>13th age is very good for combat focused gonzo fantasy >Legend d20 is a very interesting interpretation of the d20 system but needs a lot of elbow grease >Fantasy Age exists and it's not completely terrible, I do prefer the less generic Dragon Age though. >Sword World 2.5 is absolutely kino. >SWADE can do fantasy decently. >ICRPG is very fun if you prefer something rules light. >Runequest/Myth(or whatever the rebrand is) >Hackmaster if you really like your fiddly rules. >Torchbearer if you hate yourself and your players.
I've asked the same question myself >"What's the best system to replace the fricking dragon?"
and it depends on what you like, BUT if you want >abundant magic >several fantasy races >class system
I think the best system to try out is the Witcher one.
Its true that the lore gets in the way and that's a huge problem, but if we are objetively looking at the system it is a very fun alternative that will give the players a good fantasy experience
Conan 2d20 is amazing and I love it, but the feeling compared to D&D couldn't be more different, as everyone has to be human, has an emphasis on terror/horror, and magic is difficult and not comparable at all
> is the Witcher one
Wut? You mean official? The Interlock from the son of the author? But it doesn't look good at all. Have you played it? What is your experience?
I'm very happy, I like it a lot. Of course far from perfect but for the topic of the thread I feel it does the "high fantasy with abundant magic" with classes so well that its a great replacement for D&D, I specially like the options in combat and fighting feels better and more dynamic than with
My main criticism is that rolling for stats is unbalanced as frick. All characters/classes roll 1d10 for the stats (witchers and a vampire character the GM and I made that's not an official option roll a d12 for stats instead) and it can be unbalanced as frick. I rolled incredibly good for stats whereas another player got shit luck and the difference is massive, so I would look more into making that part more fair (probably the book says something about point buy, but I don't have it with me).
As for the experience I'm not sure I can do a fair criticism because there are bad things I could say about the GM, but for the mechanics and system itself I'm satisfied. Its very similar to the Cyberpunk Red system with a lot of differences made for options of magic, swords, races, classes and the things you would expect of a fantasy RPG. I would say that I dislike a lot that a 1d10+(stat+skill+modifiers) roll over has the absolute fricking jank of rolling 1s too frequently for my taste, but just as often you also roll 10s so it mentally balances out (I would still make rolling a 1 or 10 less impactful due to how frequent it is, but you'll find a frickton of people disagreeing with me). That aside combat is lethal, has a lot of options and its overall satisfying and makes you feel heroic. There's also a lot of stuff to do outside of that which is quite interesting.
Main problem is that the lore could get in the way if you just want to do your own setting and story, but I don't know to what extent it would be fine to ignore the lore and do it, as, again, I don't have the book here with me, but imo it would be quite feasible
>probably the book says something about point buy
yeah I just found it
the regular system is: >All characters roll 1d10 a total of 9 times for stats (1s and 2s are ignored and repeated) >Witchers instead roll d12, but don't repeat if they get a 1 or 2
>However there's also a table for point buy
Imo I recommend doing the point buy for a "difficult" game, 70 points divided into 9 stats, but encouraging the players to not have more than one stat maxed for the sake of a more fun experience
> is the Witcher one
Wut? You mean official? The Interlock from the son of the author? But it doesn't look good at all. Have you played it? What is your experience?
WHFRP
if you're being cheeky and counting Star Wars as "space fantasy" there's several good options
Vampire: Dark Ages
SOTDL (don't bother with weird wizard)
>if you're being cheeky and counting Star Wars as "space fantasy" there's several good options
It is space fantasy. After revising the Ghostbusters d6 pool system for Star Wars, West End Games revised them some more released a whole D6 System. What would make Star Wars better for fantasy than D6 Fantasy?
Or are you suggesting the FFG/Amodee SW rpg? In which case, err, maybe not that system, it's got some good points but it's a bit more nuanced in its flavour and SW/Genesys system are not to everyone's taste.
