Recommend Me a System

I need a System for a group of two. D&D doesn't do this well. I'm looking for something fantasy or fun scifi with a focus on exploring combat that can be survivable with only two people& doing things with a decent amount of crunch. No rules lite & GM fiat. No GURPS.

Other urls found in this thread:

docs.google.com/document/d/1pTgTN2aJUoY95JtquowagfUJLL7tCQYhzJKcCAcbvio/edit?usp=sharing
1d4chan.org/wiki/Dungeons:_the_Dragoning_40,000_7th_Edition
soundcloud.com/partyofonepodcast
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

scarlet heroes

Into the Odd. Simple, well designed and it's got quick rules for the creation of hirelings to pad out the group.

What can you tell me about them?

Not him, but Scarlet Heroes is a supplement for Labyrinth Lord (a clone of Moldvay Basic D&D aka The Best Edition Ever) though it's compatible with just about any OSR or TSR-era D&D systems, modules, bestiaries, or other stuff. Of which there's a metric crapton.

SH ramps up player power and adjusts things in a clever way to allow one or two heroes to handily go through a module that is otherwise set up for say, 4-6 players. So your player gets to be Conan and kick major ass.

Why not GURPS?

Works pretty well with sci-fi or fantasy. Not lite or fiat-based. Decent level of crunch, depth, and passable combat mechanics. It's a point buy system, which tends to work well for smaller groups (class systems often break down with low player counts that can't fill enough roles).

Savage Worlds is also a decent choice if you want something more pulpy/cinematic/D&D-ish than GURPS.

>I'm looking for something fantasy or fun scifi with a focus on exploring combat

I plan on giving Numenera a try here soon. Veeky Forums seems to hate it but it's Veeky Forums so i dont take anything on here to heart.

not him but i was looking for a system too, gurps annoys me on a base level, i hate role under more than anything, success being limited to 3-4 and failure to 15-16 and the hardcap being so small doesn't feel organic at all, while i like the 3d6 neat bellcurve, the exploding dice mechanic can give great moments.
Does Savage Worlds somehow solve those problems?

>success being limited to 3-4 and failure to 15-16
wat
Success is when you roll under your target number. 3-4 would be critical success. And the range of critical success widens the higher your skill is, and the smaller the critical failure range gets. (Which would be 17-18, not 15-16)

>D&D doesn't do this well.

Yeah, it does. Are you trying to troll or just stupid?

The only thing D&D does right is what you want.
Just play D&D if you are going for a fantasy setting.

With two players an easy encounter is like, one goblin. A hard encounter is like 4. I have to nerd everything so low that it just doesn't feel like we are doing anything interesting

A bard & a druid got repeatedly trashed. D&D plans on teamwork from multiple roles

>15-16 being failure
>exploding dice
Have you actually read GURPS?
Please read GURPS lite, it's the second post on the GURPS general, I think you're confusing GURPS for some other system

If you're still that adverse to GURPS for some reason, check out labyrinth lord + Black stream solo heroes, and then choose any OSR module

>labyrinth lord + Black stream solo heroes

Scarlet Heroes is basically v2 of Black Streams, and it's standalone so you only need the one book.
On the other hand, Black Streams was free to download last I checked and will do its thing with any Basic D&D based system.

That's true, but like you said both of those are completely free, so if OP doesn't have money he has some options

>I have to gauge the strength of the party

Wow, whodathunk.
Level with me. Are you really just stupid?

It's not that I can't or won't you ignorant chucklefuck
It's that fighting reduced threats in D&D makes for awkward adventures & lackluster action.

The boss monsters are watered down, the goons are sparse, etc. One or two little goblins instead of a hunting party, an single wolf instead of an owlbear etc.

Have you looked into scarlet heroes / black stream?

Do you have a copy? I can't find it in Da Archive, besides a copy on scribd, and I hate that website.
It's not in the OSR trove either

>OSR Trove
Look under Sine Nomine press, perhaps? Failing that, it would probably in a Red Tide folder, under Labyrinth Lord.

It was under red tide, I'm sorry, I'm an idiot.

Thank you for helping me out

Mutants and masterminds maybe? Use henchmen with one health and such

Original D&D with lots of henchmen

What the fuck are you even on about.

The threats aren't reduced, they're matched to the party. Start the PCs at a higher level if you want to trouble them with things like a lot of goblins. The boss's won't feel "watered down" because, relative to the number of PCs, they're still very strong. Strength is always a relative concept rather than an absolute one.

Seriously, I don't understand what your mental malfunction is. I guess you really are just stupid.

W-why do you have to be so mean to them user, they just want some help :(

...

