Hi Veeky Forums, i am a newbie who only played D&D and i am looking for suggestions on others systems to try...

Hi Veeky Forums, i am a newbie who only played D&D and i am looking for suggestions on others systems to try. I don't like sci-fi and horror, so i am not interested in shadowrun and CoC. I am thinking about something low-fantasy maybe, not too crunchy, well know and that will add something to my appreciation of ttrpgs. I wasn't very hyped to try anything new, but reading an early thread here i think i may be missing something if i don't.

Other urls found in this thread:

mediafire.com/folder/7llc83r2xf8bg/Barbarians_of_Lemuria_-_Mythic_Edition
mediafire.com/download/p5w885sa9a869ma/Barbarians Of Lemuria - Legendary Edition.pdf
mega.co.nz/#F!CtQR2bST!y_awB-GHCiL3CdK4iLCV7A
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

I'd say Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, but that's got some pretty deeply entrenched horror elements. They aren't necessary, though, so you might want to take a look.

Also, if you want to go with something close to your pick, try RuneQuest or Mythras. They're different names for the same game and there's a free version of Mythras that's easy to get and pretty simple to pick up.

Both systems are fairly simple roll under d100 systems. RQ/Mythras is slightly more crunchy, but still fairly simple to pick up.

the one ring [shill intensifies]
if you like tolkien, it is very true to the atmosphere of this works, relatively not crunchy, and the game parts are more akin to board game (ie. resource managements and many simple, little mechanics that are intended to make game more fun) than wargame like D&D (minis and grid tacticool combat, builds and that kind of shit).
And in my book, third age of middle earth counts as very low fantasy setting.

But judging from your pic you might like S&S more so Barbarians of Lemuria might be good too.

How different d100 feels compared to d20? Its really another experience?

Sounds really nice, i will give a better look, thanks.

>I am thinking about something low-fantasy maybe, not too crunchy
Barbarians of Lemuria fits this, and your picture, nicely.

>well know
You aren't going to find many other games than D&D that are easy to find a crew to play, or that are even capable of sustaining a decent thread here on Veeky Forums.

>Barbarians of Lemuria,Mythic Edition (current edition) -- mediafire.com/folder/7llc83r2xf8bg/Barbarians_of_Lemuria_-_Mythic_Edition

>Barbarians of Lemuria, Legendary Edition (earlier edition, fewer details & more minimalist presentation makes it even easier to learn, but the rules aren't as refined) -- mediafire.com/download/p5w885sa9a869ma/Barbarians Of Lemuria - Legendary Edition.pdf

>Barbarians of Lemuria, House Rules / Patches for Legendary Edition (if you want the bare bones minimalism of Legendary, but with the rules tightened up a bit) -- mega.co.nz/#F!CtQR2bST!y_awB-GHCiL3CdK4iLCV7A

D100 in this case is dramatically different.
>no levels
>no classes
>experience matter more than stats
>stats are primarily used to determine attributes like extra damage or HP
>everything is a skill roll including magic
>combat is more dangerous and more tactical

The downside for a lot of people is choice paralysis when making a character, and thinking about what they want to play over who they want to play.

Check it out

Thank you very much. I am now considering Barbarians of Lemuria and Dungeon Worlds. Maybe WFRP because i want to try a D100 system.

Sounds interesting. Is focused more on the gamist type of player?

Not OP here but what are the major differences between DnD and BoL?

D&D is very class-based (with each fitting tightly into a particular role) and level-based (heavily based on advancement, with a strong power curve). with a sharp focus on dungeon delving, and it's really dug deeply into that niche. If you try to take it out of the dungeon, the balance of the game kind of falls apart. You have spells like wizard lock and knock that can be quite useful in a dungeon setting, but which are pretty shitty in other contexts. Your thief/rogue skills are sharply defined by the mechanics of going through a dungeon, and fighters can be pretty crappy in a game with a more flexible, less rigid environment. D&D has wargame roots, and behind most of its rules is a very mechanicist, boardgame-like mentality. It works well for what it's designed to do, but it really isn't suited for much else.

