Choosing a system

[KyleG]

With a play history only in dnd5e and a shaky desire to run a more homebrew campaign its been suggested on other posts that some of my thoughts might be better suited to other systems.
Now there are plenty out there so what im after is really three things. 1. What does each bring that 5e doesn't? What does it lose? And how easy is it to learn as the dm, and for potential players. Ive had suggestions for pathfinder, numenera, savage worlds, call of cathulu, and even 3.5. So where do I go for what experience?

[Nifft]

5e in specific, and D&D in general, is easier to learn because these games leverage cliches which have become part of popular culture.

Classes are concept-containers which shield a player from needing to learn the whole game system at once (... except Druid); if done well, they allow a player to correctly choose a character-long method and destination before learning the details of the system.


That said, you could choose a simpler system which isn't full of so many moving parts, and then learning the whole game system at once is less daunting. Then your players might not need the silos provided by a class system.

I'll pitch one such system: Dresden Files RPG, a FATE system game.

1. What does each bring that 5e doesn't? What does it lose? And how easy is it to learn as the dm, and for potential players.

Things it Brings:
- Session Zero (city building session, a thing which you can learn and import into every future game in every system)
- Freeform Magic (yet still with limits and not totally bonkers)
- Fate Points (meta-game currency which makes muggle players able to participate and shape the world even though their characters lack magic)
- Stress & Consequences (an interesting damage system which is more suitable to how many people play than HP)

What it Costs:
- Not much of a monster manual, but that's mostly fine because you don't need to murder-hobo for XP.
- The templates can help players get their footing, but there's a lot more blank space on the map which you (plural) will need to fill in.
- Your group needs to be on the same page, or get on the same page, regarding how difficult various things are.
- Aspects are framed sloppily, and their examples of "best" aspects are vague at best and divisive at worst. Your group REALLY needs to be on the same page regarding what every Aspect means, so simple language is significantly more useful than evocative phrases or meaningless words -- at least until you've gotten some experience with them, stick to simpler phrasing which communicates better.
- The dice are weird. This isn't necessarily a big problem but it's there. There are online rollers which support FATE dice, too.

How Hard Is It:
- Wasn't hard for me to learn, wasn't hard for my group to play.

[Batcathat]

I've been getting into Mutants & Masterminds (3rd edition) lately and although it feels like I'm recommending it in every other thread I'm gonna go ahead and do it again.

Stuff it brings:

• Lots of freedom in character creation. If you can think of a super power or ability, there's almost certainly a way to accomplish it.
• Unlike D&D, pretty much any character concept has the potential to be as powerful as any other. (That doesn't mean that all characters are balanced against each other, just that the difference is between individuals or individual powers rather than classes).
• Although intended for playing superheroes, it can be used for a lot of different genres. Right now I'm a player in a urban fantasy game and the GM of a cyberpunk murder mystery game, both using M&M.
• While it comes with some "canon" settings, it can work with a lot of different ones, established or homebrewed (though I suppose this could also be a negative, since it's not really "integrated" into any one setting).

Stuff it loses:

• The flip side of the freedom in character and power creation is that it allows for some very broken and unbalanced characters. It's not that big of a problem if you trust your players not to go out of their way to break something but if you don't, you'll probably have to ban some stuff.
• Although characters typically start out a lot more powerful than a D&D character, they don't really grow in power as much. If your players are used to going from zero to superhero, they might be disappointed.

Learning difficulty: I'd say it's fairly easy to learn, at least if people are used to rules-heavy games like D&D.

Also, now I really want to play the Dresden Files RPG. I love the books and I skimmed through the rules years ago (I love the concept of it being written and commented on by in-universe characters) but I've never gotten around to buying or playing it.

[Anonymouswizard]

I have two recommendations.

Unknown Armies
Specifically 3e here.

What it brings:

• An evocative setting with a fun magic system/
• Simple d% mechanics that bring most concepts to relative power parity,
• An integrated session 0 which uses character creation to drive setting creation.
• Did I mention the incredibly fun and flavourful magick system?
• Sanity mechanics baaked into the core of the game and characters. Go mad, or grow detached.

