| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 02 Sep 2009 : 13:22:51
Before I start, let it be know that FR is clearly my favourite setting and thus D&D is my prefered system. 
But, due to distant, and a recent atomic explosion at the table during my last session, I am currently unable to organise my group to play an ongoing game. 
So I am looking for a simple, roleplay based game, that takes little time to prepare and is easy to run, so that infrequent monthly sessions can be run, without the need for lots notes and recapping.
So the question is, what other systems do you guys run? and do any of them seem to fit the bill?
Thanks in advance,
   |
| 27 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| froglegg |
Posted - 21 Oct 2009 : 00:14:43
You cant go wrong with old D&D. The red and blue Mentzer books.
John |
| The Sage |
Posted - 08 Oct 2009 : 00:34:13
quote:
Originally posted by Neil Bishop
Savage Worlds is a really good system.
Isn't there an "unofficial" GURPS adaptation floating around the internet somewhat, that's based on SAVAGE WORLDS? I was thinking about it the other day, since most of my SW books are presently locked away in storage.
|
| Fizilbert |
Posted - 07 Oct 2009 : 23:11:41
This one is completely out there, but sometimes my group and I like to play Munchkin. It's a card-based game. With a group of 6 people an average game takes a few hours to play. The first version of Munchkin (there are several versions out now) was made as a spoof of D&D, it uses monsters, items, classes, and races that would be familiar to anyone who plays D&D. |
| Neil Bishop |
Posted - 22 Sep 2009 : 12:19:27
Savage Worlds is a really good system. It's easy to learn but has enough minutiae to make it a long-term prospect for a game. DM prep is several orders of magnitude simpler than D&D3.xE. It's also really cheap: USD9.99 buys you the core book either as a PDF or hardcopy and you really only need that and maybe the Fantasy Toolkit or newly released Fantasy Companion and you're good to go. Actually, the free online fantasy supplement is pretty much all you need. It's an easy system to create new content for or for doing conversions.
I would also argue that D&D4E would be perfect for what you suggest, in large part because of a couple of the electronic utilities that make life so much simpler for the DM (monster builder, online compendium) and players (character builder). |
| Kno |
Posted - 22 Sep 2009 : 07:16:46
Only other system I like is HERO, new edition is out now. But it takes longer to develop a good character. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 17 Sep 2009 : 18:07:05
I think the dragons became a bit over the top in 2ed. I can see why people want them to be a bit more of a threat than in D&D and Ad&d 1ed., but with the increased size they also become harder to use and will have an even greater effect on the ecology than they had before. |
| Icelander |
Posted - 17 Sep 2009 : 17:04:59
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
With the hit-location rules etc. in GURPS the massive hit points of the dragon gives a somewhat wrong impression. On the other side that affects the PC's to, but as they are more or less dead if hit anyway it has less of an effect.
Indeed. Hit locations help the humanoids much more than the dragon, for the simple reason that the dragon's hamstrings, eyes or vulnerable vitals all tend to be larger than the entire body of the humanoids.
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
And if the dragons are to powerful one might as well just give them 1/3 of the hp to match the campaign feel/style.
Very true.
I use the sizes from 2e, which means that dragons literally weight hundreds of tons. If I used the 3e sizes, dragons would tend to be much smaller and therefore have fewer HPs and do less damage. The mature adult black dragon which is around 100' from snout to tail in 2e is more like 30' from snout to tail in 3e. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 17 Sep 2009 : 08:30:58
With the hit-location rules etc. in GURPS the massive hit points of the dragon gives a somewhat wrong impression. On the other side that affects the PC's to, but as they are more or less dead if hit anyway it has less of an effect.
