4 ms·

In a true manifestation of synchronicity, I've been looking into different RPG systems to get back into playing after a long hiatus. Having experience in PF1 a

In a true manifestation of synchronicity, I've been looking into different RPG systems to get back into playing after a long hiatus. Having experience in PF1 and D&D, I've tried to look into alternative systems, which can be characterized as "rules light" to ease newbies' pickup stress. I was surprised by the sheer quantity of options, leading to a complete analysis paralysis. Not only there's a plethora of OSR (old-school renaissance) systems regurgitating old D&D, but also games with new and interesting mechanics. My preliminary findings: • Dungeon Crawl Classics: + great style + plenty of contents + lots of random tables + high-effort magic with consequences + close OSR compatibility - (huge con) weird dice • Tiny Dungeon / Advanced Tiny Dungeon: + simple and logical mechanics (based around 2d6 -/+ 1d6 for [dis]advantage) + concise rules - bland magic - magic almost requires buying additional book (micronomicon) - not compatible with OSR/D20 contents without conversions - not many adventures/settings to choose from • Barbarians of Lemuria: + simple system - not generic enough (strong Sword&Sorcery flavour) - not much content available • ICRPG: + very rules light + great DM advice section of the book - disputable mechanics decisions which not all players might be on board with - low compatibility with classic contents - included setting[s] don't look flexible enough for different styles of play • EZD6: +/- basic mechanics on the verge of being limiting +/- strong reliance on metagame mechanics - relies on DM being really skilled - low classic contents compatibility • Microlite and variations: + super light and low crunch + great compatibility - mechanics break down with progression - may be too simple for inexperienced players/DMs • Low Fantasy RPG: + nice mechanics - not exactly rules light • Worlds Without Number: + free + decent compatibility with OSR/D20 content + huge set of DM tools + generic enough for different styles/settings - not rules light • Basic Fantasy: + free + great OSR variation - Not the best presentation of the rules (lots of jumping around the book) Other contestants: Swords & Wizards, Castles & Crusades, Lamentations of the Flame Princess, World of Dungeons This is just scratching the surface and needs to be put into a big table of comparison to be at least minimally useful. It would be nice to crowdsource this comparison in some wiki.

infinitezest 4y ago
Savage Worlds is my personal favorite. Its not exactly rules-light but it is fairly "a-la-carte". You really only need to learn the basics to play but there are a ton of subsystems you can employ if you want to. Another great one is The Black Hack which is much more rules light and in the DCC vein.
yamtaddle 4y ago
> Having experience in PF1 and D&D, I've tried to look into alternative systems, which can be characterized as "rules light" to ease newbies' pickup stress. D&D 5e and PF 2 both do a pretty good job of: 1) Streamlining and simplifying rules, and 2) Making battles less dull for whoever's not currently taking their turn, which helps a lot with a couple weak spots in those systems. I'd still not call them "rules light", but they are a lot more approachable than before.
- ZoomZoomZoom 4y ago
  I studied 5e rules pretty thoroughly and I liked them a lot in theory. Still, (1.) I'm looking for something even more compressed (2.) I really like the whole OSR ethos of higher risks, less widespread/more expensive magic, accent on problem solving, rather then grinding/war-gaming, etc.
- Ekaros 4y ago
  Playing 5e semi-regularly and having tried PF2 I wouldn't really put those systems on same level. 5e is streamlined system, with simple bonuses and advantage/disadvantage. Where as PF2 is somewhat daunting with multi attack penalties and the huge number of various statuses and qualities. Somewhat annoyingly ending up in decision paralysis with some classes. Then again started with play testing, so it could have somewhat improved.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    Yeah, PF2's still the more complex of the two, for sure, but PF1 was crufty as hell, and they did succeed in making it a smoother experience than that was, at least. I'd say PF2's what you should go with if you want a modern system but like the idea of older-school RPGs, without necessarily loving the reality of them—it gives you some of the crunch of traditional systems with some QOL improvements and some of the dead weight removed, plus some attention to improving the actual experience of play (especially combat, and double-especially combat for non-casters). Meanwhile, I'd probably tend to point someone interested in D&D but without much knowledge of or opinions about systems, toward 5e—if you don't know you want a somewhat-fiddlier ruleset of something like PF2, then you probably don't want it.
saddestcatever 4y ago
What are your thoughts on Dungeon World (PbtA)? For rules-lite, classic D&D-themes, and easy for newbies, I've found it to be a good choice for my group.

infinitezest 4y ago

Savage Worlds is my personal favorite. Its not exactly rules-light but it is fairly "a-la-carte". You really only need to learn the basics to play but there are a ton of subsystems you can employ if you want to. Another great one is The Black Hack which is much more rules light and in the DCC vein.

yamtaddle 4y ago

> Having experience in PF1 and D&D, I've tried to look into alternative systems, which can be characterized as "rules light" to ease newbies' pickup stress. D&D 5e and PF 2 both do a pretty good job of: 1) Streamlining and simplifying rules, and 2) Making battles less dull for whoever's not currently taking their turn, which helps a lot with a couple weak spots in those systems. I'd still not call them "rules light", but they are a lot more approachable than before.

ZoomZoomZoom 4y ago
I studied 5e rules pretty thoroughly and I liked them a lot in theory. Still, (1.) I'm looking for something even more compressed (2.) I really like the whole OSR ethos of higher risks, less widespread/more expensive magic, accent on problem solving, rather then grinding/war-gaming, etc.
Ekaros 4y ago
Playing 5e semi-regularly and having tried PF2 I wouldn't really put those systems on same level. 5e is streamlined system, with simple bonuses and advantage/disadvantage. Where as PF2 is somewhat daunting with multi attack penalties and the huge number of various statuses and qualities. Somewhat annoyingly ending up in decision paralysis with some classes. Then again started with play testing, so it could have somewhat improved.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  Yeah, PF2's still the more complex of the two, for sure, but PF1 was crufty as hell, and they did succeed in making it a smoother experience than that was, at least. I'd say PF2's what you should go with if you want a modern system but like the idea of older-school RPGs, without necessarily loving the reality of them—it gives you some of the crunch of traditional systems with some QOL improvements and some of the dead weight removed, plus some attention to improving the actual experience of play (especially combat, and double-especially combat for non-casters). Meanwhile, I'd probably tend to point someone interested in D&D but without much knowledge of or opinions about systems, toward 5e—if you don't know you want a somewhat-fiddlier ruleset of something like PF2, then you probably don't want it.

saddestcatever 4y ago

What are your thoughts on Dungeon World (PbtA)? For rules-lite, classic D&D-themes, and easy for newbies, I've found it to be a good choice for my group.