Mini Six is based on WEG d6 and really good for fantasy... Except the magic system. That sucks, but there's plenty of other compatible d6 material available out there to pick from.
every generic system except GURPS has shitty magic. They all want to avoid encoding any setting assumptions which is impossible to do when writing any ttrpg rules but especially magic rules, so they just go "you can roll your Magic skill to do one of these 6 generic things, flavor it however you want"
>(don't bother with weird wizard)
Because it's new and incomplete or because there are significant problems built into the rules?
I'm a big fan of Shadow of the Demon Lord.
>or because there are significant problems built into the rules?
Who knows, only the first book is out(haven't seen secrets uploaded) and there are supposed to be three(?). From what I read of the first book it seems to have some really good ideas and a lot, a lot, of nonsense and inconsequential rules to be read once and completely forgotten forever afterwards. Maybe with all three an abridged version that makes sense can be compiled. We will have to wait and see.
Just two core books. Secrets is a really good GM book. A lot better than SotDL's core chapter IMO. Better advice, more enemy variety, more traps and tools.
As someone who likes WW, it's probably the latter for them. Lots of changes across the board that might mean you dislike SotWW despite liking SotDL. A few things have been fairly divisive but not is a way I would say are fundamental issues. Just different ways of handling things. I see it largely as a refinement from SotDL core rules but with new things for the new genre. There are actually couple of issues with it but they're fairly small and from what I gather errata is still on going so they'll probably get solved. The big one was layout but they're redoing the whole book. As a package it's about twice the size of SotDL's core book so it's not lacking in content.
There was a thread about it a few days ago where I said this about the paths. >Better IMO [than SotDL]. There is more variety than SotDL had for a long time off the bat here as well and caters to some fantasies I still think SotDL is lacking. Fighter caters to a lot of fighting styles, Commander is a martial leader, Martial Artist is a totally mundane monk-type, Beastfriend gets a pet, Inheritor a storied magic weapon. SotDL has a lot more Paths overall but I think there are more gaps in it when it comes to some classic fantasy classes. Lots of nicher options but no good way to make a pet ranger for example. Hard to say how much of me enjoying the new paths is just that they're fresh options but they all seem a bit more exciting than SotDL. The martial side especially has a few more things going on.
>I haven't had time to play it yet but I grumbled about Rogue when it came out but with the monster manual I think it's probably a lot better than it looked without it. Enemies have less boons in SotWW from my read through so a triggered action for 2 banes is stronger than I was thinking it was. Combat Opportunist's damage might not be very worth while right now either but I'm not sure how much synergy it has. It needs more natural defense but I think that's a problem they've all got right now.
The rules aren't INHERENTLY bad, but there is a bit of a lack of balance in the initial grouping of classes so far, Paths of Skill in particular. It'll need a few supplements' worth of classes to be really worthwhile stacked up against DL. Also not a huge fan of the prevalence of Luck rolls in the system, which are essentially coin flips outside of a handful of effects that give them boons/banes (mostly the latter).
I do like the social combat section they have (which can be ported 1:1 into DL, which I am doing) and general melee combat is improved, letting you convert your bonus damage as a resource for extra cleave attacks and other class features. Afflictions have more of a variety in how they work too.
Which Paths of Skill do you think are under performing? The only one I have much issue with is Annihilator. It does scale better than the magical equivalents but I think it's not doing enough when that's all its doing. Scout looks like it might take a bit to ramp up too but looks good in general.
Trapsmith and Spellthief give stuff you can get from lower lists already, Mastermind has a silly capstone that encourages playing your character contrary to its concept up until that point, Sniper has some really bad caveats like Stealth Mode potentially inflicting grievous harm to you. A lot of people don't like that War Machine's capstone can blow up and be perma-gone but I think it's alright. Ravenguard is really mediocre as it relies on a 10 HP companion with really bad offensive stats doing things, and its level 8 reaction is just Murmuration from SotDL, which is like a level 2/3 spell. Rakehell's debt mechanic needs something more, the one way to remove the tokens is quite lacking.
