People on Veeky Forums don't reccommend D&D since it doesn't work well for anything other than playing murder-hobos...

GURPS had good mechanics and is as rules heavy or light as you want it to be

>If you kill someone a crow appears and alerts the nearby guards someone has died.

That's fucking retarded.

It doesnt fly up to a guard and speak to it. It flies to the body and starts crowing. Anyone nearby who can hear it understands why its doing that since it only does that when someone dies.

The system plays a pretty significant role in the style of play exhibited playing it. A game that gives me more or better rules to do something is going to encourage me to do that thing more. A system that gives me less or worse rules is going to see me doing less of that thing. Of course these games are played with significant help from good old human imagination and improvisation, but that will never change the fact that making up rules on the spot or negotiating with the GM about the results of actions is just more fucking work than having solid rules to do so in the first place.

On top of that, there's the fact that systems (or good ones anyway) are actually designed to encourage and discourage certain types of play. Remember back when D&D literally used Gold as experience points? That's going to encourage players to fight dragons and loot dungeons--and that's exactly what they did.

Compare that to a game like Burning Wheel, where you level up skills by using them and your character by pursuing narrative-related goals. The kinds of things the players do is going to be different.

Now take a look at Dread, where there's literally no character building aside from in-character development in the form of a questionnaire, and the goal is often going to just be "don't fucking die". The kind of play you're going to see there is drastically different from the kind in the previous two examples.

Hell, this absolutely applies to "rollplaying" or not, too. Compare Dread's "Nothing but character development" sheet to your typical RPG character sheet with a little box at the bottom for "Background". Which one encourages players to roleplay more? Or look at Unknown Armies 3E, and its relationships system--when was the last time your D&D characters saw their family? In UA, it's practically required.

So, yeah. The system has a huge impact on the game you're playing. A good GM and players always helps, but the system is important. One size does not fit all.

GURPSfags

>Incentive to not play as murder hobos
If you need incentive, you're the problem.

Any system works, D&D just also caters to analog Diablo. People who want to actually roleplay can deal with any kind of system.

Can you think of a reason not to be?

lol no one actually plays GURPS, just give it up.

>A game that gives me more (...) rules to do something

So you concede that Pathfinder is the best RPG of all time, because there's a RAW for every action under the sun?

You literally snipped out the part that answered your question.

Far too crunchy. All good combinations of splat books I've ever been recommended for gurps ammounted for more than 1000p of reading before playing a single session.

The accelerated version fixes this, but that one isn't any better than most "generic" rpgs.

GURPS core rules are way better than Savage Worlds for instance. But Savage Worlds has an insane pace advantage over GURPS. Making Savage Worlds better for busy, dense, or not fanatically devoted players. E.G. everyone not posting about GURPS all the time on Veeky Forums.

D6 System, but with Mini Six's simplified combat. Or just Mini Six by itself if you feel detail isn't that important.

>System Reccomendation General
Oh goody.
What would be the best system for a Harry Potter campaign? I tried the Veeky Forums homebrew and didn't like it.
Also what's a good system for a The Witcher campaign?

>What would be the best system for a Harry Potter campaign?
Magicians.

>Also what's a good system for a The Witcher campaign?
pic related, obviously
also good luck getting it in English, protip - you can't

>Far too crunchy.
Don't use the rules you don't need. It's as simple as that.

>All good combinations of splat books I've ever been recommended for GURPS amounted for more than 1000p of reading before playing a single session.
You do understand there is literally no need to read them from the first page to the last?

>but has better mechanics for interaction
Which interaction do you mean? But basically GURPS is good at it.

You don't always need mechanics for interactions. you just need a gm that isn't bad and players equally as not bad.

It's easier just to have mechanics for interactions.

I say this as someone who hates charisma checks with a passion, but it's easier to have that then watching the resident wall-flower try to play a charismatic rogue who can't even ask for a glass of water.

Kill the crow

You say that as if you want to be murdered horribly by a murder of crows swarming you and pecking your eyes out.

Seriously, don't fuck with crows, they remember faces and can communicate with one another across regions.

guards automatically arrest anyone with a slingshot

Pathfinder, with the expansion books focused on interactions and RPing.

Books like Ultimate Intrigue will literally have rules on "Verbal Combat" where you'll use language and tactics to defeat your opponents in debates.

