Non d20 games thread

[snoopy13a]

Inspired by the d100 thread, what are some of your favorite non-d20 RPGs?

Personally, I liked playing:

1) Mechwarrior (2nd edition, although I believe there is a 3rd now)- RPG set as a companion to the Battletech wargame. Used a d6, skill based system

2) Old West End Games Star Wars- Another d6, skill based system, although vastly different mechanics.

3) Old Marvel Superheroes- used percentile die.

[Sanguine]

I have to say Exalted is the first thing that comes to mind.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

I'm a big fan of Scion (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Scion), even with limited time that I actually played it.

Deadlands (http://www.peginc.com/games.html) is also a wonderfully weird set-up, where, oddly enough, the d12 is akin to a king.

[Jayabalard]

By non-d20, do you mean games that are not part of the d20 family, or are you also including other games that use a D20 as it's primary resolution mechanic (ie, palladium)

[Mordar]

After seeing the recent d100 (d%) game thread, I almost posted about my favorite game ever, hands-down, but I didn't. This thread, however, appeared during my lunch time, so now I shall post. My name is Mordar, and I love Rolemaster.

A wonderfully comprehensive game, Rolemaster allows so much flexability and opportunity to emulate all of the heroes we've grown up reading about - from the burliest barbarian to the knight who inspires armies to battle on the field (and damsels in the ballroom) to the slick-as-Silk diplomat who can also survive an epic trek. It is at once complex (in its choices and options) and simple (never have to remember which dice you need), accomodates most any vision of fantasy RP, and was among the first games that I played to reward diversity of action.

I've spoilered my somewhat rambling comments - I'm just not feeling well focused today, and I had to let some residual geek out...

While it does require more bookkeeping than many, it's "fun" bookkeeping - tracking the creatures defeated in combat, for instance. Everything is skill-based, from your skill with 1H bashing weapons to your ability to dance, so you have a pile of skill points to allocate at each level. What some see as a burden, many see as opporunity to show improvement and development.

Combat in Rolemaster can be lengthy but is the most enjoyable semi-simulation game I have ever had the pleasure of playing. Weapons, armor and skill are all considered in resolution. To whit, the attacker makes a d% roll, adds their skill (and any applicable modifiers). The defender subtracts their skill (and any applicable modifiers). The GM takes the final number and determines the result based on the weapon and armor class. If the attack is particularly sucessful, a critical hit is scored and the attacker gets to roll to determine the nature of the critical.

RoleMaster has been dubbed "ChartMaster" by detractors, claiming that "you have to roll on a chart to see what chart you roll on" and that combat is bogged down by math and chart lookups. Advocates, however, point out that particular weapons serve very different purposes and different armor types impact the effectiveness of weapons...that rapier is *generally* less effective against plate armor, for instance, but can more easily pierce the defender through the gaps in chain mail, leading to bleeding damage. Rolemaster has 1-roll resolution - unlike, say, D&D - for all non-critical hits...the attack roll determines damage.

RoleMaster's spellcasting is a embarassment of riches - point based casting, spell lists that are logical and inclusive while speaking to the flavor of any magician from any flavor of fiction, and a wonderful array of "classes" capable of casting from the purest academic to the mystical kung-fu master.

For anyone interested in on-the-sheet character development to go along with their RP or backstory development, this is my most heartfelt recommendation. The detail available (but not mandatory) is wonderful, the combats are both exciting and involved and the breadth of opportunity is unmatched outside of strictly-in-your-head sandbox games (compared to any I have played in my nearly 30 year history)...and in years of play I never saw any "CharOp" threads or "Don't take [skill X], it's a waste of time, n00b" comments about this game.

I understand subsequent ICE games (HarnMaster? Others?) and some inspired or influenced by RoleMaster remain out there and strong and I hope there are groups having as much fun with them as I did with mine.

- M

PS: I recognize every game can be wonderful and every game can be ruined by MixMaximus, bad luck or a poor group. That being said, I long for the days of playing my Montebanc or Nightblade...and the Archmage and Chaoslord too...after all, where else could my perform (harp), perform (composing) and Bluff skills all come together to draw the Efreeti Lord out of his manse so that my companions could sneak inside and secure the objective of our quest to the City of Brass (you know, like on the old AD&D book)?

[Yuki Akuma]

Risus, GURPS, Exalted and nWoD, I guess. I don't really care about what dice a game uses...

[snoopy13a]

By non-d20, do you mean games that are not part of the d20 family, or are you also including other games that use a D20 as it's primary resolution mechanic (ie, palladium)

The ones that don't use a d20 as primary resolution (either use d6s, percentile/d100, etc). Superficially, d20 games tend to use level based systems while non d20 games tend to focus on developing skills, attributes and powers for advancement.

