You can combine two rpgs

MtG for fluff is far worse than playing D&D which only has 1/8ish bad editions.

Barbarians of Lemuria and Mechanical Dream.

The mechanics of Barbarians of Lemuria are short and sweet. Mechanical Dream has the most creative setting I've ever seen in an RPG, but the rules are more than a little clunky.

I want the FFG Star Wars gear, adversaries, and specializations with just about any other game. The core mechanic sucks so bad, and the combat rules manage to be worse. Even the skills feel both incomplete and overlapping, and the force powers are not balanced, and attributes are not balanced at all.

Is that counting 3e and 3.5 as the same one?

MtG lore can be good, it just hasn't been because they don't know how to write a good narrative. Kamigawa would be good for TTRP, as would many other planes before the introduction of planeswalker main characters. Lorwyn/Shadowmoor could be interesting, though balancing the tone would be a nightmare. Original Mirrodin could be okay, as long as it was set before Glissa and Slobad save the day.

>D&D which only has 1/8ish bad editions.
I guess that depends on how high (low?) you set the bar for "bad". Also,

Popularity is neither mechanic nor fluff

>GURPS point buy flexibility.
>Shadowrun 4&5 equipment

I could also go for GURPS + Rune Quest or GURPS + FFG Star Wars.

Unisystem or Shadowrun + FFG Star Wars could also be good.

And that's why no one bothers with generic systems most of the time, unless they're insanely dedicated or there's a supplement doing most of the heavy-lifting for them.

4e DnD (with the good classes and fixes, and no Essentials) + Planescape.
Yes, it's DnD + DnD. But Planescape in 2e felt like a great, amazing idea that was hamstrung by its ties to the ruleset, with the faction bonuses feeling awkward. Having a solid rules base that supports the various wacky characters possible would really be awesome.
Sure, you could just do it in Strike, but... sometimes you want a bit of extra support and crunch.

You and me are bros for life.

>Takes years.

Still a fair bit of work, but you *could* write a computer program to read in the 2e stats and convert them for you.

Might cut converting the whole library down to a month or two, depending on how easily you can find a source to parse the stat blocks from.

Maybe less, if you can find an easy way to read the data in and can bang out your database software pretty quick.

Dark Heresy and nWoD.

>Fate Core + GUMSHOE

D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder

>D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder
What?

Those are already basically mix and match compatible. What are you trying accomplish here?

/music plays

5e's just crunchy enough mechanics and classic fantasy setting coupled with Monsterhearts' social mechanics.

I cant' even imagine what that would even look like but I want it anyway.

Legends of the Wulin and D&D 4e.

Two of the best combat systems in RPGs (after 4e's maths fixes), and their strengths cover one anothers weaknesses.

LotW's awful editing and bizarre, imprecise rulings can be tightened up by 4e's precise mechanics, while 4e's lack of flavour can be enhanced by LotW's excellent flavour of narrative driven combat.

5e's light enough and Powered by the Apocalypse is an open system. Grab a word doc and start homebrewing.

I like the way you think.

Along similar lines:
Exalted 3e's mostly everything, but with DnD4e's approach to mechanics templating and writing. Fuck natural language.
And also maybe a kickstarter/development process that isn't totally fucked.

In general, I think 4e is possibly the best presented RPG ever in terms of mechanics. It's a shame it became such a subject of vitriol, it's a masterclass in layout and clear, easy to understand rules, as well as consistent and user friendly player aids like the power cards.

D&D and Gamma World, so I can play Thundarr: The RPG.

Uhhhhhh
am I missing the joke or did you not know this existed?

all the reviews and mentions of it I've seen have been universally posiitive except for the 'collectible power' thing... and now that the line is over you can buy it all as a single bundle.

>D&D and Gamma World
Aren't the two already very similar? I remember that the old (1e) DMG had rules for converting characters between the games.

See , they made a version of it based on the 4e chassis.
even Penny fucking Arcade did a comic of how they liked it

The stuff in the DMG was all pretty half-assed, although the GW cross-over rules were more understandable than the Boot Hill stuff.

That *kinda* looks like Gamma World; does it have magic? See, Thundarr had full-on Super-Sorcery, SCIENCE!, post-apoc weirdness, aliens, and mutants.

Needs to have the magics.

And when I say "D&D", I really mean "AD&D" (although Gestalt solves most of my problems with 3.x. I have no interest in 4e or 5e).

Couldn't you just reframe mental mutations (and some physical ones) as magic?

Also, I don't know if this is any good, but it exists...

Oh, and there's also rpglibrary.org/settings/thundarr/ which I can equally not vouch for.

Isn't 5e a good bit closer to AD&D than 3.x is?

Not really.
People like to claim that DnD edition have sweeping changes. That may be true from 'core to core', but the fact is that usually it's more of a continuum based on improvements in later supplements, and whatnot.

2e's Skills and Powers books flow into DnD3e's attempt at a sane system. DnD4e fixed 3e's power problems and subsystem overload, and then was 'dumbed down' with Essentials. That then flowed into 5e, which has quite a few 4e-isms in there - they just tend to be hidden because 5e isn't as mechanically well-written and laid out as 4e.