>recommending Pathfinder over D&D

ahahahahahahHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

FFG Star Wars

>Imagine Paizo in charge of verbal combat rules
>"We decided that calling non-binary people 'trannies' will inflict 2d6 verbal damage (save for half) because that is realistic" - Amber E. Scott

I hate ffg star wars, what is the best system for star wars?

Kill those crows
Start a Kentucky Fried Crow restaurant
Profit

WEG d6

>RPing
>In a book whose general literally has, "Builds" as a link

oh lord

We fucking get it already.

You poor soul, you won't even see them coming.

be honest are you autistic

Did you just pick that picture for fun and quote random posts? What are you even trying to say?

Mythras is d100 based and is as easy to learn but mechanically is superior in every way to D&D, and even has a supplement to literally be better than D&D in everything D&D does.

Dogs in the Vineyard has mechanics everyone should play at least once to see how mechanics and roleplay should be intertwined.

Actually delving into PF will show that there are MANY actions that have no rules whatsoever, so no. Also, you left out the "better" part, which disqualifies PF. Also, you're misinterpreting what user said on purpose. But mostly the rules bit. There are so many holes in the rules and things that aren't covered at all, it's disgusting.

wait so is this for or against GURPS? unclear

Traveler, either classic or Mongoose versions. arguably better mechanics for talking than for combat actually.

D&D works for non-murderhobo'ing. It's just the rulebook lays out combat in a way that's very accessible, then completely leaves interactions outside of the wilderness in the air. So when a new player gets their hands on the books, and decides to DM, they have no guidelines for how to treat the player's living situation, or between adventures. I played with this one group for 3 sessions, and it was literally just running through a module, then the second we were done, it was on to the next module.

Lotta inexperience people play D&D due to it's accessibility. it's the source of a lot of the issues people have.

Savage Worlds

>"In addition, everyone in the room will think you're a terrible bigot, and you lose all social standing in the town you're in."

I took blind fighting

My personal favorite system in general is Mutants and Masterminds 3ed, for what its worth. Yes it can break, but as long as you're open about what you're doing with the GM it works great.

So much flexibility, since its an effects based system.

Unlike other character types, you need to be charismatic to act charismatic.
Otherwise you get the RPG equivalent of the only disabled guy in an NBA all-star game.

Very underrated.

Considering how much people complain about muh sjws in media it's astounding how often you shitlords manage to insert how upset you are about a few inclusive sentences when it's not even relevant.

Making a joke about people who take their views and beliefs to a hyperbolic degree does not make the speaker upset about the topic necessarily. The nature of someone taking -anything- to an extreme level, whether it be social justice, or paying your bills on time, is by nature humorous. Look how many character concepts come out of the simple idea of taking some aspect to the nth degree.

TDE 5

Basic rules are light enough for an easy introduction, advanced rules and addons via additional books make it long lasting. Heavy focus on Roleplaying and Interactions outside of combat. Actual Combat is quick and deadly, down to earth and fun.

>its the don't read the rules and don't use them meme.
How about I just don't play the game instead?

Rifts is pretty good, mainly because of the war setting. Instead of being murder-hobos, your just solders.

The Dark Eye. Too bad there only a shitty translation. Most developed and complex fantasy setting I know so far.

Just use one of the out of the box series like Dungeon Fantasy or After The End then. No prep work beyond the standard adventure building required. Saying that GURPS is too crunchy when it is simpler to play than any iteration of D&D save maybe Basic is just wrong.

Excellent summary, deendeerones BTFO.

Basically anything that's not D&D will be better than D&D. Ask yourself what kind of game you want to run and why. Chances are, the only reason you'd even consider D&D after those questions is because it's more "accessible" aka it's more popular.

If you like DSA you might also like:
>Eating soup with a fork and knife
>Anal probing
>Repeatedly banging your head against tables

Why do you hate it, specifically?

>Repeatedly banging your head against tables
The kind that's printed on paper or the kind made of solid wood?

Both

Everytime I want to run a High Fantasy kinda Medieval game the best option for my style of dm'ing is Fantasycraft.

None of my players want to play it because "they don't have time to learn it", despite spending half a week raiding on WoW or playing SMITE.

Face it guys, 3/4 of the problem with any campaign are the players, the system plays a very small problem into that.

Warhammer Fantasy Role Play 3rd edition.

Warhammer fags hate it, which is a pretty huge plus.

No, not really, I've been in plenty of games where the system fucked something up.

Your problem is running RPGs as though they were party board games, to be enjoyed with your typical circle of friends.