[Glimbur]

Risus (http://www222.pair.com/sjohn/risus.htm) is a lot of fun. So is Wuthering Heights (http://www.unseelie.org/rpg/wh/index.html), though I advise changing the problem table to have fewer physical ailments and more mental and social issues.

[Satyr]

Mechwarrior (2nd edition, although I believe there is a 3rd now)- RPG set as a companion to the Battletech wargame. Used a d6, skill based system
I loved 2nd edition mechwarrior. Such a sdimple yet elegant game design. As far as I know, the 3rd edition is a true brain bug. I mean, what's the sense in a mechwarrior game,which is not compatible with the Battletech boardgame?

But hey, let's list a few underappriciated jewels of Roleplaying:

The Unisystem Games by Eden Studios. All Flesh Must Be Eaten is probably the best known one of those, but there are actually quite a few games using the same - excellent - rules.Unisystem is a very broad generic system, and while it does not play in the same league like Gurps or Hero, it is pretty much what Savage Worlds wants to be a fast game which is easy to learn and makes actually fun. Unisystem uses a mechanism very similar to D20 (ability + skill +1d10, against a fixed difficulty). The settings include such gems like Witchcraft (pretty much "World of Darkness, concentrated"), Armageddon ("What if heaven, hell, and Asgard join forces with different human forces to fight against the Elder Gods? Because can you think of a more awesome group of characters than an Avatar of Thor, Merlin, Harry Dresden, a Seraphim and a pissed of shapeshifting cat fighting against Cthulluh?"), and Terra Primate (the universal game of big bad apes. I know it sounds stupid, but it is actually a pretty good game).

Legend of the Five Rings by AEG. I know that I only like this game out of ignorance. It is a samurai / eastern fantasy game, and it actually makes a lot of fun to play (even though it is a bit bloodthirsty...) and the rule system works well enough. The background is okay, but a bit too much focused on becoming more and more awesome per edition, which leads to the opposite effect than intended. The problem is, that I am quite sure that if I had more than token knowledge about eastern cultures and customs I would probably groan a lot about this game; the same people made one of the abslutely worst RPG settings ever, Seventh Sea, and if they treat another culture with as much intuition and understanding as this piece of crap in L5R as well, I probably wouldn't touch it. But as it is, it's a fun game.

Degenesis. The most beautiful roleplaying game I have ever hold in my hands. Truly astonishing artwork (in its own groteque way). And an absolutely intriguing back story. Yes it is yet another endtime post apocalypse setting, but in this regard, it is an unachieved masterpiece... background-wise. The rules are not that elegant, but it was certainly the RPG book that made the most fun to simply read I have ever seen. Unfortunately, it is a pure German game, and the planned English translation was finished, but never published. But hey, if you speak German, the core book can be downloaded for free. And it's worth it.

And there is Harnmaster, which is probably the game with the highest tension quota per combat I know. It is a bit old school, using a d% and all this, but the combats are unmatched in their gritty suspension building.

I could also rant a lot about over-hyped systems like Savage Worlds, or truly bad ones like the Song of ice and Fire RPG by Green Ronin, but it is nicer to say something positive.

[Theodoric]

The Second edition of Warhammer Fantasy Role Play was quite good; haven't quite looked into the third edition yet, though.

[Longcat]

Shadowrun: Cyberpunk+Fantasy? Sign me up!
World of Darkness: I've always liked Vampires, Magie, Werewolves and the like
From Another Time, Another Land: Deserves special mention as a benchmark

[fusilier]

WEG Star Wars -- I really liked that system, but haven't had a chance to play it in many years. :-(

GURPS is another one of my favorites.

[GolemsVoice]

Unhallowed Metropolis! Oh boy!