What it loses:

• Raw power fantasy, both in ability to absorb damage and the versatility of individual mages.
• It's a modern setting, which comes with additional complications.
• It basically lives and dies on the setting and magick, either they hook you in or they don't.

Personal preference:

• Combat is fast and dead;y, the core rulebook has always opened the combat rules with 'six ways to avoid a fight'. Separated into it's own section because it really is a matter of taste.

If you're good at coming up with simple stats off the top of your head ('Builder, roll 65% for construction, 30% otherwise) it's incredibly easy to run. The key issues will be the setting-related ones, either it'll click or it won't.

Advanced Fighting Fantasy/Stellar adventures

What it brings:

• Similar archetyping to D&D but in a simpler rules system.
• Only uses d6.
• Open point-based character creation.
• Science fiction variant that works and is cross compatible.
• Random armour ratings! That is, you roll a die every time you take damage to see how effective your armour was at stopping it.

What it loses:

• Raw power fantasy, both in ability to absorb damage and the versatility of individual mages.
• Stats are reduced to SKILL (do mundane stuff), STAMINA (your hit points), LUCK (your saving throw), and MAGIC (your ability to do magical stuff). Most meaningful differentiation is with Special Skills and Talents.

On ease of DMing, I'd say as easy as D&D. The main issue is the need to cross reference Out of the Pit and the main rulebook for premade monsters.

[LibraryOgre]

With a play history only in dnd5e and a shaky desire to run a more homebrew campaign its been suggested on other posts that some of my thoughts might be better suited to other systems.
Now there are plenty out there so what im after is really three things. 1. What does each bring that 5e doesn't? What does it lose? And how easy is it to learn as the dm, and for potential players. Ive had suggestions for pathfinder, numenera, savage worlds, call of cathulu, and even 3.5. So where do I go for what experience?

I'll tackle Savage Worlds.

Gains
1) Savage Worlds has a more freeform character generation. Without classes, you can make more or less what you want, within the parameters of the system. Want to be a "gish"? Make sure you have an Arcane Background and a decent Fighting skill. Pick a couple powers that support Gishiness (Boost Ability, Smite, and Protection make you a magically armored, magically skilled, magically hard-hitting fighter type), and make sure some of your advances go to fighting Edges, and you're a pretty good gish without much issue.

2) The system is pretty easy to hack without going too far overboard. I've made conversions of The Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, Shadowrun, Star Wars, Dragonlance... all of which are pretty true to the source material, while staying in the Savage Worlds ruleset. Mass Effect and Shadowrun, especially, make use of the powers system in two or more different ways... Mass Effect has both Biotics and tech-based powers, while Shadowrun has Physical Adepts who acquire permanent powers, Cyberware and Bioware which function similarly to PhysAds, but from a different viewpoint, Mages, Sorcerers, and Conjurers who use pretty much the standard system (though Conjurers and Mages can use powers-by-proxy through summoned allies), and Deckers whose powers are programs that are limited to the Matrix. They've even created an official, and pretty solid, Rifts conversion, and are working on a Pathfinder version, which should tell you a lot about the flexibility of the system.

3) Shallower power curve. A D&D character goes from zero to hero (really, from about 5 to hero, but it doesn't rhyme). A high level D&D character has pretty much nothing to fear from a standard goblin or a regular lion. A Savage Worlds character? Those remain somewhat dangerous foes even as you level. Furthermore, the Wild Die that "Wildcards" (i.e. important characters, including NPCs) get means that, while Wildcards are a cut above mooks, it doesn't prevent mooks from being dangerous.

4) I find the system very easy to summarize, and a lot of the rules can be condensed down to a single page.

Losses
1) Character power is a lot lower, which can be a disadvantage to some.

2) The game can require a lot of hacking, especially in the absence of some of the Companions that were out for previous editions. The Fantasy Companion helped flesh out fantasy games, but hasn't been updated to the newest edition, yet.

3) Different games can feel kind of samey. If I'm playing Savage Star Wars and switch over to Savage Elder Scrolls, there's going to be less unique mechanics and flavor than when you completely switch games... even if you went from, say, 3.x to Star Wars Revised or Saga (which are all based on the D20 engine)

---

Since it's a favorite of mine, let's also talk Hackmaster

Gains
1) Realism/Verisimiltude. Hackmaster tries very hard to make a lot of things relatively realistic. Obviously, the inclusion of magic means that the game worlds are not exactly like ours, but things like trade, climate, and such are mostly included.

