Help me find a non-OGL system

[PhoenixPhyre]

I don't get it. What's the point of this?

Because WotC is threatening to retroactively deauthorize the OGL. Which puts all of those existing systems that used it on shaky legal ground.

And since the whole reason I'm thinking of changing is to avoid anything WotC-contaminated (because they've been bad bad people)...

[Jorren]

Thanks!

That'll give me a starting point. And at ~$30, that fits my "cheap" criteria.

The BRP gold book is also currently on sale for 0.99.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...ic-Roleplaying

[Local_Jerk]

Because WotC is threatening to retroactively deauthorize the OGL. Which puts all of those existing systems that used it on shaky legal ground.

And since the whole reason I'm thinking of changing is to avoid anything WotC-contaminated (because they've been bad bad people)...

No, dude, come on, they can't actually do this retroactively. They can maybe change it for future ones but they can't force what was published under the old OGL to change in any way. And since all of the PF1 ruleset is online already, they can't do anything about tthat.

[PhoenixPhyre]

No, dude, come on, they can't actually do this retroactively. They can maybe change it for future ones but they can't force what was published under the old OGL to change in any way. And since all of the PF1 ruleset is online already, they can't do anything about tthat.

There's also the crucial fact that I find both PF1 and PF2 to not meet any of my needs. To put it bluntly...I dislike both of them. So Paizo is a hard no on lots of grounds.

And I care a lot about legality --I don't want to be on uncertain legal ground. And want systems that will still be supported in the future, which depends on the license.

[Anonymouswizard]

Eh, it might be a petty reason to try something new, but it's still trying something new. Honestly when D&D went from 'practical monopoly' to 'practical monopoly' an attempt at something messed up was bound to happen.

Unfortunately a lot of the stuff I really like is dice pools of one form or another. Because if it wasn't for that I'd definitely be recommending Scion, Cortex Prime, and Burning Wheel (where's my Impressive Hat* trait...).

* Your hat is so mighty as to have its own reputation. It's higher than yours

[Telok]

* Your hat is so mighty as to have its own reputation. It's higher than yours

I'd hat that.

[NichG]

I am actually noodling through a custom system...but that requires effort. And effort is hard. There's a reason I've more or less stayed "stock" (core system at least) on D&D 5e--I add lots of homebrew content, but very few actual houserules.

If you have a very specific metaphysics you want, I almost think it'd be less work to bolt on a fairly generic dice resolution system and then basically build up from there with something like 'things are only mechanics if the metaphysics needs them to be'... Even better though if you have some concrete ideas of for example what abstractions you want versus what things you want to be very granular, in terms of deciding what atomic actions there are or aren't - that way you don't have to worry about things like importing a list of magic powers of which half you have to throw out...

So for example, I might imagine a system/metaphysics like the following:

Spoiler

Show

- You want classes, so lets make that one part metaphysics and one part higher degree of realism about how people improve. There's some kind of set of gifts/blessings/paths that were put in place in the setting, and walking along those paths makes things easier than they should naturally be. If there's a skill or other competency, you can learn it without following a path, but it basically takes 10 or 100 times longer - mechanically, your character can get a few extra skill points or proficiencies in exchange for starting older, at a rate of like +1 year to get the first rank 'for free' outside of class, +2 years for the second rank, etc of a skill. And all forms of immortality basically shut off this means of advancement or have as an upper limit something like 50 years worth of 'manual growth at best'. Furthermore, acts in accordance with the paths are one of the major ways for people to access a mana/qi-like principle that suffuses the world, a sort of alignment with natural order, and even if someone studies things manually like that, the mana won't recognize them if they're not on one of the blessed paths or aren't a type of creature with an existing natural relationship with the mana (which itself, if its going to be advanced, happens separately). Doing things that move the world also moves a person along the path. They demonstrate their importance to the pattern of the world, and in turn gain access to more of that mana as well as become catapulted forward in certain narrow competencies.