Do you need help user? Remember that I'm always here, and that I love you

ACKS sounds like what you are looking for. While at the base level it is just D&D Basic with some extra fun options, it has some of the best rules I have seen for has crawls and general overland wilderness travel. There is even sci-fi material for it. One fun thing about it is that wizards can have their own towers where they cross breed sharks and bears, thieves can run a group of assassins, anyone can have their own fiefdom, among other things that make the PCs more important as the game goes on.

hehe, ACKS is a funny name

like your playing it, and you go ACK

hah

ACKS is not especially suited to one-on-one games. Unless you use Scarlet Heroes/Black Streams with it

It is an abbreviation of Adventurer Conqueror King System, which actually does communicate what the game has to offer. You start as a lowly adventurer, clear out land on the borderlands between the domains of chaos and order (Often by killing monsters), and then rule the area while raking in cash to fund future adventures.

That is true. I suppose that I would have to recommend Scarlet Heroes then, as it is specifically made for one on one games while being good in its own right.

How do I make someone who can use a sword in GURPS

How do I throw a fireball in GURPS

>success [only] on 3-4
>failure [only] on 17-18
>exploding dice

You actually haven't read GURPS, have you?

High Broadsword or Two-Handed sword skill. Probably want to invest in Combat Reflexes.

Concentrate on your turn for the spell, declare how much energy you want to put into the fireball, and then roll vs your spell level. If you succeed on your roll, a fireball is in your hand. On your next turn, you can either throw the fireball or charge it by investing more energy into it. You can charge a fireball for a total of 3 turns, counting the initial casting turn, with the 4th turn giving you the only option of throwing the fireball.

When you throw the fireball, roll vs your Innate Attack (Projectile) skill (or DX-3 if you lack this skill) to hit.

thanka u

Why is OP not responding?

UESRPG, if your party is into TES universe. GM'd for two players for couple of months until we've found more players.
Don't know if other rulebooks do it, but it tags enemies as solo-group (i.e. is it designed for a single PC or a group) and minor-major-deadly-nightmare. Need some challenge for 2 PCs with ~2500exp — throw some major solo enemies at them, like skeletal champions with melee weapon and something ranged.
The only problem I have with it right now is that combat can become a bit boring because of weapon system. If your physical damage players are not into switching weapons for maximum damage, things can get boring pretty slow.
Mages don't have that problem and they also aren't too OP: telekinesis is limited in weight and speed, so no Mach 3 forks or barrels zipping by NPCs. Maybe make them roll for backfire for each failed spell cast and tell mage to get talent that allows to roll for suppressing backfire, if you think they are unbalanced.

thats gay i should be able to tbrow a fire ball in one turn

A turn takes 1 second.
In D&D it takes 6 seconds to throw a fireball, in GURPS you can do it in 2 seconds. 3 if you aim. 5 if you charge it 3 times and aim.

yeah, but your opponent can just hit you twice in two rounds, and all your friends are running around rolling dice while u wait

Where can I find that? I didn't know it had an RPG
I have
Ill give it a look
Threat level remains the same yes. But it looses its grandeur. You're anfucking imbecile if you don't understand this.

So why have you not talked about your stupid GURPS comment?

>Threat level remains the same yes. But it looses its grandeur. You're anfucking imbecile if you don't understand this.

How. How did you manage to conclude that 8 goblins fighting against four level 2 characters is less grand than 8 goblins fighting against two level 4 characters. Or that the players ever think "Oh, this guy who's a challenge for me is not impressive because he wouldn't be a challenge for four of me."


How do you not appreciate that no grandeur is lost? Are you literally the dumbest fuckhead in the universe?
Of course you are, because you're going to try and respond just to show how fucking retarded you are again. Piss off, you shit for brains.

>sperging this hard

Jesus, man, are you so autistic that you can't possibly imagine his POV?

His POV is that the system can't do something if you specifically do your best not to be able to do it.
He's a moron complaining about an umbrella not protecting him from the rain while holding it upside down at his feet.

I was right, you're autistic. That's some rocking-back-and-forth I-don't-understand-other-people bullshit right there.

His POV is that if you have to cut the enemies down in level and number to keep the players alive, and carefully cleanse the world of any elements that could only be handled by classes they don't have, the world starts to feel smaller.

>We don't have a thief, so kobolds don't use traps anymore. Ancient crypts? Not trapped either!
>No cleric, so undead don't happen, or if they do, they're low in level and number enough for us to take them head-on

Etc., etc.

You're a retard.
The traps and undead are scaled relative to the party. They're just as scary, because fear is relative, not absolute. If anything, minor traps are now more scary if they don't have a thief, and obtain greater "grandeur."

How many times does this need to be explained, you fucking simpleton.
World is a fuck, kill em all 1989.

>This is how it feels to us

>No it doesn't! Grr! I'm mad!