I also realize now after scouring through the list I meant Paths of Prowess, not Skill. But yes, Annihilator is quite lacking compared to the Destruction magic specialists of DL.
I saw the talk about Trapsmith in the thread a while back. I think people are being silly. It's a generally better version of the spell and not their central feature in any sense. I'm not sure what your point of comparison on Spellthief is, but I think Mastermind and Sniper are both fine. If people want to do the cheesy hyper munchkin thing with Mastermind that's fine. You'll get less out of the Path until that point and then get one adventure to gloat about your cool build. In the spirit of the game I don't think it really poses an issue. Sniper does have a very harsh penalty but pretty its rare and Sniper is also very good from the looks of it.
Ravenguard could be a problem but I think in general it's probably fine at most tables. Its generally not worth swatting but if you do it's back next fight. Enemy Def is more variable than in SotDL too from the looks of things where low def creatures are pretty common so I don't think +2 and 2 boons is really all that bad. It's the rest of the kit here I think is great. Fluttering of Wings you can say is just like Mumuration from SotDL but that's not a comparison that matters because it's not in SotDL. Halving damage seems very rare in SotWW and you can do it every battle, and if Murmuration was a spell here you'd only be doing it once or thrice a day. I'd like the Raven to be harder to hit but I don't think it's a major deal over all.
Rakehell is maybe the most interesting one to talk about. I think it looks very very cool and is one of the more exciting options. Getting rid of Debt seems very punishing but having too much is worse but a stacking boon or -d20 to a roll is very powerful so you'll have lots. That's something I really want to play around with.
I think Annihilator scales fine all in all but very much not my thing. It might not be a bad thing exactly because if you want to play a magic character that's pretty simple it's not a bad fit for that but I think more could be done with it.
I mentioned upthread that I was with the people saying Rogue was underpowered but now I've had more time to absorb the game and read through Secrets I think it's in a good place overall. Cunning Dodge was being majorly overlooked because it's not that impressive in SotDL terms and Rogue in SotDL is good at everything and gets more turns. It's hard to compete with that but on SotWW's own terms I think it's got a lot going for it.
>Because it's new and incomplete or because there are significant problems built into the rules?
The latter. A lot of the changes made to it to make it more "marketable" are simply huge negatives. >Despite the entire point of the game reducing stats from 6 to 4 being that now every attribute is important for every character in SOTDL, weird wizard made the moronic decision to divorce most of your attributes from your stats besides your "key attribute score", so now you don't get extra health from strength or extra defense from agility etc, making character building moronic and making it so picking classes with higher base health pools is virtually always better since you have an insurmountable advantage over others. >Removal of Power as a stat means that you're heavily encouraged EVEN MORE to just pick high health classes with powerful defensive abilities as your novice and expert paths and then snag whatever Master spells you want since now they're completely disconnected from one another. >TAKING EVERY RACE BUT HUMAN OUT OF THE CORE BOOK AND PUTTING A FRICKING ADVERTISEMENT FOR A SECOND BOOK TO BUY THEM. Despite SOTDL having rules for goddamn Clockworks in the Core rulebook, Weird Wizard decided that it would rather spend 40 pages on useless shit like Inclement Weather and Wind Speed conditions in the Player's Handbook rather than have fricking rules for Elves and Dwarves. And this is supposedly the "more accessible" spinoff game. >Terrible artwork and a poorly formatted book in general >moronic changes like nerfing rogues for no reason, again encouraging you to just play high health classes since they get the same benefits but also an extra bonus nobody else can get
>"key attribute score"
That's not a thing any more than it is in SotDL. You want your highest attribute to be the thing you're doing. >so now you don't get extra health from strength or extra defense from agility etc
That's probably why it was removed. +1 Def vs +1 Health is not in anyway an even choice.
I agree with most of this, but Agility does increase Defense. Light armor just also has a flat Defense number you can use in place of Agility + its listed bonus.
Sold. Power was the single worse thing in Demon Lord, and I'm including the poop spells. The rest of that seems like non-issues or things that were already in Demon Lord too.