- You want fairly bounded power, but still fantasy. So along those lines, make 'casting spells' not a thing, but rather whenever anyone does something within the scope of their path (e.g. uses a class skill for something), they may infuse that act with mana. If they naturally exceed the difficulty of what they're attempting, the excess is sort of 'free mana' that can be used to add magical flourishes to how the act manifests; they can also draw from their available capacity to either bump up the roll and become able to succeed either more consistently or at more difficult things, or to pay for those flourishes. A character is limited in how much of their own mana they can draw during a single event like this, based on their progress along their Path. The design conceit is 'early on rolls determine success or failure; later on, rolls transition to determining cost and extent should the character choose to succeed'. Rolls are 3d6 + attribute + skill rank, and one never rolls unless there is a consequence for failure, but if you need to calculate what someone can consistently achieve or know the value of a risk-free roll for mana purposes, treat the 3d6 as an 8 - characters in this setting essentially can push their limits in the face of risk. This also means that a 12 would be considered the upper limit for reasonable difficulty of a daily task for a professional - requiring ten years of training for someone of average attribute.

- Attributes come in the form of three pairs: an 'acting' component and a 'being' component, associated with Force, Quickness, and Will. The Active attribute is used to modify skills/rolls associated with that approach in which the character is trying to do things. The Passive attribute determines the difficulty of such things being done against the character or things which the character does without intending - perceiving the environment for example is an act of Passive Quickness. Attributes for characters start on a scale from -3 to 3 and sum to zero. This may be modified by racial/etc modifiers. When someone first steps on a Path, they gain +3 points to distribute to the Attributes most strongly associated with that particular Path. Otherwise, attributes do not advance in any way over the life of a character. Should an Attribute ever be reduced to -6, the character has been fundamentally debilitated in some fashion - paralyzed, unconscious, too weak to move, etc. Should an Attribute ever be reduced to -10 or lower, the character lacks the ability to sustain their own life - each minute they must roll 3d6+attribute (however low that attribute is) and achieve at least a total score of -6 or they die - this can be bolstered with mana, if the attribute is a Path Attribute for them. Attributes act as the 'hit points' of this system - more on that later.

- Things classified as 'Violent Acts' against a character must succeed against 8+corresponding passive attribute. Furthermore, characters can bolster this against individual attacks or effects by spending mana. Any violent act has both a 'damage rating' as well as a 'full consequence' which limits what that violent act can at maximum achieve. A character who fails to defend against a violent act still has a choice - accept the 'full consequence', or take the act's damage rating as damage to their defending passive attribute. Most of the time, attacks with deadly weapons have the 'full consequence' of killing the target and so taking the hit would be suicidal, but there can be cases where a character would for one reason or another be immune to the specific thing that the act of violence is trying to achieve. For example, someone might attempt to Flourish to add a language dependent mind-controlling effect to a persuasive speech to command a crowd to do a particular thing, but someone in the audience does not speak that language. They would get to know they have the choice to either take the full consequence of an unknown mental effect, or take attribute damage to avoid it - but if they took the full consequence, it would just play out as confusion rather than them following the command. However if they took the attribute damage, they'd still take the effect. The specific term 'Violent Acts' refers only those abilities or effects which in some way remove autonomy from the target, by taking them out of action, constraining or restraining them, forcing them to act a certain way, or forcibly changing their physical, mental, or spiritual nature.

- The 'damage rating' of Violent Acts is not modified by attributes - its purely based on the weapon or effect the character is trying to bring about. There are forms of 'armor' that act as DR against such damage, but generally this is never higher than 3.

- There are also effects classified as 'Complicating Acts' - these are things which make certain things easier or harder to do, more or less effective, etc, but do not overtly prevent actions. Complicating Acts do not have to succeed against a character's defenses, nor do they deal attribute damage or have the ability to be reactively 'bought off' with attribute damage or mana. Singing a song of distraction that increases the difficulty of other actions for example would be a 'Complicating Act' - the effect 'just happens' regardless of the defenses or willpower of others.

(The design conceit between Violent Acts and Complicating Acts is that by default, proactive modification of the situation should be favored over things which maintain the status quo, and things which maintain the ability of people to act but change the circumstances of their actions should be favored over things which outright take someone out of the scene, otherwise 'taking someone out' is almost always better than other choices. The design conceit behind Attributes as HP is that this keeps things like being successfully stabbed by a dagger in the throat very lethal even at high advancement, but high advancement characters have more different ways of not letting the situation get to that point).