>respect my illogical, hypothetical feelings that only occur if I specifically do everything wrong!

Why. Quit being stupid.

> Where can I find that?
docs.google.com/document/d/1pTgTN2aJUoY95JtquowagfUJLL7tCQYhzJKcCAcbvio/edit?usp=sharing

It's actually your stupid GURPS comment. I just don't like GURPS, & wanted to tell people not to suggest GURPS so I wouldnt need to make posts answering them. But that didn't stop you did it? Go back to your containment General.

I'll use simple words.

Even though a task can have the same difficulty it does not mean that if has the same sense of accomplishment. Answering your posts is a chore, on par with helping out the mentally disabled at a charity but one makes me feel like I've made the world a better place.

Defeating a rat is not as cool as fending off wolves. Slaying a hatching dragon is not as thrilling as slaying it's mom. Even if they would be the same difficulty for a person.

I wish dealing with your shit was tax deductable

Then have the PCs be a higher level to compensate, you dumbfuck.

Simple math. Balance the equation.

Want less people to do more impressive things? Have them be a higher level.

Understand why you're retarded yet? Your problem only occurs if you force it to occur.

It'll take me a bit to flip through this & see if it's a good fit, but thank you for sharing it user. Have some art

The only thing he's doing wrong is talking to your stupid ass.

Just play Dungeons the Dragoning, you nerd!

1d4chan.org/wiki/Dungeons:_the_Dragoning_40,000_7th_Edition

You're just as dumb as he is. Nice rebuttal, by the way. Really succeeded in refuting logic so basic even a toddler could understand it.

This isn't quantum physics. It's the most basic of basic algebra.

If P is party size, C is character level, and X is the degree of difficulty of tasks you want them to be able to accomplish, than the equation looks like this.

PC=X

If P drops, you can raise C or lower X to compensate. If you're whole hang up is you don't want to lower X, raise C, you fucking retarded ape.

D&D still respects the party role idea. Meaning if both characters aren't decent combat characters they can suffer, or Long Rest classes having to really pace themselves versus if they were both Short Rest classes, or not having a trap disarmer or wizard, or not having stealth, or worse, one character being especially stealthy & the other one not. Party role still means a lot & not every facet can be filled by two people easily. Contrast to games like Traveller or WoD that have a more open design to succeeding & characters who have diverse skills.

I can give you a better example you walleyed troglodyte.

You have a standard screwdriver & a Phillips head. Sadly the door is locked with a hexagonal lock & need an Allen wrench

Everything can be compensated for with next to no effort. Stop trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.

Also, you can easily make extremely versatile characters in D&D, and the roles are only as important as you make them to be.

>Meaning if both characters aren't decent combat characters they can suffer, or Long Rest classes having to really pace themselves versus if they were both Short Rest classes, or not having a trap disarmer or wizard, or not having stealth, or worse, one character being especially stealthy & the other one not.

None of this matters since the DM can recognize what needs to be scaled to accommodate the party and to enable them to succeed at the challenges he wants to use. You're literally saying "this COULD be a problem" when I'm telling you "Not if the DM isn't as fucking retarded as you are, you empty-skulled fuck doll."

Look up Gestalt characters

I'm not talking pointless and inaccurate analogies like you are, you braindead cocksleave.

I'm talking basic. fucking. math. Basic math.

Come back when you're done with 3rd grade.

Jesus man, you've already gotten suggestions, for good systems, just leave it

If you don't remember they are:

Scarlet Heroes
Labyrinth Lord + Black stream solo
UESRPG
ACKS

I personally reccomend literally any white wolf RPG, they're all edgy as fuck anyways, not gonna hurt by introducing a lonesome character.

Also dude, just look at GURPS, you clearly haven't read it.

>The threats aren't reduced, they're matched to the party
>The threads aren't reduced, they're reduced
Cool argument bro.

Read the rest of that post, bro.
You should have done that before making yourself look retarded with this post.

How embarrassing for you.

He's not the OP, he's the guy titanically bootyblasted because OP said D&D doesn't play very well with a single player.

Oh, sorry, I made a mistake then. Either way, OP should look at GURPS, it's honestly a good system for this type of thing
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

I'm the guy making a fool out of you by illustrating that you don't understand anything about roleplaying games.

Actually, in truth, you're really the one making a fool out of yourself, I'm just calling you out on it.

Notice how all your problems are STILL just "I want to have problems," and you're trying to act like anything else is at fault?

OP here. I'm looking into the RPGs, & evaluating them & im thankful for the suggestions.