I'd prefer one core book but I play enough games that need two so I can live with a player/ST split so long as there is enough page count to justify that.
Rolemaster 4 + Shadow World if you want something pick up and go.
GURPS Fantasy, taking from GURPS Dungeon Fantasy and low tech and martial arts and thaumatology if you want to kitbash something for a homebrew setting.
Depends greatly on what you're trying to emulate and, even having that clear in your mind, there's no unambiguous answer, nor one devoid of compromises.
Even designing your own you have to make peace with various necessity, like playability or referencing needs, that may force you to sacrifice part of what envisioned initially.
That said i like sword & sorcery and/or picaresque/rogueish themes, i like impairments, choices and consequences to exist but not necessarily high lethality as one, i like packed cinematic, pulp action but not superheroic/wuxia level of nonsense. I like subtlety and danger in the supernatural instead of the flashy display and consequenceless nature of d&dish magic. I like mystery abot overt display of the fantastical unless breaching to weird/alien Moebius tier of fantasy/sci-fi, i like to start from grounded and then work my way to fever dream tier of Moorwienerian fantastical circling than back to the starting point.
I could go on and on in futher define what i'm looking for and i would never actually reach a definitive frame.
I like all of the above but that doesn't mean it has to be in a single game all at once, that's why i gravitate towards wfrp, gurps, savage worlds, brp, hârnmaster, rolemaster and even d&d to some degrees.
Yea, OP probably should have asked for the best fantasy system that isn't a D&D-like. Or he should have asked for the best D&D-like. Now people are just going to argue about what does and doesn't count as D&D.
anything with six ability scores called Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma where you roll 1d20 and add a modifier to see if your attacks hit is D&D. Those are the only mechanics that every game published under the name "Dungeons & Dragons" actually share so that ought to be the bar.
I don't know if I would say it was best (even leaving aside the fact that "best" is a matter of opinion), but my first recommendation for Babby's First HYTNPDND is WFRP (2e or 4e).
The rules are a little fiddly but easy enough, there's a few races but not too many, you can easily scale the amount of magic, the setting is generic enough to feel familiar to anyone but rich enough to not feel generic, the Early Modern period is a little new and exotic but close enough to the late Middle Ages of most D&D, and there's a class system which is more complex and flexible than D&Ds, but still provides good structure for players who want/need that.
90% of the anons in this thread suggested meme systems (rollmaster, gurps, star wars), troony shit or retroclones.
I guess you really should just play D&D. Preferrably 3.5 because it's the best edition.
But I have glanced over the core savage worlds rulebook and it's fine I guess?
Without having played it, the grimdark and poop aside, Shadow of the Demon Lord looks awesome for that.
But then again, I love 3.5e prestige classes and multi classing so I'm biased.
There is no "best... system", there is only the system best for your needs.
I quite like Conan 2d20 myself.
>13th age is very good for combat focused gonzo fantasy
>Legend d20 is a very interesting interpretation of the d20 system but needs a lot of elbow grease
>Fantasy Age exists and it's not completely terrible, I do prefer the less generic Dragon Age though.
>Sword World 2.5 is absolutely kino.
>SWADE can do fantasy decently.
>ICRPG is very fun if you prefer something rules light.
>Runequest/Myth(or whatever the rebrand is)
>Hackmaster if you really like your fiddly rules.
>Torchbearer if you hate yourself and your players.
I've asked the same question myself
>"What's the best system to replace the fricking dragon?"
and it depends on what you like, BUT if you want
>abundant magic
>several fantasy races
>class system
I think the best system to try out is the Witcher one.