- Skills are .... Every step along a character's Path advances the Path Skills by +1. Every Step additionally gives the character a single skill point to invest, but only for non-Path skills. Attacking, dodging, etc should involve skills, but rather than a single 'Attack' skill there should be skills that cover broad approaches like 'Brute Force' or 'Deftness' that can apply both to in-combat actions as well as out-of-combat actions. In general, the difficulty of hitting targets does not increase much as the game goes on, and is not easily increased for player characters as well. Barring exceptional circumstances, the skill cap for characters is 12

- Flourishes are quasi-magical effects resulting from hyper-competent use of a skill or the investment of mana, and can somewhat be improvised. General rule of thumb is that adding a purely visual or auditory effect is 1 mana, adding a +1 minor penalty or bonus that lasts for a scene or modifying the damage of an effect is 2 mana (+4 mana for +2, +6 mana more for +3, etc), removing some precondition for the effect is around 3 mana (fighting even when your hands should be occupied, moving through snow as if wearing snowshoes even if you lack them, etc), creating an effect above and beyond what normally could be possible but within the same scope is around 4 mana (compelling someone to tell the truth with a persuasive argument, constructing a building in a tenth of the normal time, moving so quickly you leave an after-image that an enemy might mistake for real), effects that broaden scope but still in a local way like attacking everyone surrounding you with a single blow or reading every book on a bookshelf are 5 mana, and things that act non-locally or permanently like cursing someone by their name from halfway across the city would be 10+ mana and most likely would need to be ritualized and specifically worked out with the GM in advance.

- The first Step of a Path gives a character a mana pool of size 6, and each subsequent Step grows this by 3. Mana refreshes equal to the character's Step every hour. A character can normally only put as much of their own mana into a single roll equal to their Step in their Path.

- To use more mana than this, a character can enact a ritual - this allows them to add again their normal mana limit for each additional hour they spend on the act. They do not regenerate mana during this time, and must perform the entirety of the ritual without interruption. If multiple people participate in a ritual, each additional person can add at most 1 mana per hour. The context of the ritual must be appropriate to the magnitude of the skill use - if you're dumping 20 mana into something, its as if you performed a feat worthy of a difficulty around 30. Failing to match the context of a ritual with its magnitude may cap the actual mana that the ritual is capable of absorbing. Furthermore, rituals are serious enough business that they are very dangerous to improvise - specifically, a skill roll is always required for a ritual and on failure there is some kind of backlash proportional in effect to what the ritual was trying to achieve. The difficulty of this roll is based on the degree of understanding of the creator of the ritual and is not known in advance unless the ritual is a pre-existing one, though extensive research and experimentation with the sub-components of a ritual can over the course of weeks or months give someone a good idea of the current difficulty, or even reduce the difficulty as the person's understanding of the phenomenon grows. Rough rule of thumb, someone saying 'I want to raise the dead!' without understanding anything about souls, life, death, time, etc might end up with an effect that costs 20 mana, but a ritual with a hidden difficulty of 50 - meaning odds are they're going to have to dump a lot more mana in than they thought. That same person, having themselves experienced dying and returning, might get that difficulty down to 30. If they practiced casting the components of the ritual one by one in isolation for a few weeks they might get the idea that 'the difficulty is at least 20 and probably higher'.

- Every Even Step of a Path gives the character a unique special ability associated with the Path. These are things that modify something innate about how the character interacts with the fiction of the game, rather than abilities which must be done via skill use or mana expenditure. Examples would be that the character moves 50% further in the same time, that they gain innate armor to an Attribute, that they may counter-attack in response to being attacked, that they may 'formalize' a certain number of Flourishes to reduce their mana cost, etc.

- In general, characters do not normally advance beyond ten Steps along the Path. Characters who have reached this point and who still do things worthy of advancement can still gain expanded mana pool, channeling capacity, and bonus non-Path skill ranks, but they do not gain any more unique abilities or automatic advancement of Path skills.

- 'Enchanted' items actually cover a broad range of categories - items created by ritual (which encode a specific Flourish in that item's function, so that it is always added for free when that item is used in that way) are relatively common but tend to have about 10x the mana cost of the Flourish to produce and so are somewhat limited. There are 'naturally aligned items' in the world that simply have some effect via the flow of natural mana through them and are not inherently created by artifice. Those naturally aligned items can be further used as part of other artifice in a non-mana-using fashion of course - a crystal that is supernaturally cold can be used to make an ice box without needing to enchant a refrigeration flourish. There are also relics - things which played enough of a part in some momentous or historical event that even being objects, the mana of the world recognizes them and places them upon a Path. Such things are almost characters in their own right, capable of advancement or even intentional action. There are also items made by forcibly binding creatures of mana into physical form, which are hard to tell apart from relics but are inherently unstable - the creature might break free if the object were to be damaged or subject to the right effects.