2) No advancing metaplot or RSEs. The Kingdoms of Kalamar setting has remained largely unchanged since it was first published. While the book listed is for 4th edition, 90% of it is systemless; it has much the same world information included in the original boxed set, which was statted for 2nd edition AD&D. This means older material, even for other editions, remains useful.

3) Crunchy combat. Second-by-second combat/the "count up". If I play Hackmaster for a while, I miss this SO MUCH when I go back to another system. There are no rounds. Surprise is entirely down to your initiative roll. Faster weapons have some advantage, but so do longer weapons. Shields are useful and viable choices, especially against missiles. Armor is damage reduction, but heavier armors can have drawbacks. Battle Axes have a couple clear advantages over swords, but swords are often better weapons. Different combat styles (weapon and shield, one weapon, two weapon offensive, two weapon defensive, two-handed weapon) all have their advantages. Penetrating dice, Threshold of Pain, and Trauma saves can WILDLY swing combat, which helps to make lower-power enemies viable combatants without having to have "Well, this whole troop of goblins are inexplicably equal to level 10 fighters" problem of D&D.


Losses
1) Character power. Again, while characters can grow in power, they're generally about half as powerful as an AD&D character of the same level. A level 2 character does not get a new HD, but rather gets to reroll the old one.

2) Learning Curve. It can take a while to get used to some of the systems. I, personally, miss them when I'm playing other games, but they can take a while to learn.

3) Some more regressive attitudes. Orcs are evil. In-game racism is baked into a lot of things. Most of the sexism got weeded out after the early drafts (I recall that an early version had women taking more penalties to Looks as they got older than men did, for example), but they've held pretty firmly to the "evil humanoids are evil" thing, to my chagrin. OTOH, I've also found these relatively easy to edit out.

[Nifft]

Also, now I really want to play the Dresden Files RPG. I love the books and I skimmed through the rules years ago (I love the concept of it being written and commented on by in-universe characters) but I've never gotten around to buying or playing it.

In addition to being a solid set of game mechanics, the books are very well written, both as in-universe character commentary and as a technical documents (which have the requisite written accuracy but don't read like technical documents).

Even if you never play, it's a good read. (But do play it. Especially the City Creation session.)

I'll tackle Savage Worlds.

My experience playing that was that it's a solid transitional game if you have some minis-painting wargame-players whom you want to convert into RPG players.

The movement and cover rules are very tightly integrated to the battle-mat, and the non-map portions of the game felt too much like generic d20 tropes: Edges = Feats, right down to Alertness = +2 Perception Notice; Bennies = Action Points / Force Points / Fate Points; Attributes are quite close to D&D Ability Scores; Skills are Skills; and so on.

Regarding addon rulesets, we found a problem with scale -- as an example, we saw significant disagreement in scale between the same ability in the core book and an addon, the one I remember best is Rocket Jetpack either being able to move you across the map seven times in one action, or not being able to move you even 1/4 of the map. This was important because we were chasing a Nazis zeppelin, and Rocket Jetpack Guy (not his real name) wanted to punch it.

The card system was innovative and I really liked how that part of the game worked.

Maybe we were the wrong target audience -- Savage Worlds felt like a gateway drug for wargammers, and we were already deep enough into RPGs to be chasing the dragon.

[KyleG]

Lots of useful info so thanks. With the exception of 3 of the 6 of us are 5e exclusive players and only for the last 2yrs having come into the hobby late in life and as we have toss around ideas one of the key draw cards for them all is the simplicity. But I think that what I find breaks things for me is
1. a very rapid ingame timeline moving you from zero to hero.
2. And leveling in leaps instead of smoothly.

As to the world iv been looking to create, it feels more western/steampunk (for those familiar think mistborn both eras) but im not sure guns have a place as you lose so much as melee becomes a secondary choice. I think fantasy races remain an important part of the escapism.

[Yora]

I would say you're looking for something that isn't class and level based. Climbing this power ladder where you become bigger and badder at regular intervals really is a D&D thing, that you find mostly in games that started more or less as D&D reskins.
Other games tend more towards systems where you add new abilities to your character instead of regularly increasing all the numbers on your stat block.