1905, a huge the dead rose. Suddenly, all of Europe and the Americas were brought to the brink of extinction, most falling back into a dark age of small hamlets and disorganized city states. Great Britain, however, lost it's colonies, but, due to being an island, managed to abandon the main cities, shoot them to dust, and slowly, ever so slowly, regain them. This was known as the Reclamation, and lasted about 60 years, ending with the full Reclamation of London. But the plague, and what it brought, changed the world forever. A Wasteland started to appear, slowly eating the green fields of England, and replacing them with unfertile, poisonous soil. Ever spreading, noone knows what the source of this corruption is, or how to stop it.
The wave of death and misery wore thin the barriers between life and death, and psychic phenomena and hauntings began to manifest among the already harrowed refugees, as well as persons who controlled spirits and the powers of the mind.
The dead no longer sleep peacefully, and the more miserably the place somebody died, the more likely it is that his corps will rise to seek the flesh of the living. Many cities were never reclaimed, standing as Sepulchres in the wastes, a place of death and despair, haunted by Animates and Ghouls.
London, known as the Metropolis, rises as a bastion behind 40 feet walls, manned by the ever vigilant Deathwatch, it's streets prowled by Undertakers, licenced bounty hunters on the lookout for Vampires or Zombies.
With the rediscoverd power of Alchemy or Tesa power, ressurectionists seek to restore life to the dead form, creating a legion of horrors in the process. Mad doctors seek the ultimate cure to the Plague, trying to distill the Elixier Vitea and end mankind's suffering.
High above, the aristocrats and barons of industry watch full of disinterest, lost in the eternal game of society and plagued by ennui. They see themselves above the Common man, and many indulge in any vice just to ease the boredom, seldom being stopped by the Law.
The misery of the overcrowded city has given birth to a new kind of killer, men and women driven mad by the life they are forced to live, ever competing with Vampires for the headlines of the dailys.
The poor live out their short lifes in the slums, serving from sunup to sundown, easing their pain with cheap pills or cheap liquor.
The ashes of the dead, who must be cremated under pain of death, and the fumes of London's rampant industry have poisoed the air to such a level that leaving home without a gas mask is to invite sickness and suffering.

All in all, it's a mixture of gothic horror, steampunk, the penny dreadfuls and mad science come to an unholy semblance of life. It has some very interesting mechanics (like incrasing your corruption, a rating which measures the depravity of a character) to gain rerolls, and a unique and incredibly detailed setting. The mechanics are simple (mostly roll 2d10+ability/skill agains a TN) and combar is deadly, with a wound system that can easily cripple or kill characters. Most fascinating, but a very special setting.

[mr.fizzypop]

...The Unisystem Games by Eden Studios. All Flesh Must Be Eaten is probably the best known one of those, but there are actually quite a few games using the same - excellent - rules.Unisystem is a very broad generic system, and while it does not play in the same league like Gurps or Hero, it is pretty much what Savage Worlds wants to be a fast game which is easy to learn and makes actually fun. Unisystem uses a mechanism very similar to D20 (ability + skill +1d10, against a fixed difficulty). The settings include such gems like Witchcraft (pretty much "World of Darkness, concentrated"), Armageddon ("What if heaven, hell, and Asgard join forces with different human forces to fight against the Elder Gods? Because can you think of a more awesome group of characters than an Avatar of Thor, Merlin, Harry Dresden, a Seraphim and a pissed of shapeshifting cat fighting against Cthulluh?"), and Terra Primate (the universal game of big bad apes. I know it sounds stupid, but it is actually a pretty good game)...

Unisystem and AFMBE is the only system I've tried other than D20. I've found the game to be much more realistic than D20. Guns in this can kill in one shot, and even if you survive you're not going to heal back to full health for at least a month, and that's with hospital care!

The only other system I've tried is Paranoia, but I think that still counts as "D20".

[TheCountAlucard]

Shadowrun and Exalted both jump to the forefront of my brain. :smallamused:

[The Dark Fiddler]

FATAL.

Not because I played it and found it fun or anything, but it's always nice to have something to point to and say, "This is not how you do it."

Like why everyone likes My Immortal.

[Kiero]

The only D20 game I played that I liked was D&D4e. While I think it's a good game to play, I could never run it. I've played a lot of systems over the years, it's one of just three I think is any good at all.

If I'm running something, it's a choice of two. For one-shots, nothing beats Wushu. Takes five minutes to explain the rules in their entirety, characters and setting/premise can be done in half an hour if necessary (I prefer offering a number of fixed premises with pregens, rather than burn up creativity and enthusiasm with setting-gen and chargen), a whole scenario can be done and dusted in under four hours.

If I'm playing something longer (ideally in the region of 5-10 sessions), FATE, hacked to fit the premise, is my go-to. A game where it's not just what the characters can do that matters, but who they are as well. Aspects are a really powerful way of not only making that relevant, but getting the players to think beyond their characters as collections of skills on a character sheet. I also like that it puts the players' desires front and centre, if something matters to you it features in your character's Aspects.

But then it's also got the concrete side of things covered with very traditional Skills and Stunts.

[subject42]

By non-d20, do you mean games that are not part of the d20 family, or are you also including other games that use a D20 as it's primary resolution mechanic (ie, palladium)

Maybe we just had a weird campaign when I played, but we used the d30 considerably more than the d20 in Rifts.

I'm still scarred by that game, but that's a story for another time.