Okay that got a bit longer than I intended, but anyhow :)

[KorvinStarmast]

There's also the crucial fact that I find both PF1 and PF2 to not meet any of my needs. To put it bluntly...I dislike both of them. So Paizo is a hard no on lots of grounds.

And I care a lot about legality --I don't want to be on uncertain legal ground. And want systems that will still be supported in the future, which depends on the license.

In a completly selfish move, as I play in your world, I have reviewed WWN (I have pdf and hardcover from dtrpg) and find it both appealing and a bit needful of careful consideration.

Would you be interested in trying out our next campaign in WWN format? I am game, and I will be very happy to be of assistance in helping you try to lay out the transition plan.
Kids are out of the house, I have a little time to offer as a resource. There's a lot to like about the system, from my first read through.

[PhoenixPhyre]

In a completly selfish move, as I play in your world, I have reviewed WWN (I have pdf and hardcover from dtrpg) and find it both appealing and a bit needful of careful consideration.

Would you be interested in trying out our next campaign in WWN format? I am game, and I will be very happy to be of assistance in helping you try to lay out the transition plan.
Kids are out of the house, I have a little time to offer as a resource. There's a lot to like about the system, from my first read through.

My big issue is that the foundry system seems to be not compatible yet... It's definitely on my list.

[animorte]

In a completly selfish move, as I play in your world, I have reviewed WWN (I have pdf and hardcover from dtrpg) and find it both appealing and a bit needful of careful consideration.

You ad I were discussing this with the apparently established Willie_the_Duck.

[Tanarii]

Personally I'm inclined to wait to see what Kobold Press comes up with. Unfortunately I don't think that will meet your required timeline.

I had some good experiences with Forbidden Lands ... but it's OGL. They're reviewing now.

I've already had multiple players ask I'd be willing to come restart my campaign as Pathfinder or even BECMI. As much as BECMI is exactly what I originally wanted, I don't think they realize the first is OGL and the other outright owned.

Edit. If you haven't already, google for lists of non-OGL games.

[KorvinStarmast]

You ad I were discussing this with the apparently established Willie_the_Duck.

Yes we were, and I lamented my lack of a local group I could try it out with. There is so much to like about that system.

[Tectorman]

Gotta plug Triten here (https://www.fenrispublishing.com/triten.php). I think it fits your main criterion and some of your secondary criterion (it's points, not classes with levels).

[Psyren]

Personally I'm inclined to wait to see what Kobold Press comes up with. Unfortunately I don't think that will meet your required timeline.

I had some good experiences with Forbidden Lands ... but it's OGL. They're reviewing now.

I've already had multiple players ask I'd be willing to come restart my campaign as Pathfinder or even BECMI. As much as BECMI is exactly what I originally wanted, I don't think they realize the first is OGL and the other outright owned.

Edit. If you haven't already, google for lists of non-OGL games.

The nice thing about KP's system is that it looks like it will be open content, whatever form that ends up taking for their license (which looks as though it will be much closer to a true creative commons-type deal than the current OGL, i.e. true irrevocability/perpetuity etc.) If that ends up being the case, we'll all be able to try it out for free, develop for it without worrying about a rugpull of some kind later etc.

[Gnoman]

In the wake of the (very likely) changes to the OGL which are utterly repugnant to me personally (this is not the place to debate those changes), I'm looking to transition away from D&D 5e to something entirely non-OGL. But I'm not nearly as familiar with other systems as I'd like.

Hard Requirements
* Non-OGL. This excludes anything Paizo.
* Fantasy
* Simple action resolution, preferably fixed dice (no dice pools or counting successes).
* Limited, if any, meta-currencies/meta-currency economy. I want players mostly thinking in character terms, not in narrative terms.
* Either not bound to a specific setting or extremely easy to alter the setting.
* Easy to homebrew for. These last two are 80% of the fun I have as a GM.
* Easy to learn (for players).

Soft requirements
* Lower on the power scale. More like levels 1-10 of D&D 5e than like Exalted.
* Not horrifically imbalanced.
* Class/level, not build-a-bear.
* Free, or at least cheap. $30 for all the materials is fine, multiple $50 books, not so much.