Its true that the lore gets in the way and that's a huge problem, but if we are objetively looking at the system it is a very fun alternative that will give the players a good fantasy experience
Conan 2d20 is amazing and I love it, but the feeling compared to D&D couldn't be more different, as everyone has to be human, has an emphasis on terror/horror, and magic is difficult and not comparable at all
W hitch withcer one of the lot?
the one done with CD project
I'm very happy, I like it a lot. Of course far from perfect but for the topic of the thread I feel it does the "high fantasy with abundant magic" with classes so well that its a great replacement for D&D, I specially like the options in combat and fighting feels better and more dynamic than with
My main criticism is that rolling for stats is unbalanced as frick. All characters/classes roll 1d10 for the stats (witchers and a vampire character the GM and I made that's not an official option roll a d12 for stats instead) and it can be unbalanced as frick. I rolled incredibly good for stats whereas another player got shit luck and the difference is massive, so I would look more into making that part more fair (probably the book says something about point buy, but I don't have it with me).
As for the experience I'm not sure I can do a fair criticism because there are bad things I could say about the GM, but for the mechanics and system itself I'm satisfied. Its very similar to the Cyberpunk Red system with a lot of differences made for options of magic, swords, races, classes and the things you would expect of a fantasy RPG. I would say that I dislike a lot that a 1d10+(stat+skill+modifiers) roll over has the absolute fricking jank of rolling 1s too frequently for my taste, but just as often you also roll 10s so it mentally balances out (I would still make rolling a 1 or 10 less impactful due to how frequent it is, but you'll find a frickton of people disagreeing with me). That aside combat is lethal, has a lot of options and its overall satisfying and makes you feel heroic. There's also a lot of stuff to do outside of that which is quite interesting.
Main problem is that the lore could get in the way if you just want to do your own setting and story, but I don't know to what extent it would be fine to ignore the lore and do it, as, again, I don't have the book here with me, but imo it would be quite feasible
>probably the book says something about point buy
yeah I just found it
the regular system is:
>All characters roll 1d10 a total of 9 times for stats (1s and 2s are ignored and repeated)
>Witchers instead roll d12, but don't repeat if they get a 1 or 2
>However there's also a table for point buy
Imo I recommend doing the point buy for a "difficult" game, 70 points divided into 9 stats, but encouraging the players to not have more than one stat maxed for the sake of a more fun experience
> is the Witcher one
Wut? You mean official? The Interlock from the son of the author? But it doesn't look good at all. Have you played it? What is your experience?
WHFRP
if you're being cheeky and counting Star Wars as "space fantasy" there's several good options
Vampire: Dark Ages
SOTDL (don't bother with weird wizard)
>if you're being cheeky and counting Star Wars as "space fantasy" there's several good options
It is space fantasy. After revising the Ghostbusters d6 pool system for Star Wars, West End Games revised them some more released a whole D6 System. What would make Star Wars better for fantasy than D6 Fantasy?
Or are you suggesting the FFG/Amodee SW rpg? In which case, err, maybe not that system, it's got some good points but it's a bit more nuanced in its flavour and SW/Genesys system are not to everyone's taste.
Mini Six is based on WEG d6 and really good for fantasy... Except the magic system. That sucks, but there's plenty of other compatible d6 material available out there to pick from.
every generic system except GURPS has shitty magic. They all want to avoid encoding any setting assumptions which is impossible to do when writing any ttrpg rules but especially magic rules, so they just go "you can roll your Magic skill to do one of these 6 generic things, flavor it however you want"
wdym? GURPS has bad magic systems while Genesys has a satisfying one.
how tf is "roll your magic skill to do one of 6 extremely basic boring things, flavor is free" satisfying
Actually feels like you're playing a tabletop game and not vidya with "deal x damage to target enemy" crap
at least D&D and gurps have utility spells (gurps has a frickton of them iirc), genesys magic is literally all "deal 6 damage to target enemy" crap.
Mini Six doesn't do that, but the difficulty to cast spells is all out of whack so it's just pointless.
Thankfully d6 Fantasy has enough of a magic system that is pretty easy to adapt it to most settings. And WEG d6 is very homebrew friendly in general.
Yeah. Other d6 games like Into The Shadows have good magic systems too. There's a lot to steal from!
>(don't bother with weird wizard)
Because it's new and incomplete or because there are significant problems built into the rules?