Not really an expert on the other generic fantasy games that are out there, though. So nothing specific comes to mind immediately.

[Anonymouswizard]

Lots of useful info so thanks. With the exception of 3 of the 6 of us are 5e exclusive players and only for the last 2yrs having come into the hobby late in life and as we have toss around ideas one of the key draw cards for them all is the simplicity. But I think that what I find breaks things for me is
1. a very rapid ingame timeline moving you from zero to hero.
2. And leveling in leaps instead of smoothly.

So a flatter power curve, and more gradual advancement? You probably want something point buy, although there are a few classed and/or levelled systems I've seen that'll do it, generally by only giving one or two benefits per level up.

As to the world iv been looking to create, it feels more western/steampunk (for those familiar think mistborn both eras) but im not sure guns have a place as you lose so much as melee becomes a secondary choice. I think fantasy races remain an important part of the escapism.

Have you considered Mistborn: the Adventure Game? It's a narrativist system basked on the books with relatively smooth advancement, although highly skilled Allomancers and Feruchemists could probably pull off some insane stunts.

Alternatively I think you might like Deadlands, especially the simpler Savage Worlds version. Which, in my experience, is a pain to find these days (although I wanted Hell on Earth). but is basically a Fantastical Wild West game. No nonhuman races, but it makes up for that with eight different flavours of magic user (who, in Classic, have very different rules).

[Pex]

GURPS

Pro: Players can create any character they want. The only limit is the point value the DM wants the game set at and genre used. For example, a fantasy game won't have superhero powers. 100 points is for typical characters, but the DM is free to allow more.

Con: Players need system mastery, not to find loopholes of Kewl Combos but just to know what to do. You need to spend points for everything.

Personal opinion Major Con: Characters do not advance. As you play the game characters get points to improve a skill or two, but your character is basically the same in Session 20 as it was in Session 10 as it was in Session 1. You cannot gain roleplaying benefits. For example, at character creation you can pay to get a Patron, a powerful NPC individual or organization who can aid you from time to time. However, if during game play the party befriends/helps a power NPC individual or organization, you may never call upon that person or organization for help in the future. You have to pay for it with points, and you won't get enough points to pay for it, maybe after a real world year of playing and you never, ever improve your character in any other way. Conversely, at character creation you may earn extra points for character creation by having an Enemy, a powerful NPC individual or organization who hates you and will make your character's life difficult from time to time. However, if during game play a Villain develops, such as the BBEG, you do not gain extra points to improve your character. Another example, you need to pay points for your character to be wealthy. However, if during game play the party gets a treasure trove after defeating the dragon or followed a pirate treasure map, you may not use the gold until and unless you pay for being wealthy in character points, which you'll never get enough of unless you spend a real world year playing and never improve your character in any other way.

[LibraryOgre]

As to the world iv been looking to create, it feels more western/steampunk (for those familiar think mistborn both eras) but im not sure guns have a place as you lose so much as melee becomes a secondary choice. I think fantasy races remain an important part of the escapism.

Alternatively I think you might like Deadlands, especially the simpler Savage Worlds version. Which, in my experience, is a pain to find these days (although I wanted Hell on Earth). but is basically a Fantastical Wild West game. No nonhuman races, but it makes up for that with eight different flavours of magic user (who, in Classic, have very different rules).

Deadlands is definitely something to look into, yes. You could pretty easily slip in fantasy races, as there's lots available in Savage Worlds core.

[kyoryu]

5e in specific, and D&D in general, is easier to learn because these games leverage cliches which have become part of popular culture.

Classes are concept-containers which shield a player from needing to learn the whole game system at once (... except Druid); if done well, they allow a player to correctly choose a character-long method and destination before learning the details of the system.


That said, you could choose a simpler system which isn't full of so many moving parts, and then learning the whole game system at once is less daunting. Then your players might not need the silos provided by a class system.

I'll pitch one such system: Dresden Files RPG, a FATE system game.

I mean, I'd argue for Fate in general. And it so happens that someone that wrote one of the most commonly-cited "how-to" guides for Fate is a regular here.