In fact, most friend groups are going to have wildly divergent interests in something as broad as RPGs, if they have any at all.

If you want to play good games, find gamers interested in your game (these are overabundant, by the way), don't force your friends, who clearly want to play shitty MMOs and MOBAs (get better friends), to do it.

>>If you want to play good games, find gamers interested in your game (these are overabundant, by the way), don't force your friends, who clearly want to play shitty MMOs and MOBAs (get better friends), to do it.

You clearly have a valid point, the most valid one I've ever seen. But, aren't the essence of most RPG to be games you play with your friends, noting that they demand social interaction? And ever you tried to assemble a group to play based on people you don't know, make them agree on style and theme, show up to play, and making this process take less than six months?

I have a lot of problems on running games with most of my friends, but the only one that truly annoy me is their incapacity to learn new games.

>who clearly want to play shitty MMOs and MOBAs (get better friends)
The quality of your friends isn't defined by which hobbies you share.

Murderhobo is an issue or player and group mindset and escalation of force. Just because someone steals your pouch of gold doesn't mean you have to kill him. Just because a tavern brawl starts doesn't mean you need to kill everyone involved and all witnesses.

Let's be real. Townsfolk aren't just going to sit by and watch you commit crimes. They will start to distrust you, not help you, call in whatever local arm of the law exists.

The big problem I see is people are too lazy to come up with creative ideas so they just kill everything because it's simple.

D&D is a perfectly fine game, don't let triggered Veeky Forums anons talk you down from using the system.

Which, while I agree, raises the question: What system does DnD better than DnD that so many anons feel they can recommend not using DnD?

Fantasy Craft, Legend (RoC), 13th Age, Apocalypse World: Fallen Empires, World of Dungeons (not Dungeon World, that game is garbage), many OSR games, Sword World, Grancrest, Ryuutama, just to name a few.

Do note that "D&D" encompasses three very different categories of playstyles at this point, so only a few of these systems will correspond to your personal interpretation of "D&D".

Not who you were talking to, but I just thought it was funny that I 100% disagree with your post. I'm basically nega-you.
Even to the point of liking "some, but few" OSR games.

So you would argue that Dungeon World is a good game and that pre-3e, 3.PF and 4e are more or less all the same game?

Have you tried not being an insufferable murderhobo?

Shadows of Esteren. Dark Fantasy setting. The system is 1d10+mod, and has quite the nice mental trauma tracker. It is not mean to be a game focused around combat, and being good in a fight is only something characters do out of necessity. Definitely worth checking out.

>Dungeon World
If your DM doesn't fully understand the game, it's dogshit but otherwise, yeah, I think it's genuinely great. Better than most versions of D&D, mainly for having a strong design focus on theatre of the mind play, that focuses on the strengths of that style of play. No D&D game is set up in a way that ends up subtly empowering your descriptions of your actions and movement in combat in such a way that describing a different attack actually behaves differently and has consequences, yet still fits within the game's balance framework.

If you look at the fundamental "i make an attack with my weapon" rules in any version of D&D (and I know, because I played half of them and researched the rest), the rules don't actually give the DM a good way to do that. It's more or less "here are a set of particular individual cookie cutter action options that are non-contextual to the situation, and work exactly this way" coupled with "of course the DM can let you do whatever the fuck he wants". But that doesn't really solve the problem of "how do we do this well" which is why we need rules at all.
And if you have a DM who truly understands the subtle interconnected systems that end up having that effect in dungeon world, and how they're meant to be implemented, then combat in DW feels fucking incredible.

I wouldn't call DW a fantastic game, mainly due to its insistence on going to extremes with game philosophy wank, like the whole "no initiative roll" and "failure XP, on pain of death, to the point where the DM theoretically would have to spawn more monsters if you fail a Lore check after you've established that you're in safety" thing. Even if i do understand why those two design decisions are "supposed to work", I don't agree that they do, and the game is much weaker for it.

But the clincher is that every edition of D&D has issues or instances of bad design either just as bad or worse than those things, at least to me.
So TL;DR, yes.

>People on Veeky Forums don't reccommend D&D since it doesn't work well for anything other than playing murder-hobos.

Fuck off with trying to force this gay shit.

People recommend D&D all the time. It's usually one of the first posts whenever someone asks for a system.

And the "D&D can't do anything other than dungeon crawls" meme is just bullshit from people hoping to stop D&D from being so overwhelmingly dominant.

So, to reiterate, fuck off already.

