. Once you wrap your head around 12 is average, 15 is pretty amazing, 18+ is practically godlike, the rest of it is a cinch!

@Hawkstar: I've never heard of them. Care to elaborate?

[King539]

Pathfinder.

[icefractal]

IMO, Fate is everything a RPG should be. It's hard to find players, though, especially ones who can overcome their years of indoctrination into the D&D mindset.

"Sushi is everything a food should be. It's hard to find diners, though, especially ones who can overcome their years of indoctrination into the Lasagna mindset."

By which I mean that I play both D&D and Fate, and they do different things and provide different kinds of fun. Neither could be used to replace the other except in a really half-assed way. Fate is very mechanically elegant though, no argument there.

On topic - Hero system maybe?
Heavier than I want to deal with sometimes, particularly combat-wise, but its so clean and solid to make characters in. When I read a thread like "How do I make [character] in [system that doesn't really support it]?" and it turns out the answer is taking a very specific combination of abilities, refluffing most of them, ignoring some parts that don't make sense, and having to leave some things out - I'm thinking to myself "You could make that character in Hero, no difficulty at all."

But the amount of crunchy frightens people away, and admittedly even when running smoothly it's by no means a light system, so finding players can be difficult.

[Lacco]

Interesting. I think Blade of the Iron Throne rings a bell, but it's a vague recollection. Does it use the same dice-pool mechanic RoS did?

From what I gathered, the main difference is they are using d12 dice pools instead of d10s, attributes were reworked, skills no longer represent target numbers but dice pools (capped by relevant attribute, but if you have skill, the roll becomes easier than if you don't), magic system is workable (and quite nice, actually - I've ported it into my RoS games and trouble have yet to surface) and the priority table has been reworked (and there are lots of options how to modify the character).

Combat is largely the same (deadly, fast, tactical). And there is a great chapter about how to do the "Sword & Sorcery" atmosphere in games.

Still, haven't tested it on live players

[2D8HP]

...a viable alternative for fulfilling one's personal system preferences.

Max_Killjoy, IIRC you liked the 5th edition of HERO, but thought it didn't work as well for lower powered adventurers.
Have you since found any system you like better?

....But I've also encountered a reasonable amount of resistance against Fate (and a number of other games) just because they don't work the way D&D does. It's a real thing...

I'm pretty upfront that familiarity makes a big difference:

Me: What's all this about 5e D&D being simpler? It's not simpler than old D&D!

Reasonable Person: 1e AD&D was simpler?

Me: Well yes because.... um.... I already know it!

[Morty]

The sorcery in Riddle of Steel didn't really give me the impression of being usable in an actual game. Song of Swords doesn't have those rules ready yet. BoIS' magic, by the looks of it, is of the "super powerful but super dangerous" variety, but I assume it's not as out there as the RoS's system.

[Max_Killjoy]

Max_Killjoy, IIRC you liked the 5th edition of HERO, but thought it didn't work as well for lower powered adventurers.
Have you since found any system you like better?

No, sadly.

It's looking increasingly like I'm going to have to do something from scratch.

Ironclaw and the Cardinal system it uses are my favorite. The way it handles skills as a combination of small dice pools and scaling die is great.

Looks like it's 1dX for attribute and 1dX for skill, with both rated directly as a die (1d4 to 1d12), against a target number of 3 in most "tests".

[kyoryu]

No, sadly.

It's looking increasingly like I'm going to have to do something from scratch.

Have you tried some iteration of BRP?