[Grod_The_Giant]

- Not much of a monster manual, but that's mostly fine because you don't need to murder-hobo for XP.

There is, actually-- Volume Two: Our World is two hundred plus pages of NPC stats, including basically every character ever named in the books.

Also, now I really want to play the Dresden Files RPG. I love the books and I skimmed through the rules years ago (I love the concept of it being written and commented on by in-universe characters) but I've never gotten around to buying or playing it.

The books are gorgeous, and the game as a whole does a better job of adapting the feel and themes of the books than almost anything I've seen. (Including "wizards > supernatural creatures > mortals" unfortunately-- the less magic you take the more Fate points you get to start with, but it doesn't really balance out that well in my experience.) The actual mechanics are a bit clunky in places because it's 2e Fate and there are a lot of unnecessary bits bolted onto the basic engine.

[Nifft]

I mean, I'd argue for Fate in general. And it so happens that someone that wrote one of the most commonly-cited "how-to" guides for Fate is a regular here.

We had tried another FATE product, and it was so disappointing we almost blacklisted the system.

FATE is an uneven space.

DFRPG was great enough to redeem FATE for us.

There is, actually-- Volume Two: Our World is two hundred plus pages of NPC stats, including basically every character ever named in the books.

That book is both the DMG and the MM, with advice about organizations and running the game and 20 pages of sample city write-up. Furthermore, a large portion of the MM pages are dedicated to character recaps, not monster stats -- and that's because more than half of the "monsters" statted out are NPCs, and some of those were allies.

What I remember is looking through it with the intent of finding a beast to throw at the PCs, and the MM portion seemed more inspirational than informative.

I guess if you wanted the exact monsters from the books, then it'd be a solid resource, except even then some monsters are sketched rather than statted -- e.g. dragons -- but what I wanted was monsters similar to the books but not necessarily identical, like ... I dunno, a smaller shrubbery chlorofiend, or a potted petunia preditor.

I ended up using humans with flower crowns, which were actually mind-controlling wild-fae parasites, because I could fudge that quickly from what I had been given.

As an entertaining read, it's a great book; as a source of inspiration and examples, it's fine; but as a reference tool for finding monsters to throw at my group, it was insufficient.

[Batcathat]

Personal opinion Major Con: Characters do not advance. As you play the game characters get points to improve a skill or two, but your character is basically the same in Session 20 as it was in Session 10 as it was in Session 1. You cannot gain roleplaying benefits. For example, at character creation you can pay to get a Patron, a powerful NPC individual or organization who can aid you from time to time. However, if during game play the party befriends/helps a power NPC individual or organization, you may never call upon that person or organization for help in the future. You have to pay for it with points, and you won't get enough points to pay for it, maybe after a real world year of playing and you never, ever improve your character in any other way. Conversely, at character creation you may earn extra points for character creation by having an Enemy, a powerful NPC individual or organization who hates you and will make your character's life difficult from time to time. However, if during game play a Villain develops, such as the BBEG, you do not gain extra points to improve your character. Another example, you need to pay points for your character to be wealthy. However, if during game play the party gets a treasure trove after defeating the dragon or followed a pirate treasure map, you may not use the gold until and unless you pay for being wealthy in character points, which you'll never get enough of unless you spend a real world year playing and never improve your character in any other way.

I'm not very familiar with GURPS so maybe this is a dumb question, but couldn't you solve this issue by giving characters more points and/or lowering the prices for various improvements?

[clash]

So I created a tabletop rpg called Vanguards and villains. It was born out of a desire to give a smoother leveling curve to 5e. The basic gameplay mechanics are the same so it would probably be easy to adopt. It does away with classes and instead has linear feature sets that are easy to track.

Skills and combat have separate progression and at its core of you complete a combat encounter you gain a combat point to become marginally better at combat abs if you compete a skill based encounter you gain a skill point to become marginally better at skills. If you spend most of the game in combat you become very good at it. If you instead are in a political intrigue campaign you become very good at skills.

Its been in some level of playtest for over 4 years now and 3 entire campaigns have been run start to finish including an epic level one. Let me know if it's something you're interested in.

[Democratus]

For a simple system with fairly slow advancement, an OSR game like Old School Essentials is pretty fun.