The biggest edition change is 2e to 3e - 4e is just a cleaned up 3e.

Fluff from Kult, mechanics from BRP.

It was definitely well laid out.

I personally didn't like the super gamey mechanics that didn't make narrative sense.

I don't like them in 3.x either, but 4e has tons of them, requiring a lot of reaching in order to explain them.

I agree 2 to 3 was a big change.
I disagree about 3 to 4 being a small change.

Id say 1 to 2 was small, 2 to 3 was big, 3 to 4 was big, and 5 is 3, with some of the better ideas of 4 cribbed, and trying to bring the power level back near 2.

I'd actually argue that a lot of 4e's mechanics are more narrative based than 3;5's. They don't make in universe sense, but that comes to a personal style preference on the types of games you enjoy.

I love the AEDU economy as a narrative system. If you're watching a combat based TV show, of course the characters aren't busting out their big special moves more than once a scene or episode. They rely on simple bread and butter stuff most of the time, only using their really special tricks in pivotal moments. Power usage feels more more natural if it represents more than just your character explicitly doing something. Taking advantage of an opportunity, having a moment of insight or a plan in the moment, etc. It actually helps that the powers are often so broad, as you can fluff it to fit the context while still getting a useful mechanical effect.

I have heard this particular argument before.

I tend to want stuff that makes in universe sense, but I was referring to things like the lack of common combat maneuvers such that you need a special power to try to trip someone.

But yes. I find the lack of in-universe sense to be too gamey to me.

Some people hate AEDU because they insist that they MUST be 100% in their character's heads at all times and make decisions from their point of view.

This is a ridiculous way to play RPGs that rarely works - even 1e DnD has HP working as plot armor, not as meat points - but some people insist on it.

Tripping someone is handled as something you do in the course of attacking. It's 'abstracted' as a basic attack. If you hit and do 12 damage to someone - maybe you swept their legs out from under them and caused them to fall badly, tripping them and striking them again as they get back up.

It's important to remember that in no DnD edition has 'one attack roll' ever been equal to 'one sword swing'. You're assumed to always be moving back and worth, feinting, dodging and looking for an opening. Making an attack roll is FINDING that opening and taking advantage of it.

And it's not like you're much better off in 3.PF. The combat maneuver rules are a joke. Unless you invest heavily in feats they're almost impossible to pull off, and even then there's a fair chance you're going to be fighting something that isn't vulnerable to whatever combat maneuver you're good at for whatever reason.

Plus, 4e has more fleshed out improvisation rules than any edition I've seen, and explicitly tells GMs to let an improvised power be better than an At Will, even if it's not as good as an Encounter. Nothing stops you having a go at an improvised trip, and it has a lot higher chance of being successful and useful than the equivalent in 3.PF.

For certain values of "closer to." 5e basically takes 3.PFs rips out probably 80% of the math in favor of 6 attributes plus a single "proficiency bonus" based on class level that shows up literally everywhere.

Thus most of the character sheet can be derived from equipment + ATR + Proficiency(maybe), and checks are 1d20 + ATR + Proficiency(maybe). Skill ranks are gone in favor of ATR-only tests like "DEX saves" but there's a handful of "skills" like stealth that give you your proficiency bonus on a subset of those checks.

Hence a sheet that is clearly 3.PF based but with way less numbers and way more uses for each number, similar to how a lot of 3.PF games were actually played.

To compensate for all that being stripped out, though, some of the gameplay was changed dramatically. A lot of bonus stacking was removed from the game entirely in favor of a mechanic that lets the DM look at the totality of the scene and either award the opportunity two roll twice and take the better or require roll twice and take the worse in hopes of increasing turn speed and player creativity and reducing reliance on the rulebook.

Values themselves have also been flattened out, as well. You still get slightly better each level but the lower levels are relatively more powerful and the higher levels are relatively less powerful. So you start out competent and get super-competent instead of starting out pathetic and getting godlike.

A lot of subsystems that were often dropped from 3.PF like ammo tracking, lifestyle expenses, rations, and professions are back and *interesting* again, and magic items are now intended to be fun toys instead of integral to balanced gameplay.

All of those add up to something that feels much more like AD&D even if it gets there from a weird 3.PF derived angle.

tl;dr - It's 3.PF streamlined down to the point you can actually play your class by replacing most of the math with "ask your DM." This is more fun than it sounds like.

The simplicity of DnD 5e with Star Wars SAGA.

only war or deathwatch + maid RPG

>4e is just a cleaned up 3e.
You'll have to take that one further out on the fields, as we say around here.

Warhammer 40k + Paranoia

>Not obeying your friend The Emperor is heresy.

>Secret Cults are heresy

>Unregistered Mutations is heresy

>Falsely accusing someone of heresy is heresy.

In terms of the overall game and system. Of course if you compare classes 1-to-1 with their previous edition incarnations, they don't match up the same. Instead, 4e is more like the designers took a look at "What kind of game is 3e, ACTUALLY? What is it good at? What is it for?" and refining on that.