Comparatively, Barbarians of Lemuria is loosey-goosey. Yes, it has a strong focus on combat, but you can use the careers in pretty much any kind of game you want to. BoL is less focused on minutiae than D&D. It's less concerned with precise number of silver pieces you collect, the XP value of the monsters you kill, the number of minutes your torch will burn for, etc. You're there to have thrilling adventures and not sweat the details. It has a smaller power arc and you start out pretty formidable. It's more tales of high adventure than fantasy Vietnam (like old school D&D starts out) or high-magic wonder-show (like all editions of D&D, to varying degrees, end up).

You should definitely try new things but D&D is the best at what its aimed to do. If you don't really like sci-fi and horror then you could play something new to try another fantasy setting or to explore new types of gameplay. You could play something more focus on simulation, with a more tactical combat and more oriented towards the narrative experience. These are basically your options, but if you really like the dungeon crawling, adventure experience of D&D you better stick with it.

Really, the biggest improvement between Legendary and Mythic editions is probably to armor. In Legendary, it's possible for people to get so armored up that it takes forever to whittle them down. However, there are downsides to this for PCs due to it penalizing agility, so it's more an issue if the GM throws heavily-armored enemies at the party (which, obviously, he can just not do). Still, one of the beautiful things about BoL is how easy it is to mod (unlike a lot of other games, there's generally very little in the way of unintended consequences when you tweak things), so it makes good sense to go ahead a fix things if you're gonna use Legendary. Mythic does make some other improvements (dropping the dump-stat of Brawl, making heavy weapons the better of two die rolls rather than +2, etc.), but that's the only one that really screams out for fixing, in my opinion.

Can anyone comment on this post?

It really depends on what you want to do. D&D doesn't have the best rules for all fantasy campaigns, but it is specialized to address a particular niche that, thanks in large part to the legacy of D&D, has become synonymous with what RPGs do, in many people's minds. Are you looking for a statistics-driven game about looting dungeons, fighting (or sneaking past) their denizens, and grinding your way along a power curve as you amass enough experience points to gain levels? That's D&D's home turf. But that isn't really what you get when you read a Conan story. And if you want something closer to that, well.. many people still use D&D, but that's just because it's the big game that everybody knows.

If you want a game that's low magic or swords & sorcery, D&D isn't what you want. If you want a game that isn't about dungeon delving (or some other setting that's set up to mirror dungeon delving), then there's a good chance that D&D isn't what you want. If you aren't into the rigid classes, or power climbs, or abstracted combat (the large amount of hit points high level characters have make it clear that you aren't literally hacking chunks out of people when you hit them, for instance), the D&D probably isn't for you. You want a more skilled-based game, or one where you have more of an ability to shape your character outside of a rigid class structure? D&D isn't for you.

So it all depends on what you're looking for.

Guess you could give my little homebrew system a go, it's pretty loose and only has 8 pages of rules (plus 4 pages of spells). It's pretty crunchy and needs a DM who can make up rulings on the fly.

I am really down to BoL, FATE core or Dungeon World right now. I really just want to try something else to not be that guy who only played D&D. Which one should i choose? Which one have the most potential to expand my perception of the genre?

>Is focused more on the gamist type of player?
Not really, depending on how you mean the term. Now I'm not the guy you were replying to, but I play games prioritizing roleplaying first and foremost, and I prefer d100 systems. Calculating and and min/maxing builds actually puts me to sleep.

What I like about d100 systems, namely WFRP, is that it makes the dice rolling simple. It's a percentage check, where the stat represents the odds of the player being able to do something. A 50 in Ballistic Skill means a 50% chance of hitting the target, so long as no other multipliers are in play. And the thing about d100 systems is that modifiers are always in play. I stop to aim? + 20%. I'm firing a single shot? +10%. The target has 3/4th cover? -40%. So I have a 40% chance of hitting the target. It's actually that simple.

Moreover, character progression is simply increasing ability scores (my 50 Ballistic Skill is now 55, etc.), or getting new skills, which add modifiers. I have ranks in Knowledge (Forbidden Lore)? Cool. +10 modifier. I have increased training? +20. Maximum training? +30.