Ones I've looked at and rejected already
* Savage Worlds. The crunch is all in the wrong spot for me, personally.
* FF d6. Not only does this use the OGL, but from the reviews the balance is all sorts of borked and the power level is way too high. This is a soft rejection.
* PbtA anything. I strongly hate the style.

GURPS was mentioned in passing, but you'd probably want more detail that that, so I figured I'd give it.

It completely fails two of your "nice-to-haves"

Soft requirements
* Class/level, not build-a-bear.
* Free, or at least cheap. $30 for all the materials is fine, multiple $50 books, not so much.

It is, after all, explicitly point-buy. Kind of the point-buy system. It can also be quite expensive due to the vast number of supplements. For a D&D-like experience, you'd be shelling out $55 (for the core rulebook duo), ~$80 (for either the Dungeon Fantasy Roleplaying Game, theoretically self-contained but still benefiting from having the core books, or for the series of Dungeon Fantasy supplements (something like 11 books at $5-$10 each), and $20 (for Low Tech, a critical resource if you want to timeshift out of the Generic Late Middle Ages pastiche typical of D&D). It is almost certain you'd want other supplements as well (I tend to use bits from about a dozen per game!).

With those two caveats, it is very well suited for your list of wants.

Hard Requirements
* Non-OGL. This excludes anything Paizo.
* Fantasy
* Simple action resolution, preferably fixed dice (no dice pools or counting successes).
* Limited, if any, meta-currencies/meta-currency economy. I want players mostly thinking in character terms, not in narrative terms.
* Either not bound to a specific setting or extremely easy to alter the setting.
* Easy to homebrew for. These last two are 80% of the fun I have as a GM.
* Easy to learn (for players).

1. Self-explanatory
2. There's a dedicated book for that
4. The only "meta-currency" is character points, which are the systems equivalent to XP
5. The closest it comes to a Defined Setting is a vague interdimensional thing referenced in the core books. You can quite easily mold it to whatever you want. One of the great strengths of the system is that you can drop in almost anything and have it Just Work - want your wizard to have a shotgun instead of a sword? Drop it in!
6. The greatest obstacle to "homebrewing" is that there's so much existing content either officially or fan-made. This means you're likely to be able to take something off the shelf, but more importantly you can easily find a framework.
3+7. The sole resolution method is 3d6 roll-under. You have a number on your sheet, you need to roll less than that on 3d6. Sometimes you're trying to beat your score better than another guy beats theirs. That's it. The entire complexity of the system is the enormous amount of options - once you distill that to a character sheet, it is simplicity incarnate.

Soft requirements
* Lower on the power scale. More like levels 1-10 of D&D 5e than like Exalted.
* Not horrifically imbalanced.

Without insane point expenditure (or special "we're playing a superhero game, don't use this in normal game" advantages), the power cap is on the low side. Spider-Man is probably one of the most powerful pop-culture characters that can easily be modeled.
Balance is always tricky, and you might have to make direct tweaks if a given build seems off (the one-second combat rounds mean archers need some extra help, in the opinion of at least some, for example), but compared to D&D it is a paragon.

[OACSNY97]

Anyone know the status of 13th Age?

I haven't played 13th Age, but as someone who came in on 4e and liked it, my read of 13th Age makes me think 4e but better, except for the archetype/backgrounds = skills.

If it's off OGL, does anyone who played it think it would work considering the OP's prerequisites?

Thanks

I've already had multiple players ask I'd be willing to come restart my campaign as Pathfinder or even BECMI. As much as BECMI is exactly what I originally wanted, I don't think they realize the first is OGL and the other outright owned.

Edit. If you haven't already, google for lists of non-OGL games.

[Thane of Fife]

You could look at Mazes and Minotaurs. It's designed as sort of a "What if the first RPG was inspired more by stuff like Jason and the Argonauts instead of Conan?" It's got a strong Ancient Greek feel by default, but there's a Viking variant and it's free. Meets your criteria, I think.

[Tanarii]

Anyone know the status of 13th Age?

OGL 1.0(a) it's on page 316 at the back of the book

[DeMouse]

I can highly recommend Genesys with the fantasy module from Fantasy Flight. Setting agnostic like gurps but unlike gurps isn't a nightmare to learn/balance. Kinda threads the needle between Powered by the Apocalypse style narrative systems and more traditional D&D style ones. The only problem is that it uses a unique dice system so you will need to either use conversion tables for regular dice or us a dice roller app or website that has their special dice programmed in.