And if the dragons are to powerful one might as well just give them 1/3 of the hp to match the campaign feel/style. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 17 Sep 2009 : 00:27:09
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
Dragons are far more terrifying than they ever were in D&D rules**
I just have to comment on this... I've never thought dragons weren't scary in D&D rules. I think that with a bit of planning and creativity, even a younger dragon can be pretty freaking scary -- especially since their mobility is such a huge advantage. I've had more than one person telling me how awesome their character is, and how a dragon isn't a challenge to them -- and they always look puzzled when I reply "It would be if I was running the dragon."
I've encountered much the same myself. Though, after a quick jaunt through the world of Krynn, using that system's rules for dragons, often results in these players considering otherwise.  |
| Icelander |
Posted - 17 Sep 2009 : 00:22:42
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Even staying in the air gives a huge advantage, and doesn't require any subtlety at all.
Well, staying in the air gives a huge advantage unless the foe has enough firepower to make it unfeasible.
Against a group of mages, staying in the air can be a good way to ensure that they can direct all of their best attack spells against you without you being able to retaliate much or at all.
The dragon in my example is a mature adult black dragon, which means that as a spellcaster, it is rather paltry compared to many human or demihuman wizards.
And let's not neglect good archers, who can certainly sting with their arrows, particularly if using enchanted ones.
But dragons afflicted with the Rage seem to favour teeth and claw, probably because they feel the need to rend flesh and break bones. As such, they are much easier to goad into an unthinking assault than at other times.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Well, that does make dragons scarier... But at the same time, it turns a dragon into an unstoppable powerhouse. If a dragon can take out your fighter in one attack, what chance does anyone else have?
The chance lies in not getting hit. When something outweights you a 1000 to 1, you don't trade blows. You stay well clear of the dragon's claws and bite.
Sure, if it lands a full force hit, you're done for, but if you consider how hard it is for a human to swat a fly, it is possible to dodge and weave a bit to avoid the attacks.
Of course, unless you have powerful magic and a solid plan, that's not likely to do much but delay your death in any case... but no one said that slaying dragons should be easy.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I like playing up to their potential to make them scary. I don't like the approach of making them something that can't be fought. Under D&D rules, it's a matter of strategy -- the PCs have to figure out how to counter the dragon's advantages. What you're describing under GURPS is making a dragon something that simply can not be fought, regardless of your strategy. I don't see any fun in that approach.
*Shrug*
Normal people, regardless of skill, usually cannot win against an opponent that oughtweights them 2 against 1. That's why there are weight classes in fighting sports and a champion in the 115-lbs. division would be in serious danger of injury when fighting 230-lbs. people.
In the absence of magic of stupendous power, humans have no chance at all in a melee with a being that outweights them by three orders of magnitude or more. That's just common sense. We don't see any dormice killing humans in a fair fight.
With magic, though, dragons can be fought. My players, under these rules, have slain six* of them in total. True, usually they had allies on their side and they certainly used powerful magic, but that still doesn't mean that it is impossible.
*The example black dragon in my last post would be a representative of the upper middling range in power of what they have fought. A huge fang dragon of about 500 HP and a red around that range would be the most powerful ones. They'll face far worse in their next session. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 16 Sep 2009 : 18:29:34
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I just have to comment on this... I've never thought dragons weren't scary in D&D rules. I think that with a bit of planning and creativity, even a younger dragon can be pretty freaking scary -- especially since their mobility is such a huge advantage. I've had more than one person telling me how awesome their character is, and how a dragon isn't a challenge to them -- and they always look puzzled when I reply "It would be if I was running the dragon."
Certainly the intellect of the dragon is one part of why they are scary, yes.
But the black and white dragons, for example, are not known for their strategy (beyond maybe ambushes for the skull drakes) and any dragon in the throes of the Rage (which is happening during my campaign) will neglect the more subtle approaches available to him.
Even staying in the air gives a huge advantage, and doesn't require any subtlety at all.
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
But just to clarify what I mean by the way the system influences the relative power levels, a powerful human fighter in D&D may have 200 HPs (dies after taking 210 or so) and inflict 1d8+12 with his attack. A dragon might have 253 HPs and inflict 2d6+13 or 2d8+13 per attack.