I'm a big fan of Shadow of the Demon Lord.
>or because there are significant problems built into the rules?
Who knows, only the first book is out(haven't seen secrets uploaded) and there are supposed to be three(?). From what I read of the first book it seems to have some really good ideas and a lot, a lot, of nonsense and inconsequential rules to be read once and completely forgotten forever afterwards. Maybe with all three an abridged version that makes sense can be compiled. We will have to wait and see.
Just two core books. Secrets is a really good GM book. A lot better than SotDL's core chapter IMO. Better advice, more enemy variety, more traps and tools.
As someone who likes WW, it's probably the latter for them. Lots of changes across the board that might mean you dislike SotWW despite liking SotDL. A few things have been fairly divisive but not is a way I would say are fundamental issues. Just different ways of handling things. I see it largely as a refinement from SotDL core rules but with new things for the new genre. There are actually couple of issues with it but they're fairly small and from what I gather errata is still on going so they'll probably get solved. The big one was layout but they're redoing the whole book. As a package it's about twice the size of SotDL's core book so it's not lacking in content.
There was a thread about it a few days ago where I said this about the paths.
>Better IMO [than SotDL]. There is more variety than SotDL had for a long time off the bat here as well and caters to some fantasies I still think SotDL is lacking. Fighter caters to a lot of fighting styles, Commander is a martial leader, Martial Artist is a totally mundane monk-type, Beastfriend gets a pet, Inheritor a storied magic weapon. SotDL has a lot more Paths overall but I think there are more gaps in it when it comes to some classic fantasy classes. Lots of nicher options but no good way to make a pet ranger for example. Hard to say how much of me enjoying the new paths is just that they're fresh options but they all seem a bit more exciting than SotDL. The martial side especially has a few more things going on.
>I haven't had time to play it yet but I grumbled about Rogue when it came out but with the monster manual I think it's probably a lot better than it looked without it. Enemies have less boons in SotWW from my read through so a triggered action for 2 banes is stronger than I was thinking it was. Combat Opportunist's damage might not be very worth while right now either but I'm not sure how much synergy it has. It needs more natural defense but I think that's a problem they've all got right now.
The rules aren't INHERENTLY bad, but there is a bit of a lack of balance in the initial grouping of classes so far, Paths of Skill in particular. It'll need a few supplements' worth of classes to be really worthwhile stacked up against DL. Also not a huge fan of the prevalence of Luck rolls in the system, which are essentially coin flips outside of a handful of effects that give them boons/banes (mostly the latter).
I do like the social combat section they have (which can be ported 1:1 into DL, which I am doing) and general melee combat is improved, letting you convert your bonus damage as a resource for extra cleave attacks and other class features. Afflictions have more of a variety in how they work too.
Which Paths of Skill do you think are under performing? The only one I have much issue with is Annihilator. It does scale better than the magical equivalents but I think it's not doing enough when that's all its doing. Scout looks like it might take a bit to ramp up too but looks good in general.
Trapsmith and Spellthief give stuff you can get from lower lists already, Mastermind has a silly capstone that encourages playing your character contrary to its concept up until that point, Sniper has some really bad caveats like Stealth Mode potentially inflicting grievous harm to you. A lot of people don't like that War Machine's capstone can blow up and be perma-gone but I think it's alright. Ravenguard is really mediocre as it relies on a 10 HP companion with really bad offensive stats doing things, and its level 8 reaction is just Murmuration from SotDL, which is like a level 2/3 spell. Rakehell's debt mechanic needs something more, the one way to remove the tokens is quite lacking.
I also realize now after scouring through the list I meant Paths of Prowess, not Skill. But yes, Annihilator is quite lacking compared to the Destruction magic specialists of DL.