Many initial 4e complaints (besides the intro adventure being utter shit, which it was) were because previously, as well as playing 3e like the game it was, you could kinda-sorta play it like 2e. 4e doesn't let you get away with that any more - you need to play the game the way it's written.

Why some people played 3e like 2e instead of actually reading the game, I'll never understand. To this day you STILL see people playing Pathfinder or whatever and playing Clerics that heal and wizards that blast, instead of actually reading the capabilities of their classes.

Even then, of course, 4e matches classes up to what they were 'good at' in 3e. The 'leader' archetype is about making your allies more effective, so the 4e cleric is a Leader. The 'controller' was... actually always kind of shaky, but it focuses on the same staggering amount of battlefield control that the 3e wizard had.

Believe it or not, apparently during 4e design there were people on the design team who wanted to keep Caster Supremacy in the game - that's how deep the cancer went.

Cyberpunk 2013 + Conan d20

I like to summarize it like this:

Both 4e and 5e are a product of 3.5.

4e is the result of what 3.5 became.
5e is a result of what people thought 3.5 was.

Runequest for magic.
bol or honor + intrige for everything else.

GURPS and FATAL

Maid RPG and D&D 5e.

What would 5e be bringing to the table, here?

Maid RPG for character generating, random evening and maid theme.

D&D 5e for old school style with classes, spells combat rules, and so on.

Hmmm... Maybe I should create sourcebook for D&D 5e to play Maid rpg style...

Well, I'm sold. Or I would be if I weren't buried under a mountain of RPGs waiting for me to play them. But 5e's on my list to eventually check out.

Didn't 4e already have some planescape support?

Obligatory 2e AD&D feel/fluff with 5e mechanics; the 5e team really wants to recapture that, I think, and I want them to as well, but I'm not feeling confident with the current writing staff and the drought of settings/setting materials.

With that out of the way: I'd like to see a dice pool D&D just because it'd make someone's head explode somewhere. It'd have to be branded as mainline D&D.

Id also like a game that combined D&D4e's mechanics (with some work) and Heavy Gear or Battletech's settings.

Noumenon and Dread

FATAL and ow.
Party is female regiment facing down the worst the galaxy can offer ahue hue hue

I'm sure there was something in a Dragon magazine or web supplement or whatever, but not a full-on re-overview and reimagining of the setting (and in the process probably making a lot of grognards whine that they changed it now it sucks).

And DnD4e as a whole could do with a 'good parts edition'. Like, if someone asks "how do I do 4e right" you end up saying something like "well mostly it's OK right out of core. But the Paladin needs the stuff from Divine Power. And you need the inherent bonus rules for a low magic campaign. And you need to either give everyone a math fix feat for free, or give a flat bonus at the following levels..."

Exalted and Edge of the Empire

That actually sounds pretty fun.

I think there was some planescape stuff at the end of DMG2.

And yeah, it was changed, and many people didn't like the changes.

I almost kinda wish we could've gotten a REAL 4.5 with a new, retuned core book that's more like a codex and has the "best of" power selections for each class with the updated errata+math fixes.

Oh well, there's still Strike!

>Believe it or not, apparently during 4e design there were people on the design team who wanted to keep Caster Supremacy in the game

I can see this happening but any source?

Also, any good sources for learning about the design process behind the various D&D editions? A number of things seem to be interesting hearsay like 3e was intended to be a Fallout tabletop RPG.

Wow, this level of insecurity and butthurt is impressive.

I'm almost tempted to screencap how sad, pathetic, and oddly enough, how jealous you are.

It's okay to be upset. We get it. It wouldn't be fair to take the one thing D&D has going for it. You can relax.

I can't find a quote right now, but it's definitely something Rob Heinsoo talked about somewhere, and it might have even been in one of the 4e preview books.

4e was the most open WotC has ever been about their design, and you can see it in the preview books they released.
Which really should have been free web articles, but whateves.
The DMG2 for 4e is also more like a collection of essays, and occasionally goes into detail on how to get the most out of it.

Unfortunately, most the of the DnD4e and 5e web articles are lost. You can still track down 5e playtest material, but most of it was really closer to being marketing than any kind of serious marketing.

There's probably some 3e material out there, but not much to find. Some playtesters noted that the 3e playtest material was just the PHB, without many of the spells, and none of the DMG information or the monsters. The lack of this was what led to 3.5e being created - the game wasn't properly tested until after 3e's actual release.

We feel the exact same way about you.

Butthurt and imagined Butthurt, impressive.

I wouldn't mind seeing a blend of Fate and the Apocalypse World systems.

If not Fate then Cortex+.

Lorwyn/Shadowmoor wouldnt require much, since the Great Aurora only happens maybe once a century tops.

Mtg does have some nice settings for adventuring, but I feel like its already quite possible to run a game with them.

4e definitely had some good ideas and better balance than 3.x.

I could see it (with some changes and additions) being refined into something I'd be more interested in as an RPG, or into a multiplayer skirmish heroes wargame of sorts I'd be willing to play.

FATAL and Maid RPG.

D&D 4e for balance and big damn heroes style of play.

2e D&D for Fluff and number of settings.

I want the beautifully honed rules templates of MTG with the big fantastic world of Exalted.