In GUPRS, that same powerful human fighter might have 14 HPs (dies after suffering anywhere from 28 to 84, nearer the higher number for a supremely fit warrior) and inflict 2d+6 damage per attack. The dragon has 315 HPs (dies after suffering 630 to 1,890, most likely the latter) and inflicts anywhere up to 31d+31 points of damage in one attack, enough to instantly kill our human warrior.
Well, that does make dragons scarier... But at the same time, it turns a dragon into an unstoppable powerhouse. If a dragon can take out your fighter in one attack, what chance does anyone else have?
I like playing up to their potential to make them scary. I don't like the approach of making them something that can't be fought. Under D&D rules, it's a matter of strategy -- the PCs have to figure out how to counter the dragon's advantages. What you're describing under GURPS is making a dragon something that simply can not be fought, regardless of your strategy. I don't see any fun in that approach. |
| Icelander |
Posted - 16 Sep 2009 : 18:05:56
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I just have to comment on this... I've never thought dragons weren't scary in D&D rules. I think that with a bit of planning and creativity, even a younger dragon can be pretty freaking scary -- especially since their mobility is such a huge advantage. I've had more than one person telling me how awesome their character is, and how a dragon isn't a challenge to them -- and they always look puzzled when I reply "It would be if I was running the dragon."
Certainly the intellect of the dragon is one part of why they are scary, yes.
But the black and white dragons, for example, are not known for their strategy (beyond maybe ambushes for the skull drakes) and any dragon in the throes of the Rage (which is happening during my campaign) will neglect the more subtle approaches available to him.
But just to clarify what I mean by the way the system influences the relative power levels, a powerful human fighter in D&D may have 200 HPs (dies after taking 210 or so) and inflict 1d8+12 with his attack. A dragon might have 253 HPs and inflict 2d6+13 or 2d8+13 per attack.
In GUPRS, that same powerful human fighter might have 14 HPs (dies after suffering anywhere from 28 to 84, nearer the higher number for a supremely fit warrior) and inflict 2d+6 damage per attack. The dragon has 315 HPs (dies after suffering 630 to 1,890, most likely the latter) and inflicts anywhere up to 31d+31 points of damage in one attack, enough to instantly kill our human warrior. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 16 Sep 2009 : 17:48:25
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
Dragons are far more terrifying than they ever were in D&D rules**
I just have to comment on this... I've never thought dragons weren't scary in D&D rules. I think that with a bit of planning and creativity, even a younger dragon can be pretty freaking scary -- especially since their mobility is such a huge advantage. I've had more than one person telling me how awesome their character is, and how a dragon isn't a challenge to them -- and they always look puzzled when I reply "It would be if I was running the dragon." |
| Icelander |
Posted - 16 Sep 2009 : 17:17:16
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
I happen to like GURPS a lot myself, because it is (as Jorkens pointed out) scaleable, both in complexity and level of power (one system can handle "nobodies" as well as superheroes).
I use GURPS for all my Forgotten Realms gaming and have found it to handle the feel as Ed Greenwood describes it much better than any D&D version I've tried.
The GM has to know the rules pretty well so that he has an instinctive knack for what stats to assign things based on narrative description, but if the GM does so master the rules, the players don't really have to know much about them at all.
Where D&D is a very gamist system which demands that people learn assumptions taht differ greatly from anything that they might expect, GURPS is benchmarked against reality*. That means that people can mostly react to what the GM describes as they imagine a person would react in reality and find that the system supports that action.
Of course, this means that my Realms differ somewhat from the 3e D&D ones. Dragons are far more terrifying than they ever were in D&D rules** and even a veteran warriors has to worry when he is outnumbered in battle, as even swords and knives wielded by neophytes can be lethal when stuck into unprotected backs. But I don't think this detracts from the feel of the Realms as Ed has described them, I rather think it enhances it.