I also happen to think that Fantasy Craft has exactly the same issues as Pathfinder and 3.5e, in that it is an overly bloated, overly obtuse, messy piece of derivative, unhelpful trash that blocks you from completely reasonable courses of action, because pissing while standing up has to come from a fucking character class, or a feat twelve levels worth of progress into the goddamn campaign.

13th Age is an overrated slot machine of a game, relying on random procs more than any kind of tactics or strategizing, and its forced abstract worldbuilding aides (I forget what they're called) are lackluster at best, limiting and restrictive at worst, and are haphazardly baked into just a few class features exactly so that it's not immediately obvious that they're mandatory - - but upon closer inspection they simply cannot easily be removed. Full of half-baked ideas that come two thirds of the way to being innovative, but ultimately tend to simply fall short and feel awkward in actual play.

I could keep going but I'm getting tired

>Ultimately, pretty much anything you want to do outside of combat boils down to a single skill roll.
>He hasn't heard of OSR

If you have such a problem with other rule systems OP, why don't you just make your own?

>If you have such a problem with other rule systems OP

He literally started the thread asking for system suggestions.

For Christs sake, his post is three sentences long and one of them is "System Recommendation General."

It is like everything else ffg has done.

It has half baked mechanics spread out over enough books to make a library that a cult props up as the gospel.

>"D&D can't do anything other than dungeon crawls" meme is just bullshit
No, it's 100% accurate. It's what the vast majority of the game's mechanics are set up for and those mechanics break down when they're brought outside of that context.

My issue with Dungeon World is that its own creators didn't understand the system.

>describing a different attack actually behaves differently and has consequences
That is true for Apocalypse World, but not for Dungeon World.
Go aggro and seize by force are two very different combat moves with clear and meaningful consequences.
Hack and Slash, Volley and Defend only do one thing: numbers. Different attacks behaving differently is something that the DM has to add in spite of the Move, not because of the Move.

>And if you have a DM who truly understands the subtle interconnected systems that end up having that effect in dungeon world, and how they're meant to be implemented, then combat in DW feels fucking incredible.
So if you have a DM who knows how to convincingly wing everything that DW's creators failed to include in the rules? Well, that's how you make every game feel incredible despite its system. DW combat by the rules is a boring HP whittling slog, with everything interesting having to be improvised by the GM and/or the players, whereas proper PbtA combat has interesting and mechanically meaningful consequence in and of itself.

>no initiative roll
None needed. It's all part of the GM's job to moderate conversation at the table.

>failure XP
>the DM theoretically would have to spawn more monsters if you fail a Lore check after you've established that you're in safety
Both are fucking stupid and a result of the creators failing to understand the system they copied.

Now, DW is still better than 3.5 in particular, I agree, but it is so very far from being a decent game.
And you did not answer my second point, namely that you apparently believe every edition of D&D to be the same game.

>Fantasy Craft has exactly the same issues as Pathfinder and 3.5e
No. Fantasy Craft precisely avoids the issues of Pathfinder and 3.5 by breaking down the system and reconstructing it from scratch, populating it with meaningful choices and options instead of shitting it up with traps upon traps.
The rest is just your personal interpretation of D&D not matching up with the 3.PF playerbase.

>Full of half-baked ideas that come two thirds of the way to being innovative, but ultimately tend to simply fall short and feel awkward in actual play.
Still a better 5e than 5e.
Is 13th Age a good game? Hell no.
Did it at least try to build on 4e instead of discarding everything learned from it in a panic? Yes.

if you need mechanics for roleplaying, tabletop rpgs aren't for you

If youre going to disregard the developers of the system saying "dont have to use all the rules" then you are the problem, retard.

I actually like D&D style games, I just don't like how D&D does it. I have grown increasingly weary of number crunching that in the end turns out to be relatively meaningless. I have started to prefer games that are designed more bottom-up, first identifying what the goal of the game is, then focusing on that experience, instead of just trying to be "Like D&D, but...".

>World of Dungeons
meine neger, schwarze bruder

postan WoDu

*Mein Neger, schwarzer Bruder.

Or if you wanted to make it plural for whatever reason, it would have to be "Meine Neger, schwarze Brüder."

>"no, my bullshit is 100% accurate"

No, you troll. It's you just ignoring the rules that upset your "propaganda."

Go read the DMG for once in your life, and then never post again.

10/10 filename kolego

>it's a "my system is better than yours!!!"-episode
My absolute favourite.