[9mm]

Inspired by the d100 thread, what are some of your favorite non-d20 RPGs?

Personally, I liked playing:

1) Mechwarrior (2nd edition, although I believe there is a 3rd now)- RPG set as a companion to the Battletech wargame. Used a d6, skill based system


Universe at War is in beta right now last I checked; It is hilariously well written.

[erikun]

World of Darkness and Shadowrun are two that I like and are fairly familiar with. Burning Wheel and Muntants and Masterminds (d20 mechanism) also deserve mention, although I haven't used those two yet.

[Dexam]

I understand subsequent ICE games (HarnMaster? Others?) and some inspired or influenced by RoleMaster remain out there and strong and I hope there are groups having as much fun with them as I did with mine.

HârnMaster isn't an ICE game - perhaps you are thinking of HARP (High Adventure Role Playing)? HARP is an ICE game that's a "successor" to RoleMaster, to the point where it's relatively easy to convert characters/creatures/items/etc back and forth between the two... or so I've been told. I've only played in HARP games, not RoleMaster, so I don't know from first-hand experience, but one of my HARP GM's said that he has converted creatures and items from RoleMaster to HARP with ease.

[Bagelz]

World of Darkness and Shadowrun are two that I like and are fairly familiar with. Burning Wheel and Muntants and Masterminds (d20 mechanism) also deserve mention, although I haven't used those two yet.

I am also a big fan of shadowrun (3e haven't played the newer editions) and world of darkness (especally old mage and vampire and the new core set).

[GolemsVoice]

Degenesis. The most beautiful roleplaying game I have ever hold in my hands. Truly astonishing artwork (in its own groteque way). And an absolutely intriguing back story. Yes it is yet another endtime post apocalypse setting, but in this regard, it is an unachieved masterpiece... background-wise. The rules are not that elegant, but it was certainly the RPG book that made the most fun to simply read I have ever seen. Unfortunately, it is a pure German game, and the planned English translation was finished, but never published. But hey, if you speak German, the core book can be downloaded for free. And it's worth it.

Oh, yes, Degenesis. I've skimmed the pages, as I don't like reading on the PC, but one day I'll have to read it properly.

[Swordgleam]

Wushu for the win. Because nothing is beats a game where "I vault over the balcony, kick him in the chest and let my momentum carry me forward over his body so that I can stab his friend in the face" is more likely to succeed than just "I stab him in the face."

[The Rose Dragon]

Wushu for the win. Because nothing is beats a game where "I vault over the balcony, kick him in the chest and let my momentum carry me forward over his body so that I can stab his friend in the face" is more likely to succeed than just "I stab him in the face."

So, like, Exalted and Pandemonium don't even get honorable mention? Because they have stunt mechanics, too.

Besides, Wushu, if I recall correctly, has no success or failure. It just has degrees of affecting the outcome.

[Satyr]

Oh, yes, Degenesis. I've skimmed the pages, as I don't like reading on the PC, but one day I'll have to read it properly.

I read it, I bought it. Than I played it using the original rules, found them annoying, and replaced them with Gurps (nowadays I would probably use Unisystem for the conversion, but back in the days, I didn't know those existed) to play a very cool and impressive campaign.


Wushu for the win. Because nothing is beats a game where "I vault over the balcony, kick him in the chest and let my momentum carry me forward over his body so that I can stab his friend in the face" is more likely to succeed than just "I stab him in the face."

How about a game that treats iditic actions as if they they were in fact idiotic, and not reward them? Wushu, and games with a similar scope suffer from the very problem of permanent overkill and thuse undermine their very intent; by making everything spectacular and outstanding, nothing is outstanding anymore and every action, no matter how awesome they would be in any game where they would be a true achievement, are just bland giveaways.

And, continuing the praise of underappriciated games:

Earthdawn. The only truly good high magic setting I have ever seen. The setting is fantastic, exotic and actually imaginative (at least in parts, and for a game that uses the standard array of fantasy species, you know dwarves, elves and orcs), the mechanics are solid (and were ripped of by Savage Worlds, and then made bland and boring - which is actually kind of an achievement), and it is the only game I ever saw where classes and levels made actually sense and were not something like a metagaming artifact with no inherent correspondence in the true game, but had a plausible in-game concept.
I am actually surprised that this wasn't mentioned earlier. There was a time when Earthdawn was actually kind of a big game, back in the days when FASA still existed.