It has a very easy-to-follow system for just about everything: dungeon/wilderness exploration, combat, NPC interaction, etc.

I would also second the vote for DeadLands. Though I suggest using the original system. It has amazingly flavorful mechanics based on playing poker with cards.

If you don't want classes, GURPS or Fantasy HERO are just fine. Being point-buy systems, though, Pex is right about needing system mastery to get the most from it.

[Willie the Duck]

I'm not very familiar with GURPS so maybe this is a dumb question, but couldn't you solve this issue by giving characters more points and/or lowering the prices for various improvements?

You could. And, to be clear, when Pex says "you may not use the gold until and unless you pay for being wealthy in character points," that's omitting the 'well of course you can, because your GM isn't insane and will let you spend the money you just earned.' However, in both instances, you are in effect doing an end-run around one of the basic premises/systems around which the game is based (so why are you using it in the first place?). Either wealth should cost points in which case you shouldn't be able to spend acquired gold, or your should be able to spend acquired gold and that person who spent their points to start off rich looks foolish now. This specific example isn't the best, because IIRC there actually are rules (at least in 3e, I never got into 4e) about benefits acquired through gameplay. However, it highlights how the game treats the point system as a really big deal and really important... right until it doesn't.

Edit: I have it in my head to do a pro/con for Runequest, but it looks like I won't have time today. I do not mind if someone else wants to grab it.

[kyoryu]

We had tried another FATE product, and it was so disappointing we almost blacklisted the system.

FATE is an uneven space.

DFRPG was great enough to redeem FATE for us.

DFRPG is great. I think DFA is even better.

The EH stuff in general is great. The biggest issue with Fate seems to be in showing people how the system actually runs. Check out my link in the kickstarter thread for my opinion. Or just read http://fate-srd.com/odds-ends/book-hanz (or grab the pdf from the EH site)

Some of the non-EH stuff (I'm looking at you, Strands of Fate) doesn't seem to really get the Fate system very well at all.

[kyoryu]

I'm not very familiar with GURPS so maybe this is a dumb question, but couldn't you solve this issue by giving characters more points and/or lowering the prices for various improvements?

Yes.

There's still a bit of an issue in that higher skill levels cost a lot more than earlier skill levels - 1/2 or 1 point to start, but 4 or 8 points eventually. But at those higher levels a single skill point starts to have bigger advantages due to the bell curve so it all works out.

It's also totally valid to let people have the advantage they get and just require players to spend all of their CP into buying it off before they can improve in other ways.

But advancement changes a lot if you're giving 8-10 CP/session or 2. It's still not D&D-esque zero-to-godling, but very few games are outside of D&D and its direct descendents.

[Anonymouswizard]

But advancement changes a lot if you're giving 8-10 CP/session or 2. It's still not D&D-esque zero-to-godling, but very few games are outside of D&D and its direct descendents.

The only ones I can think of are Exalted and Scion, and they both suffer from massive cost inflation by the upper tiers. Oh, and Anima and possibly other Rolemaster games, bit I believe they start you a bit further up beyond 'zero' relatively speaking.

Although I suppose in Scion you literally begin as godlings, even if in practice you're mortals with a few nice tricks.

[Pex]

I'm not very familiar with GURPS so maybe this is a dumb question, but couldn't you solve this issue by giving characters more points and/or lowering the prices for various improvements?

The game recommends you give 1 to 3 points per session. Patrons cost 10 or more points depending on how "powerful" and the frequency you can use them. Wealth can also be 10, 20, 30 points. It's been a while; I don't know the exact numbers. The point is it takes a long time to save up to buy an Advantage. Doable if you're patient, but it takes a real world long time to do and you're not improvong your skills. Sure, a DM can always give 10 points if he wants. I'm going by what the game recommends.

GURPS characters are stagnant. Play a character for a real world year you'll hardly notice a difference from when you first started. That may not be a bother for some people. They might be more interested in Solving The Plots, Progressing The Story, and/or enjoy the Glorified Chess of winning combat. I like that stuff too, but I want my character to improve significantly as the game progresses. Class levels is a method but not a requirement. Character point based systems can do it if they give enough points at a reasonable ratio of game sessions played. GURPS is not one of them. Fantasy Flight Star Wars is a point based system that does provide a reasonable improvement rate, though I'm not a fan of that game for other reasons.