I saw the talk about Trapsmith in the thread a while back. I think people are being silly. It's a generally better version of the spell and not their central feature in any sense. I'm not sure what your point of comparison on Spellthief is, but I think Mastermind and Sniper are both fine. If people want to do the cheesy hyper munchkin thing with Mastermind that's fine. You'll get less out of the Path until that point and then get one adventure to gloat about your cool build. In the spirit of the game I don't think it really poses an issue. Sniper does have a very harsh penalty but pretty its rare and Sniper is also very good from the looks of it.
Ravenguard could be a problem but I think in general it's probably fine at most tables. Its generally not worth swatting but if you do it's back next fight. Enemy Def is more variable than in SotDL too from the looks of things where low def creatures are pretty common so I don't think +2 and 2 boons is really all that bad. It's the rest of the kit here I think is great. Fluttering of Wings you can say is just like Mumuration from SotDL but that's not a comparison that matters because it's not in SotDL. Halving damage seems very rare in SotWW and you can do it every battle, and if Murmuration was a spell here you'd only be doing it once or thrice a day. I'd like the Raven to be harder to hit but I don't think it's a major deal over all.
Rakehell is maybe the most interesting one to talk about. I think it looks very very cool and is one of the more exciting options. Getting rid of Debt seems very punishing but having too much is worse but a stacking boon or -d20 to a roll is very powerful so you'll have lots. That's something I really want to play around with.
I think Annihilator scales fine all in all but very much not my thing. It might not be a bad thing exactly because if you want to play a magic character that's pretty simple it's not a bad fit for that but I think more could be done with it.
Rogue is an inferior Novice Path to the other three options, and it's a night and day difference. It barely even has an identity of it's own.
I mentioned upthread that I was with the people saying Rogue was underpowered but now I've had more time to absorb the game and read through Secrets I think it's in a good place overall. Cunning Dodge was being majorly overlooked because it's not that impressive in SotDL terms and Rogue in SotDL is good at everything and gets more turns. It's hard to compete with that but on SotWW's own terms I think it's got a lot going for it.
>Because it's new and incomplete or because there are significant problems built into the rules?
The latter. A lot of the changes made to it to make it more "marketable" are simply huge negatives.
>Despite the entire point of the game reducing stats from 6 to 4 being that now every attribute is important for every character in SOTDL, weird wizard made the moronic decision to divorce most of your attributes from your stats besides your "key attribute score", so now you don't get extra health from strength or extra defense from agility etc, making character building moronic and making it so picking classes with higher base health pools is virtually always better since you have an insurmountable advantage over others.
>Removal of Power as a stat means that you're heavily encouraged EVEN MORE to just pick high health classes with powerful defensive abilities as your novice and expert paths and then snag whatever Master spells you want since now they're completely disconnected from one another.
>TAKING EVERY RACE BUT HUMAN OUT OF THE CORE BOOK AND PUTTING A FRICKING ADVERTISEMENT FOR A SECOND BOOK TO BUY THEM. Despite SOTDL having rules for goddamn Clockworks in the Core rulebook, Weird Wizard decided that it would rather spend 40 pages on useless shit like Inclement Weather and Wind Speed conditions in the Player's Handbook rather than have fricking rules for Elves and Dwarves. And this is supposedly the "more accessible" spinoff game.
>Terrible artwork and a poorly formatted book in general
>moronic changes like nerfing rogues for no reason, again encouraging you to just play high health classes since they get the same benefits but also an extra bonus nobody else can get
>"key attribute score"
That's not a thing any more than it is in SotDL. You want your highest attribute to be the thing you're doing.
>so now you don't get extra health from strength or extra defense from agility etc
That's probably why it was removed. +1 Def vs +1 Health is not in anyway an even choice.
I agree with most of this, but Agility does increase Defense. Light armor just also has a flat Defense number you can use in place of Agility + its listed bonus.
Sold. Power was the single worse thing in Demon Lord, and I'm including the poop spells. The rest of that seems like non-issues or things that were already in Demon Lord too.
I'd prefer one core book but I play enough games that need two so I can live with a player/ST split so long as there is enough page count to justify that.
Rolemaster 4 + Shadow World if you want something pick up and go.