*With plenty of powers available to break the realistic rules of physics, of course, but in the absence of such powers, reality holds sway. And when it comes to the consequences of such power, reality is also the baseline, so whole body burns will be lethal unless magic is used to heal them and blows powerful enough to send people flying will also snap necks and spines.
**In reality, something that weights in the hundreds of tons and is still strong enough to support its own weight in flight, is quite simply a nightmarish opponent. A swipe from a claw from something that big doesn't do twice, thrice or even four times the damage of a sword swing. It's more like an order of magnitude, to begin with, and going far higher if it puts its weight behind the blow. |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 16 Sep 2009 : 07:46:21
I happen to like GURPS a lot myself, because it is (as Jorkens pointed out) scaleable, both in complexity and level of power (one system can handle "nobodies" as well as superheroes).
Another option would be to use Chaosiums Basic Roleplaying system (BRP), which is the engin behind the good ole classics like Call of Cthulhu, Runequest, Stormbringer/Elric, Hawkmoon, etc. If you are converting from D&D, it is probably a lot easier than for GURPS, since the basic Stats are similar in numbers range and scope. It's still in print, but Chaosium also sells it as a PDF on their site. |
| wintermute27 |
Posted - 16 Sep 2009 : 02:55:33
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
A good old game of Dungeons&Dragons, the TSR version, would be an idea. If you are used to the 3ed. then the Red and Blue Mentzer books will seem ridiculously simple.
...
There are also things like OSRIC which can be downloaded for free and which gives a good impression of the old AD&D. I seem to remember there being a free version of Runequest also. Both of these are legal.
The group who made OSRIC also has a free game called Labyrinth Lord which is essentially a reprint of the old blue and red Mentzer books (If I remember correctly). You can check it out here |
| Tyranthraxus |
Posted - 09 Sep 2009 : 19:35:58
quote:
Originally posted by Amraz one arm
Really not contributing but worth metioning none the less. I used to play a German-game called Aug des Meister (translate eye of the master). Which in all accounts is a great game with some good mechanics. But it being in german and most my friends prefering English we had to switch.
You mean Das Schwarze Auge (Oog Des Meesters in Dutch). It's a great system. The English version is called The Black Eye. I think it's more complicated than D&D but worth a shot. |
| Amraz one arm |
Posted - 09 Sep 2009 : 14:39:28
Really not contributing but worth metioning none the less. I used to play a German-game called Aug des Meister (translate eye of the master). Which in all accounts is a great game with some good mechanics. But it being in german and most my friends prefering English we had to switch. |
| Quale |
Posted - 04 Sep 2009 : 08:58:26
Sorry my post won't be really contributive, but if you don't find anything. Well, we were once in a similar situation, making npc and monster stats was time consuming not fun at all. I looked to the other systems, but inspired by that supposed Gygax's saying that you need no rules, we created our near classless system, you can play a warrior, an arcanist or a roguish role but there are no strict boundaries. There is a one big pool of all imaginable skills, feats, powers and talents that you can grow into ''trees''. They depend on a lot of factors, lore learning, pc's creativity and ideas, power of belief, race, organization membership, training, activating innate talents from bloodlines, previous lives etc. pacts ... Levels are just guidelines for your character maximum potential. It gives a lot of options, but pcs can only learn them through roleplaying, not cause you killed a goblin you're better in alchemy. Makes the pcs appreciate who they are and what they've accomplished. And when running combats monster stats are matter of seconds, tough takes experience to balance it out.
It seems that 4e shortened the time of preparation, but the battles are very long. For me no edition of D&D or other RPG system will be as fast and satisfying as the one you make for yourself. |
| Chosen of Moradin |
Posted - 03 Sep 2009 : 01:34:38
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Moradin
I love Alternity, by the way, and think that the Realms could receive a good conversion from this ruleset.