[Anonymouswizard]

I would also second the vote for DeadLands. Though I suggest using the original system. It has amazingly flavorful mechanics based on playing poker with cards.

It's also, IIRC, quite complex, which is why Reloaded might be better than Classic. Although honestly Reloaded from what I've seen could have done with keeping more of the poker mechanics in, partiocularly for Huckster casting (although now you need a separate deck to the one for initiative).

The game recommends you give 1 to 3 points per session. Patrons cost 10 or more points depending on how "powerful" and the frequency you can use them. Wealth can also be 10, 20, 30 points. It's been a while; I don't know the exact numbers. The point is it takes a long time to save up to buy an Advantage. Doable if you're patient, but it takes a real world long time to do and you're not improvong your skills. Sure, a DM can always give 10 points if he wants. I'm going by what the game recomments.

GURPS characters are stagnant. Play a character for a real world year you'll hardly notice a difference from when you first started. That may not be a bother for some people. They might be more interested in Solving The Plots, Progressing The Story, and/or enjoy the Glorified Chess of winning combat.. I like that stuff too, but I want my character to improve significantly as the game progresses. Class levels is a method but not a requirement. Character point based systems can do it if they give enough points at a reasonable ratio of game sessions played. GURPS is not one of them. Fantasy Flight Star Wars is a point based system that does provide a reasonable improvement rate, though I'm not fan of that game for other reasons.

My experience with GURPS was closer to 3-6 points a session, but I get what you're saying. Although I do believe that monetary rewards were meant to be separate to CP awards, and at the very least I remember being able to drop a CP on raw cash if you desparately needed it now instead of waiting for a Wealth Level increase.That said, I'm starting to think HERO might be the better system.

Also,I really like games with relatively flat power curves, but then again I'm an Unknown Armies fan where the transition from 'street' to 'cosmic' starting stats in 2e took years going by the book, be prepared to spend several more if you want to match any of the significant NPCs like The Freak. That said I do like a good D&D style Zero to Hero, I just don't enjoy how D&D does it (partially because anybody but casters desn't seem to meaningfully grow in versatility).

[Duff]

Call of Cthulu

Simple system - Pick an archetype (kinda like a class) tweak it and you're ready to go
When you want to do a thing, roll percentile and generally that's your result (not a lot of modifiers - But that means your GM will need to make decisions about what success looks like and any difficulty modifiers.

The "default" settings are better for short campaigns or single adventures because the game is rough on a character. If you want an ongoing game, expect high turnover and make peace with that or dial it back a bit for sanity loss and injury

[Democratus]

GURPS characters are stagnant. Play a character for a real world year you'll hardly notice a difference from when you first started. That may not be a bother for some people. They might be more interested in Solving The Plots, Progressing The Story, and/or enjoy the Glorified Chess of winning combat. I like that stuff too, but I want my character to improve significantly as the game progresses. Class levels is a method but not a requirement. Character point based systems can do it if they give enough points at a reasonable ratio of game sessions played. GURPS is not one of them. Fantasy Flight Star Wars is a point based system that does provide a reasonable improvement rate, though I'm not a fan of that game for other reasons.

Highly dependent on the kind of character you are playing.

Last time I played Fantasy GURPS I played a wizard. And by the end of the first campaign I had twice as many spells as when I started. GURPS Magic allows relatively cheap purchasing of new spells and powers.

If, instead, you are trying to make your axe-wielding barbarian significantly stronger or better at axe wielding it can be a long road. Gaining new skills is much cheaper than improving skills that are already good.

[Anonymouswizard]

Highly dependent on the kind of character you are playing.

Last time I played Fantasy GURPS I played a wizard. And by the end of the first campaign I had twice as many spells as when I started. GURPS Magic allows relatively cheap purchasing of new spells and powers.

If, instead, you are trying to make your axe-wielding barbarian significantly stronger or better at axe wielding it can be a long road. Gaining new skills is much cheaper than improving skills that are already good.

At a certain point you just start bumping IQ and/or DX instead of your actual skills due to the flat 20CP/point cost. Generally after character creation, even with only 100CP it can be very easy to end up with it costing over 20CP to increase all your important skills by one.