Unknown Armies. Okay, this might be a bit esoteric, and you just know that any roleplaying game that describes itself as 'post-modern' has it's very own issues, but it is actually a very good game. You could probably compare it to the World of Darkness Mage games, but Unknown Armies is a lot more creative in its presentation of the supernatural. Magic comes from paradox, and the forms of magic are actually making sense, in their own ways. These are not the ancient orders of Atlantis, or the secret lodge of the knights templar or a similar stale standard example; these are mages basing their powers on libraries (the more books you own and read, the more powerful your magic becomes), Dipsomancers draw power from binge drinking, and not to forget the powers of pornomancy. Others become the incarnation of global concepts of the collective subconsciousness, and take the role of these godlike figures. It is an truly spectacular game, with a tendency of decent understatement. It is also completely anthropocentric, which is a refreshing alternative to the World of Darkness (which seem to be so full with supernatural creatures that pure, naive humans alomst appear to be a minority). As a big plus, Unknown Armies is almost as well written as Degenesis. Almost. And the other big plus, it has the most coherent and fun rules for actual insanity I have ever seen. If I would create a Frankenstein Monster of the best roleplaying games to create the game to end all games, I would totally vivisect Unknown Armies to steal these insanity rules.

There's a cult in California who've found a way of crossing voudoun with The Picture of Dorian Grey. They stay the most beautiful of the beautiful people while a village in Kansas gets steadily uglier.

[Emmerask]

I would also like to mention the dark eye (das schwarze auge) I think it´s not so very well known outside of germany.
The rules are quite complex and for the most part well thought out but what really makes this one stand out is the prewritten campaign and all the fluff in it.

If I would have to compare it to the d&d adventure modules it would be like comparing lord of the rings/wheel of time or other fantasy epics compared to a duck tales comic :smallbiggrin:

It is played with 3d20 but not in the "normal" d20 way you roll those three d20 to determine successes and failures so its more played like d6 games but with d20s instead.
So in essence I think it falls under the non d20 games despite using d20s ^^

[Satyr]

The rules are quite complex and for the most part well thought out but what really makes this one stand out is the prewritten campaign and all the fluff in it.

There are several campaigns in it. Some are awesome (Year of the Griffin, Phileasson Saga, and of course Borbarad's Return, and my personal favorite, Bloody Sea), some are mediocre (Kingmakers, In the Shadow of Simyala) and a few are truly bad and bland (the Orcland Trilogy, Year of Fire). Okay, even the bad ones are an equal match or even superior to supposedly 'good' D&D campaigns like Red Hand of Doom, but the rules... let's be honest, The Dark Eye rules are messed-up, incoherent nightmare. There is a lot of traditional baggage which is just carried along, there are too many authors who don't understand their own rules, and in many, many ways the rules seem to try to take the most arbitrarily complicated rule possible.
A streamlined version of the Dark Eye would be an absolutely awesome game. But as it is, it's a great setting with absolutely ingenious campaigns (Borbarad alone is probably better than anything ever published for D&D... I know that sounds like a hyperbole, but that is one truly epic campaign, if you don't mind the strong tendency to railroading) and rules that are just plain bad. I love the world, I love the general feeling of the world, but I think I could write better rules than that.

[Marillion]

I love 7th Sea. Mechanically, everything is based off of a d10, with your attributes and skills determining how many die you roll and how many of those die you count. I found it to be streamlined and very enjoyable.

What I really liked, though, was how it was sort of a parallel to 17th century Europe and that each nation had a unique form of sorcery. The setting was so well-thought out and well-written that I just fell in love with it.

Personally, I liked playing a Montaigne (French) sorcerer best. The Montaigne bloodline carries Porte sorcery. My hands were stained with the blood of the universe. I literally ripped screaming, bloody holes in the flesh of reality, and used those holes to transport myself anywhere in the world. I was also a mooch and a complete pansy.

Good times.

[Shardan]

Here Here to Seventh Sea.

Tonov, the indestructable Ussuran raises a mug to a fellow fan.

[Emmerask]

There are several campaigns in it. Some are awesome (Year of the Griffin, Phileasson Saga, and of course Borbarad's Return, and my personal favorite, Bloody Sea), some are mediocre (Kingmakers, In the Shadow of Simyala) and a few are truly bad and bland (the Orcland Trilogy, Year of Fire). Okay, even the bad ones are an equal match or even superior to supposedly 'good' D&D campaigns like Red Hand of Doom, but the rules... let's be honest, The Dark Eye rules are messed-up, incoherent nightmare. There is a lot of traditional baggage which is just carried along, there are too many authors who don't understand their own rules, and in many, many ways the rules seem to try to take the most arbitrarily complicated rule possible.
A streamlined version of the Dark Eye would be an absolutely awesome game. But as it is, it's a great setting with absolutely ingenious campaigns (Borbarad alone is probably better than anything ever published for D&D... I know that sounds like a hyperbole, but that is one truly epic campaign, if you don't mind the strong tendency to railroading) and rules that are just plain bad. I love the world, I love the general feeling of the world, but I think I could write better rules than that.