As a fan of the Alternity system myself, I wouldn't mind hearing your thoughts on such a conversion, CoM.
This is something that is poking my mind for a long time...
I will see if I grab my wild thoughts about this and put them in a coherent scroll here in the keep. :) |
| The Sage |
Posted - 03 Sep 2009 : 01:02:45
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Moradin
I love Alternity, by the way, and think that the Realms could receive a good conversion from this ruleset.
As a fan of the Alternity system myself, I wouldn't mind hearing your thoughts on such a conversion, CoM.
|
| Ghost King |
Posted - 02 Sep 2009 : 22:00:47
I believe Rifts is still in print. If you want to just blow stuff up but face still rediculasly more powerful monsters then how rediculas you made your character that's the setting for you!
You got magic, technology, demons, devils, science experiments run a mock, and of course aliens! Oh and if that didn't sell it enough you can also be a superhero in Rifts. No joke. It is really that raving mad! |
| Chosen of Moradin |
Posted - 02 Sep 2009 : 18:47:51
Shadowrun is a great game, but as Hoondatha said, itīs not a very good choice here, based in your input.
Markus is correct. 4E D&D is a great choice by the simplicity of the system. And, of course, it can be used to more than dungeon-crawling. Good roleplayers can shine, despite of rulesets.
I love Alternity, by the way, and think that the Realms could receive a good conversion from this ruleset. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 02 Sep 2009 : 17:40:42
Mongoose Publishing has a version of Runequest, but I seem to remember it not being that well liked by the old guard (big surprise). I wonder if it was the Mongoose pages that had a downloadable version of older rules, but I am not certain. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Sep 2009 : 16:41:39
From what I understand of it, 4e D&D is perfect for that scenario. There is less emphasis on the campaign and more on dungeon-crawling (which is how the game started out).
And by dungeon-crawling, I mean adventuring... which doesn't always have to be in a dungeon.
I used to use T&T (Tunnels & Trolls) for that, but I'm not sure if those rules are even being published anymore. I was surprised (and saddened) that Flying Buffalo disappeared during the D20/OGL game renaisance. I think that was their moment to shine, and AFAIK, that didn't produce a single product for 3e. 
Their City Books are STILL amongst my favorite gaming resources.
And T&T was just plain fun (as was it's counterpart, Monsters! Monsters!, which allowed you to be the critters and kill the adventurers that kept invading your home). Extremely simple and easy to learn, and it was designed not to take itself too seriously.
Runequest is another old favorite of mine, with one of the most unique and realistic skill systems ever created (although easilly abused, which was its weak point). I don't know if thats published anymore either...
Damn, I'm getting old... |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 02 Sep 2009 : 15:46:03
A good old game of Dungeons&Dragons, the TSR version, would be an idea. If you are used to the 3ed. then the Red and Blue Mentzer books will seem ridiculously simple.
GURPS can be made as simple or as complicated as you want, but if you have never used the system before it might be a chore.
Some of the older games based on Perrins Basic Roleplaying are simple enough, but I don't know much about how these have developed and what is in print.
There are also things like OSRIC which can be downloaded for free and which gives a good impression of the old AD&D. I seem to remember there being a free version of Runequest also. Both of these are legal.
Quite honestly; I don't even know which games are in print any more, so other people might give you better advice, but these are my best shots. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 02 Sep 2009 : 15:12:58
I play a couple other varieties of D&D (mainly Dark Sun), and I also play Shadowrun. I don't think SR is what you're looking for, though. It's a great setting, really rivals the Realms for depth, but it requires a bunch of thinking, and the rules are a little hard to grasp at first. Oh, I mean 3e SR, not the new 4e SR. 4e SR isn't quite as bad as 4e D&D, but my group is happy with 3e SR, so I haven't done much work with it.
I've also played a little Paranoia, which is all kinds of fun when it's three in the morning and everyone is bleary-eyed and high on caffine. |
|
|