[Anonymouswizard]

You could look at Mazes and Minotaurs. It's designed as sort of a "What if the first RPG was inspired more by stuff like Jason and the Argonauts instead of Conan?" It's got a strong Ancient Greek feel by default, but there's a Viking variant and it's free. Meets your criteria, I think.

It's a far out game.

But yeah, M&M is cool, particularly the 'revised' rules, and the books are fun to read even if just for the commentary of the 'history' of the game homebrewing also wouldn't be very hard, classes are absurdly simple and I believe monsters are too.

The only potential downside is that due to the licences for some of the clip art used print versions aren't a thing.

[Ashtagon]

I think he asked for an RPG, not a gamebook

But yeah, Advanced Fighting Fantasy is pretty rad. It's basically the system from the gamebooks with a bit of randomised damage and Skill being broken up a bit. Plus the space opera spinoff includes species design rules, so you can play truly bizarre things if you want.

Just note that elves get access to minor magic by default, and that minor magic gets a +6 to casting (allowing for viable mage builds with low Magic but decent Skill). A party can be pretty magical if they desire to be.

Thank you for the hyper-correction, but Fighting Fantasy (and Advanced Fighting Fantasy too) is indeed an RPG, not just a gamebook series.

[KorvinStarmast]

You could look at Mazes and Minotaurs. It's designed as sort of a "What if the first RPG was inspired more by stuff like Jason and the Argonauts instead of Conan?" It's got a strong Ancient Greek feel by default, but there's a Viking variant and it's free. Meets your criteria, I think.

I have a version I down loaded some years ago, and a folder full of the subsequent material also. It captures the mythological/fantastic well, but it doesn't feel like it has the kind of level grind to 20 that WoTC era D&D has. It meets the "level 1-10" aim well enough.
And the magic system is both simple and coherent.
Our one try with it felt a little like Original D&D but with much better understood 'how it works' in place.

It's a far out game.
But yeah, M&M is cool, particularly the 'revised' rules, and the books are fun to read even if just for the commentary of the 'history' of the game homebrewing also wouldn't be very hard, classes are absurdly simple and I believe monsters are too.

The only potential downside is that due to the liscences for some of the clip art used print versions aren't a thing.

I am pretty sure we can get around clip art if our group tries this out with Phoenix.
EDIT: forgot that it goes to level 6, or rather, level 6+.
Also: no multiclassing. (Which I find to be a good idea).

[Anonymouswizard]

I am pretty sure we can get around clip art if our group tries this out with Phoenix.
EDIT: forgot that it goes to level 6, or rather, level 6+.
Also: no multiclassing. (Which I find to be a good idea).

I mean, it says a lot if 'print versions must be DIY' is the worst thing I can say about it.#

Honestly I like the low level cap and lack of multiclassing. Low level caps are suited to short games, and M&M characters don't get new abilities as they level anyway. Well, except for casters in the 'original rules'. The level cap is really more of a guideline.

As to multiclassing, I feel it really just destroys one of the few things I like about class based systems, the inherent strong archetyping. It's why my favourite version of d20 is, wewirdly enough, Monte Cook's World of Darkness, where class is just 'what kind of monster are you' (although it could do with more noncombat feats).

[PhoenixPhyre]

I mean, it says a lot if 'print versions must be DIY' is the worst thing I can say about it.#

Honestly I like the low level cap and lack of multiclassing. Low level caps are suited to short games, and M&M characters don't get new abilities as they level anyway. Well, except for casters in the 'original rules'. The level cap is really more of a guideline.

As to multiclassing, I feel it really just destroys one of the few things I like about class based systems, the inherent strong archetyping. It's why my favourite version of d20 is, wewirdly enough, Monte Cook's World of Darkness, where class is just 'what kind of monster are you' (although it could do with more noncombat feats).

For me, personally--

* I'm agnostic about level caps. While I do like progression, I'd (in a perfect world) like less of it than exists in 5e D&D (power-scale wise). Whether that's stretched out over 10, 20, or 100 levels I don't care nearly as much about.
* I do like medium-length games. Hard to have much of a narrative at all or do much exploration in a couple sessions--the characters barely know each other. Or have unspoken (at the table) backstory together, which can cause conflicts (when different people see each other differently and don't realize they do). Having "campaigns" that run on order 1 year feels about right to me.
* Not getting new abilities means no mechanical progression. Which kinda sucks, and certainly does for many of my players.
* Multiclassing--I can totally be fine with trashing that. It's never done anything good and is kinda inherently broken. I like other forms of diversification.