Maybe you are right and I just forgot about the bad rules ( it was a long time ago) because of the awesome campaigns I had with DSA :smallbiggrin:
There is a 4th edition now maybe it is more streamlined? Anybody with playexperience?

[GolemsVoice]

Oh yes, the Dark Eye. Fantastic! I havne't played 4th edition yet, but I found the rules to be not that terrible, and the incredibly detailed setting more than makes up for it. Really, the level of detail and love that went into this is staggering. It also has a focus on politics and daily survival (or can be played this way, high adventure is totally possible), the heroes actually can be nobility or knights, and have the skills to go with the position. I find this "down to earth" perspective refreshing, though I don't know if I could stand a whole campaign of moving chess pieces.

[potatocubed]

Well, let's see...

I love Burning Empires, although when it was described as "the best game you'll never get to play" I suspect that was true. It's the only scifi game I've ever really been interested in. Oh, and Alternity. I liked Alternity.

Nobilis is another favourite that it's incredibly difficult to round up players for.

The Baron Munchausen Roleplaying Game is not so much a roleplaying game as a drinking game with roleplaying elements, and one of the best-written RPG books I've ever had the pleasure of reading.

FATE is an excellent system; one of my many pet projects is to retool it so it's suitable for use as the basis of a Planescape game, since I think it would do a better job than any of the current D&D incarnations.

Conspiracy X had a lot of good ideas, including a close combat system based on the idea that you can't 'miss' with a punch or kick or stab - your opponent has to actually get out of the way.

I also like Rifts, in the same way that I like mindless action movies. It's not something that you want to think about too much or subject to great analysis; just cue up the heavy metal soundtrack and break out the absurd firearms. I wouldn't advise trying to take it seriously at all.

I didn't like Shadowrun until I read the 4th edition rules. Now I like it. I like the ideas behind Exalted, but I find the mechanics lacking in both editions. I want to like Anima, but while I like the world and the character-building options, I find the actual game system clunky and annoying.

I could probably go on but I have to go eat lunch now.

[Ianuagonde]

I've had a lot of fun with Mage and Legend of the 5 Rings. My favorite non-d20 system is without a doubt Dying Earth, by Pelgrane Press. They've managed to do something that almost never succeeds: capturing the atmosphere of the books perfectly, while still allowing players (and GMs) a lot of freedom. From the speech to the weird customs to the messing with each other's plans, it just works beautifully. The rules are elegant in all their simplicity. Players are encouraged to take their time in taverns, to interact with NPC's and spend all their money on luxury, which is a nice contrast with D&D where characters are assumed to fight 24/7, 7 days a week for months at a time.

Sadly, I seem to be the only person that knows it...It deserves a lot more love.

[dsmiles]

HoL is awesome.

So is Call of Cthulhu 6e.

So is Marvel Superheroes.

So is Hero System's Champions.

[Weimann]

I haven't actually PLAYED a lot of them, but I am a fan of Exalted and Risus in particular. I am also very interested in learning more about nWoD, because it sounds like it has the depth of setting and concept I associate with Exalted without all the perfection. Perfection isn't really interesting.

[Satyr]

What I really liked, though, was how it was sort of a parallel to 17th century Europe and that each nation had a unique form of sorcery. The setting was so well-thought out and well-written that I just fell in love with it.

Actually, the backgrond is an almost insulting lists of stereotypes and the setting is just plain dull, when compared to the real world era and region it is supposed to play in. This is background-wise one of the worst RPG's ever published, equal in deserved spite to the holocaust book for Wraith and the oWoD Gypsies sourcebook. (which are all worse than, for example, FATAL, because they werre actually published. In printed form and people were supposed to pay money for those). Seriously, a sourcebook about America on this niveau would reduce the United States to Texas and New York, everybody would be Charlton Heston and there would be no black people. I truly think the authors of this game deserve to be used as test animals for text book throwing targeting practice.
Worst, it's no only mildly offensive and loaded with stereotypes bordering to blatant racism, it is also terribly, terribly dull in comparison. There is a lot of cool stuff and iconic people in Early Modern Europe, starting with Shakespear or Elizabeth I. to Charles V., Wallenstein, Metternich or Louis XIV. Hell, Richelieu alone is more interesting than the whole cast of NPC of this abomination of a game.


There is a 4th edition now maybe it is more streamlined? Anybody with playexperience?