Oh, and Talents. I believe they cost 1CP/level for every skill they apply to and raide all their related skills by one per level. Everybody should have a Talent.

[kyoryu]

Highly dependent on the kind of character you are playing.

Last time I played Fantasy GURPS I played a wizard. And by the end of the first campaign I had twice as many spells as when I started. GURPS Magic allows relatively cheap purchasing of new spells and powers.

If, instead, you are trying to make your axe-wielding barbarian significantly stronger or better at axe wielding it can be a long road. Gaining new skills is much cheaper than improving skills that are already good.

Yeah, if you build a dedicated mage right, (Magery 3, sufficient IQ), it is ridiculously cheap to add new spells at a highly competent level.

[Eldan]

In addition to being a solid set of game mechanics, the books are very well written, both as in-universe character commentary and as a technical documents (which have the requisite written accuracy but don't read like technical documents).

Even if you never play, it's a good read. (But do play it. Especially the City Creation session.)

I really wasn't a fan of (the book for) Dresden Files Accelerated, though. I thought the book was horribly organized, even if the system is great. For example, I think it's a horrible idea to start with a long chapter of NPC statblocks, before you explain what those statblocks mean. They should be at the end. I also felt like I had to repeatedly switch back and forth between several chapters until I understood who had to roll when what.

(I'm also strongly considering homebrewing some things from other FATE versions into it, like separate stress tracks for social-mental-physical stress. I like those. And I've already allowed pretty much everyone to take stunts from other mantles if they fit the character.)

[Nifft]

I really wasn't a fan of (the book for) Dresden Files Accelerated, though. I thought the book was horribly organized, even if the system is great. For example, I think it's a horrible idea to start with a long chapter of NPC statblocks, before you explain what those statblocks mean. They should be at the end. I also felt like I had to repeatedly switch back and forth between several chapters until I understood who had to roll when what.

(I'm also strongly considering homebrewing some things from other FATE versions into it, like separate stress tracks for social-mental-physical stress. I like those. And I've already allowed pretty much everyone to take stunts from other mantles if they fit the character.)

I've never read the Accelerated version.

The only version I can recommend from experience is the Your Story (book 1) / Our World (book 2) from Evil Hat.

That version does also discuss separate Stress tracks, and recommends a Mental Stress track if you're planning to go into dark places like the Dresden Files books do regarding mental manipulation.

[Gnoman]

GURPS

Pro: Players can create any character they want. The only limit is the point value the DM wants the game set at and genre used. For example, a fantasy game won't have superhero powers. 100 points is for typical characters, but the DM is free to allow more.

Con: Players need system mastery, not to find loopholes of Kewl Combos but just to know what to do. You need to spend points for everything.

Personal opinion Major Con: Characters do not advance. As you play the game characters get points to improve a skill or two, but your character is basically the same in Session 20 as it was in Session 10 as it was in Session 1. You cannot gain roleplaying benefits. For example, at character creation you can pay to get a Patron, a powerful NPC individual or organization who can aid you from time to time. However, if during game play the party befriends/helps a power NPC individual or organization, you may never call upon that person or organization for help in the future. You have to pay for it with points, and you won't get enough points to pay for it, maybe after a real world year of playing and you never, ever improve your character in any other way. Conversely, at character creation you may earn extra points for character creation by having an Enemy, a powerful NPC individual or organization who hates you and will make your character's life difficult from time to time. However, if during game play a Villain develops, such as the BBEG, you do not gain extra points to improve your character. Another example, you need to pay points for your character to be wealthy. However, if during game play the party gets a treasure trove after defeating the dragon or followed a pirate treasure map, you may not use the gold until and unless you pay for being wealthy in character points, which you'll never get enough of unless you spend a real world year playing and never improve your character in any other way.

The first example about alliance groups is fair, though most GMs will simply give you the necessary Advantage and arrange some way to pay it off.

The second is dead wrong. You do not need to spend CP to use monetary or item rewards. Th wealth level advantage is for determining starting money only, trading away some CP at character creation to get a financial leg up (or reducing your cash flow to gain more CP). If you find a dragon hoade or other treasure you spend it no matter what you have spent points on.