It's a simple, robust system based around common stats. Moreover, the DC for tests is usually set by your own character's ability, modified by circumstances. I know that good agility and being trained in lockpicking give me good odds of opening a lock, because my total score is 60 and most locks will only impose a -10 or -20 against my roll. Meanwhile in d20 systems, by Open Lock skill gives me +5 as a composite of Dex and skill ranks. +5 against what? An unknown DC that I can only determine by rolling a few times.

Dungeon World is very much D&D with a more narrative approach. And I mean that literally. It is D&D-derived. So if you're wanting to see what D&D would be like if you approached it from a different direction, it's a good thing to go with. But if you're looking for something as different as possible to expand your horizons, it's probably not the way to go. FATE shares its narrativist bent, but is more dedicated to it, and isn't tied to D&D. I would say that of those three, it's going to be the most different from what you've experienced before. I'm not a big fan of giving the players meta-control over the story though, so my personal taste is with BoL, which is at least somewhat different from D&D genre-wise (swords & sorcery rather than high magic, and not specifically geared towards dungeon delving) as well as mechanics-wise (it doesn't take a narrativist approach and doesn't seek to give the players a freer hand in the story beyond the immediate actions of their characters, but it's quick and easy and uses careers--which are like skill packages that you can freely buy into--rather than classes). But then I'm the one who suggested BoL in the first place, so I'm biased.

Why not thumb through the PDFs for all of them and see which one calls out to you from a cursory glance?

What about WFRP? Looks interesting too.

You'd have to ask somebody else as I've never even looked it over. I mean, I know what I've heard about it, but you'd be a fool to put much stock in that.

Not him, I cannot compare WFRP to BoL, but I can compare it to D&D.

The main thing about WFRP is that the combat is a far lot more brutal. The common barroom brawl in D&D can't get too bad, but in WFRP it's not terribly difficult for a PC to wind up with a broken arm or leg. See, unlike critical hits on a 20, the critical hits in WFRP become automatic once you run out of wounds. If in D&D, HP is the barrier against being knocked unconscious and suffering bleed out. In WFRP, it's the barrier against critical hits. Fights will end with critical hits. This is almost guaranteed.

Moreover, because WFRP fully makes use of locational damage, a critical hit has set effects built into the system. Once you run out of wounds, each limb has 10 hitpoints. Generally speaking, 1-3 damage are minor, temporary effects, while 4-5 are temporary but more serious. These are the broken limbs. Once you pass 5, you're looking at permanent damage. IIRC, a 7 against arms has the player roll d3 to determine the number of fingers lost. When damage hits 9-10 against a location, the result is almost always fatal.

Unlike D&D, magic is not terribly common in the Fantasy world. At least, not good magic. Chances are, if you lose a limb it's gone for good. Then again, if you lose a limb it's rare to survive the fight. Magic in the setting is not subtle or delicate. There isn't any real equivalent to spells like Magic Missile or the like. Most spells will be fireball-tier powerful, at the least. The reason for this is that failing a casting, then failing the save rolls to survive that casting can kill your character outright, or result in a daemon taking his body over, or some other bit of unpleasant nastiness.

Beware, the magic system in the first two editions of WFRP doesn't work too great. you're going to need some homeruling to make it work.

Since you were probably going to ask, here's a sample of the criticals chart.

WFRP is best used for more gritty adventures. If you want great heroes and tales of legend, look elsewhere. If you want your party to be in the world of Beowulf, Berzerk, or Conan, but not as the heroes of legend, you've come to the right system.

>The main thing about WFRP is that the combat is a far lot more brutal. The common barroom brawl in D&D can't get too bad, but in WFRP it's not terribly difficult for a PC to wind up with a broken arm or leg.
I don't doubt your analysis overall, but let me just point out that in old school D&D, a starting character might die after taking literally 1 hit point of damage. Sure, once you get a few levels on you, you're much more resilient, but low level characters are vulnerable as fuck.