I play it regularly, once in a month or so. The rules are bas, but the rest of the game (and a very cool group) make up for it.

And yes, the rules are terrible. The original 4th edition had four different status description for "you trip", depending if you were tripped with a weapon, thrown down with a wrestling maneuver, tripped by yourself when fumbling or where hit so hard that you fall down, but at least that got errata'd. It is impossible to increase any skill without referencing a table, because the costs of the skills are so damned arbitrary. And the 3D20 skill checks are slow, bog down the gameplay and have the elegance of a beached whale.
I really like the world, and many of the adventures, and especially the Borbarad campaign is probably one of the most glorious acomplishments of roleplaying games ever, but the rules are truly bad.

[GolemsVoice]

but the rules are truly bad.

Now, now, aren't you a bit harsh on poor DSA? I find the rules not so much bad as very... German, make of that what you will. Also, is Degenesis available in actual paper? I'd buy it right away.

[Kiero]

How about a game that treats iditic actions as if they they were in fact idiotic, and not reward them? Wushu, and games with a similar scope suffer from the very problem of permanent overkill and thuse undermine their very intent; by making everything spectacular and outstanding, nothing is outstanding anymore and every action, no matter how awesome they would be in any game where they would be a true achievement, are just bland giveaways.


Classic misinterpretation of Wushu. It's a genre emulator, it merely rewards any description that is genre-appropriate. As in things that aren't Veto-ed by someone else around the table, or break the Coup de Grace rule.

Has nothing to do with "idiotic" or "spectacular" description.

[Satyr]

I like DSA. It's just not that the rules are very good. There are some very good ideas in it, like buildng character out of the combination of race, culture and profession, which results in quite organic and well-rounded characters. The combat system is full of options, which are sometimes really fun, and at least in questions of quantity, just really good. The problem is, the implementation of these basically good ideas is just plain awful. The rules are often very poorly executed, and the basically good ideas behind them makes it often worse, because you can see clearly all that wasted potential.
But like I said, the setting and the actually good adventure modules make up for it.


Classic misinterpretation of Wushu. It's a genre emulator, it merely rewards any description that is genre-appropriate. As in things that aren't Veto-ed by someone else around the table, or break the Coup de Grace rule.

So, if I'd used to play Wushu to play something like a grim and gritty genre, I would recommend instead describtions that sounds like mean, painful injuries and a lot of pain, dirt, and guts? Interesting.

[Gentleman Bard]

I didn't like Shadowrun until I read the 4th edition rules. Now I like it.

Huh. For me, it's the opposite. I liked it until 4th edition came out. A wireless Matrix? Really? I'll stick to 3rd edition, thank you.

On another note, I haven't really played RPGs that didn't use the d20 system. Shadowrun's pretty much the only one.

[Totally Guy]

I love Burning Empires, although when it was described as "the best game you'll never get to play" I suspect that was true. It's the only scifi game I've ever really been interested in.

I'm into Burning Wheel. I'm running a campaign for my group. I've not picked up Burning Empires as I'm not really into Sci Fi systems but I'd probably grasp most of the mechanics easily enough due do my familiarity with its sister products.

Maybe we could find a way to try it out at the meetup.

[subject42]

HoL is awesome.

Oh god. HoL.

We tried that once; character creation took six hours. To be fair, that was mostly because one guy had characters that kept dying during the process, but still, good lord.

That being said, the session probably had the highest players-to-babies-punched ratio of all time.

[dsmiles]

Oh god. HoL.

We tried that once; character creation took six hours. To be fair, that was mostly because one guy had characters that kept dying during the process, but still, good lord.

That being said, the session probably had the highest players-to-babies-punched ratio of all time.

Really, only 6 hours? You must have done something wrong...maybe not enough baby-punching?
:smalltongue:

[The Big Dice]

Non D20 systems... Man, where to start?

Paranoia: Two rules sets, one for the players and one for the GM. Who may or may not follow the rules. The Computer says you like it. Perfect for one or two shot games.

Cyberpunk 2020 version, not 3rd ed. Ok, so the Net is a bit dated now and the time that things are set in is getting uncomfortable close. But still unbeatable for guns, knives and bombs in a near future setting.

GURPS: Does it all and does it better than your current system,. Usually. If you don't mind the workload on the GM.

RuneQuest / Stormbringer / Call of Cthulhu: Chaosium's BRP system got it right first time. Ok so RuneQuest has velcro limbs, Stormbringer has Demons of Desire and CoC proves there are worse things than death. But the rules underpinning it all are among the best out there.