Unfortunately there is some wrathful sperg going to insanity trying say that I'm having badwrongfun. This is the dude you responded to.
I'm
Not
It's also really entertaining to see this user loose his shit

I've had success with M&M in a one on one game
The best thing to do is familiarize yourself with the Player Characters and choose or build Villains appropriately
Minions can be plentiful since they go down in one so the player can wade through mooks to get to the Bad Guy

>wah, I got BTFO
>i better say HE"S the one upset

OP, you're an idiot, and it's nice to see how you can't refute the basic truth I've laid against you.

Go on. Try to divert attention away some more. All it does in confirm that you have imaginary issue that only occur if you specifically construct them to occur.

How fucking stupid you must be.

...

Oh, I'm really sorry for making assumptions, I'm glad you're appreciative of the suggestions. If you want some actual play of a two person RPG, there's a podcast called Party of One, which is all about one dude running two person games for himself and one other guest. I personally hate his personality, and any time I hear the title theme I want to blow my brains out, but it could be useful to you.

soundcloud.com/partyofonepodcast

Nice attempt, I guess.

Nice distraction, because you can't actually make an argument.

>have to nerf threats to make them appropriate for a 2 man party because the game is built around a 4 man party
>imaginary

>can't raise the power of the 2 man party

Yes. Imaginary.

Raising levels doesn't make your party have more basic roles covered.

Gestalt character / multiclassing

We've gone over that.
Basic roles are only as important as you try to make them, and they can be scaled appropriately. Or, the PCs can be enhanced. There's a hundred million solutions for your imaginary problem.

Once again, you're trapped in "It COULD be a problem if the DM is a fucking moron like I am", and that's just fucking embarrassing.

>Basic roles are only as important as you try to make them
Go into a dungeon without a Cleric in AD&D.

Hirelings

No problem if the DM isn't a fucking moron.

How fucking inflexible are you? Are you honestly an idiot, or are you just inflexible because your entire argument relies entirely on you avoiding obvious answers and clear solutions?

You're a fucking joke.

Dungeon Crawl Classic. It's very much a game and it's very fun. It also has rules for single players running multiple characters at once.

Hey, hey. There's no call for this kind of shit. I know this place gets into stupid fights sometimes, but this is horribly unproductive!

>No problem if the DM isn't a fucking moron.
Well, that's one way to know you haven't played it.

Really? That's your rebuttal?

So, you're not just faking for the sake of prolonging this argument? You're just honestly an inflexible idiot.

Good to know.

What about gestalt / multiclassing

Action economy, MAD, and in multiclassing's case you're a shitty version of both roles in most editions of the game.

I think the issue is that OP is looking for systems that will solve his problems, when most of his problems stem from himself. Recommending systems isn't the solution, because OP needs to fix himself first. Otherwise, he'll just end up making the same idiotic mistakes alongside brand new ones, and never realize that he's the one ultimately at fault.

The most productive thing OP could possibly do is realize just how absolutely retarded he is. Once he can do that, then he might stand a chance of learning something aside from putting newspaper over his problems and hoping they disappear.

OP, I present you a solution that you seem not to have thought of before: have each player play two or more characters.

It isn't even an exotic solution. Leadership is a thing. There's no law that says one player, one PC.

Hirelings

I suspect having NPCs solve the problems for them is not what OP is looking for.

>none of that has to do with what we're discussing

Wow, you must be super fucking mad to be try this. It's like you're actually unaware that all the things you just complained about are questions of power, which the DM can scale.

Gestalt/Multiclassing is one of many easy rebuttals to your versatility complaint. Don't try to conjure up more imaginary issues that won't occur with a half-way competent DM just in hopes of prolonging this argument.

This argument ended before it even started. You're literally just going "This COULD be an issue" and pretending it HAS to be, when even an elementary school kid can identify solutions to every problem.

You're an inflexible idiot. Stop making that so apparent and just sit down before you embarrass yourself any further.

>if you work around the problems caused by not having enough players, then there aren't any problems with not having enough players and you're stupid for saying there are!

How is all this shit any better than running with Scarlet Heroes, where a single character is able to fill multiple roles and is already balanced equal to a small party? A system where you can run those old TSR modules straight up, with zero alteration.

Hirelings are not NPC's, the PC specifically orders them

>You're literally just going "This COULD be an issue"
Actually by it already was an issue so your denial that it can be means nothing.

Because Scarlet Heroes has a number of its own issues or hazy areas that need care and concern, and if OP is so retarded as to be as inflexible as he's revealed himself to be, he's going to stumble a lot harder. With Scarlet Heroes requiring a fair amount of GM adjudication, an idiotic and inflexible GM like OP would result in far worse issues than all the imaginary ones he's been conjuring in this thread.

>OP was an idiot and wanted more impressive battles but didn't want the PCs to be an appropriate level

Only an issue if you're a retard.

>Because Scarlet Heroes has a number of its own issues or hazy areas that need care and concern,

Bullshit.

Go to bed, Kevin.