GURPS Fantasy, taking from GURPS Dungeon Fantasy and low tech and martial arts and thaumatology if you want to kitbash something for a homebrew setting.
my homebrew
Yes, his homebrew
post it then gaygit
I did, you should’ve been there
/thread
as long as your homebrew isn't called array of champions or whatever the frick was the name of that atrocious game anon tried to chill here
Fabula Ultima
fabula ultima is fricking troony garbage that shits all over ryuutama, what the frick are you spouting
The one that you have the most fun with
Top 5 in order of quality but weighted for how close to D&D they are
>SotWW (when it's fully out)
>SotDL
>Conan 2d20
>WFRP 4e
>13th Age
ascending or descending order?
the homebrew you and your mates build together and change whenever you all agree something is off
Depends greatly on what you're trying to emulate and, even having that clear in your mind, there's no unambiguous answer, nor one devoid of compromises.
Even designing your own you have to make peace with various necessity, like playability or referencing needs, that may force you to sacrifice part of what envisioned initially.
That said i like sword & sorcery and/or picaresque/rogueish themes, i like impairments, choices and consequences to exist but not necessarily high lethality as one, i like packed cinematic, pulp action but not superheroic/wuxia level of nonsense. I like subtlety and danger in the supernatural instead of the flashy display and consequenceless nature of d&dish magic. I like mystery abot overt display of the fantastical unless breaching to weird/alien Moebius tier of fantasy/sci-fi, i like to start from grounded and then work my way to fever dream tier of Moorwienerian fantastical circling than back to the starting point.
I could go on and on in futher define what i'm looking for and i would never actually reach a definitive frame.
I like all of the above but that doesn't mean it has to be in a single game all at once, that's why i gravitate towards wfrp, gurps, savage worlds, brp, hârnmaster, rolemaster and even d&d to some degrees.
Earthdawn. Cool class system. Cool magic item system. Cool intertwined magic system.
I like ACKS
ACKS is B/X and therefore DnD. Even if it is HEAVILY modified DnD
Mythras or Pendragon
Pic related. Baby's first OSR can be baby's first ttrpg.
Yea, OP probably should have asked for the best fantasy system that isn't a D&D-like. Or he should have asked for the best D&D-like. Now people are just going to argue about what does and doesn't count as D&D.
anything with six ability scores called Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma where you roll 1d20 and add a modifier to see if your attacks hit is D&D. Those are the only mechanics that every game published under the name "Dungeons & Dragons" actually share so that ought to be the bar.
I would argue, but 4e fricks up my argument just by existing so there. You win an internet today.
what's your argument and how does 4e frick it up
Palladium was fun. Haven't played in ages though.
With or without the mental illnesses/sexual deviation table as written by actual genuine psychologist (TM) (using at least 10 year old definitions)?
>what is the best fantasy game system
I don't know if I would say it was best (even leaving aside the fact that "best" is a matter of opinion), but my first recommendation for Babby's First HYTNPDND is WFRP (2e or 4e).
The rules are a little fiddly but easy enough, there's a few races but not too many, you can easily scale the amount of magic, the setting is generic enough to feel familiar to anyone but rich enough to not feel generic, the Early Modern period is a little new and exotic but close enough to the late Middle Ages of most D&D, and there's a class system which is more complex and flexible than D&Ds, but still provides good structure for players who want/need that.
Basic Fantasy RPG
90% of the anons in this thread suggested meme systems (rollmaster, gurps, star wars), troony shit or retroclones.
I guess you really should just play D&D. Preferrably 3.5 because it's the best edition.
But I have glanced over the core savage worlds rulebook and it's fine I guess?
what systems besides savage worlds do you not consider to be "meme games" or "troony shit" anon
Without having played it, the grimdark and poop aside, Shadow of the Demon Lord looks awesome for that.
But then again, I love 3.5e prestige classes and multi classing so I'm biased.
>"troony shit"
opinion discarded
Earthdawn
L5R
Genesys (Terrinoth)
ACKS
2d6