@KorvinStarmast -- I'm starting to have second thoughts about WWN. Will post more when I have time.

[KorvinStarmast]

* I do like medium-length games. Hard to have much of a narrative at all or do much exploration in a couple sessions--the characters barely know each other. Or have unspoken (at the table) backstory together, which can cause conflicts (when different people see each other differently and don't realize they do). Having "campaigns" that run on order 1 year feels about right to me.
* Not getting new abilities means no mechanical progression. Which kinda sucks, and certainly does for many of my players.

Mazes and Minotaurs does have skill improvement with level. While it is bound to a setting style (ancients Greek legends and lore and the deities you'd be familiar with from the Iliad) I think that your own world's deity system could be easily folded in/dropped in place of the base one's.
But that would take a little effort.

TBH, because you won't count successes or use dice pools, you have kicked Tunnels and Trolls to the curb, and yet that has to me a very flexible skill system. On the other hand, the weapons/stats min requirements piece might be off putting in terms of violating simplicity rules.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Mazes and Minotaurs does have skill improvement with level. While it is bound to a setting style (ancients Greek legends and lore and the deities you'd be familiar with from the Iliad) I think that your own world's deity system could be easily folded in/dropped in place of the base one's.
But that would take a little effort.

TBH, because you won't count successes or use dice pools, you have kicked Tunnels and Trolls to the curb, and yet that has to me a very flexible skill system. On the other hand, the weapons/stats min requirements piece might be off putting in terms of violating simplicity rules.

I'm concerned really about the rest of my group(s) players. Not sure how I feel about the OS feel and the very "dungeon/hex crawl" focused rulesets.


----------

On a different note:

Anyone have any experience with GreenRonin's FantasyAGE system? I'm reading through it and it seems at least reasonable?

[Blackdrop]

----------

On a different note:

Anyone have any experience with GreenRonin's FantasyAGE system? I'm reading through it and it seems at least reasonable?

The only experience I have with it is that I have no experience, because I could never find anybody to play it.

[Anonymouswizard]

On a different note:

Anyone have any experience with GreenRonin's FantasyAGE system? I'm reading through it and it seems at least reasonable?

It suffers from padded sumo issues at later levels, hp increases by 3.5+CON per level until level 10, and still increases by CON every lvel thereafter. Damage increases by at best, 1 every other level, with an extra attack coming online far too late to make any difference (and no, weapon Talents do basically nothing for raw damage). Modern AGE pretty much solves this issue, simply by having two 'modes' where hp scaling is somewhat less ridiculous.

The corebook is a bit mediocre in terms of character options, with only four specialisations per class, your standard D/7D races, and magic very focused on combat. The companion adds a lot, including four new races (beastfolk, half-monsters, robots, and *urgh* humanoid dragons), a bunch of specialisations including universal ones, and a whole host of new spells (including many more noncombat ones).

Mages get very few mundane Talents. Just worth being aware of.

The system is designed around stunting, it happens about 50% of the time. Noncombat stunting in everything before MAGE is a bit lackluster. Thankfully the games are mostly cross compatible, but it is another £20 to spend on a book with a lot of redundancy (...not that I don't own three AGE games).

ETA: just remembered, Barebones Fantasty might be worth looking at. It's a small book, a d% system, and aimed at doing classic D&D style games (with spinoffs for espionage, space opera, wuxia, and urban fantasy). It's pretty much as simple as possible, with just thirteen versatile spells and a 'skills as profession' design.

[OACSNY97]

OGL 1.0(a) it's on page 316 at the back of the book

Thank you for looking that up for me. I don't have access to the 13th Age book at this time.

I guess 13th Age is not on the list of alternatives for the OP.

[Renegade Paladin]

I will point out that Wizards of the Coast might be able to withdraw their work from coverage under the current OGL, but plenty of other creators used the license not to avoid the ire of Wizards but to make their own work open, notably the D6 system by West End Games. Open doesn't necessarily mean vulnerable to the 1.1 change; they can only pull what depends on the SRD.