Warhammer RPG: First edition. One of the best gothic horror fantasy games ever, and the Enemy Within campaign is a true classic. So what if the system is a little clunky.

Legend of the Five Rings: Samurai drama in one of the best realised settings out there. Great game,but a shame about the way the metaplot gets dragged along behind a card game.

Pendragon: A true original. Have your character age by a year for each game session, then play your character's descendants. And the Great Pendragon Campaign is possibly the best campaign ever published.

Qin the Warring States: Wuxia roleplaying with possibly the most elegant game system I've ever come across. Yin/Yang dice are a fantastic idea.

[Morty]

I can't say I have a favorite non-d20 game, since we could barely get organized enough to play D&D with my old group. But there are some that picked my interest.
WFRP 2nd edition is the one I've actually played, but it didn't quite live up to my expectations. Perhaps it was because none of us had any experience with it, but the mechanics seemed both too simple and clunky. Still, it's a fun, gritty system, even if I don't particularily like the setting.
GURPS looks like a very decent generic system that does realistic simulation well.
Riddle of Steel has an amazing, deadly and realistic combat system, at least based on what I've read. I don't like the idea of advancement solely by spiritual attributes, though.
I've read something about Harnmaster once, having heard that it's a good gritty system, but I don't really remember anything about it.

[dsmiles]

...and what ever happened to Gamma World (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_World) and Toon (http://www.sjgames.com/toon/)?

[Kiero]

So, if I'd used to play Wushu to play something like a grim and gritty genre, I would recommend instead describtions that sounds like mean, painful injuries and a lot of pain, dirt, and guts? Interesting.

Yes, that's the point of the Veto rule, to act as a means to steer the game towards the genre that everyone has agreed they're playing.

All description is worthy of dice, each discrete element earns one. But it has to be description that passes muster, anyone (not just the GM) can Veto something they don't think fits.

[JaronK]

Shadowrun, all the way (though I enjoy 3rd edition more).

JaronK

[Satyr]

All description is worthy of dice, each discrete element earns one. But it has to be description that passes muster, anyone (not just the GM) can Veto something they don't think fits.

Another problem I see is that thesedescriptions are too much focused on quantity, not quality, and the more 'democraic' approach to allow everybody to veto any addition, bercause than you lack an authority to evaluate the quality of any given notion.
That well may be a very theoretical problem, but if you think of the game narrative of a story fraught with many despricptive attributes has often less impact than a singular pointed one; generally I would weigh quality always higher than quantity.

[GolemsVoice]

I've always had the feeling (just from tales I've heard, mind you) that Wushu isn't really supposed to be all that serious, but rather the player controlling the results by determining them, rather than the other way round.
In D&D you might roll a 20, and describe an awesome finishing move, in Wushu you describe an elaborate counter-attack and get a good roll for that.

[Kiero]

Another problem I see is that thesedescriptions are too much focused on quantity, not quality, and the more 'democraic' approach to allow everybody to veto any addition, bercause than you lack an authority to evaluate the quality of any given notion.
That well may be a very theoretical problem, but if you think of the game narrative of a story fraught with many despricptive attributes has often less impact than a singular pointed one; generally I would weigh quality always higher than quantity.

Wushu doesn't judge quality, just quantity of appropriate narrative. It's not a story-building engine, but a genre emulation one.


I've always had the feeling (just from tales I've heard, mind you) that Wushu isn't really supposed to be all that serious, but rather the player controlling the results by determining them, rather than the other way round.
In D&D you might roll a 20, and describe an awesome finishing move, in Wushu you describe an elaborate counter-attack and get a good roll for that.

'Fraid not. The dice in Wushu categorically do not tell you how well your character did at the level of a task. The player decides that in their description, because the golden rule is whatever you describe happening happens, then and there, before the dice are rolled.

You aren't rolling for success or failure of an individual action. You're rolling to see how significant your chosen action was in bringing the scene closer to resolution. This is the stumbling block that has people not understanding how it works.

Because the link between narration and mechanics is tenuous, and not direct as it is in many other systems. The only thing the narration tells the mechanics is how many dice you roll. What you narrate has no bearing on the roll that comes afterwards beyond that.

And all the mechanics inform the narrative is whether or not to continue, or award someone the right to close out a challenge. Unless something has been written out, what you roll has no impact on what is narrated after it, because the in-game effect was already handled when you were describing.

Most critically of all, Describe and Resolve are two completely separate phases of the game. You have an entire collection of description from everyone. Then all description stops, and you work out the mechanics. Then that stops, and it's back to narration again. That's best illustrated in my Actual Play from the last Wushu session (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=104952) I ran face to face, it doesn't flow like other RPGs.

[infinitypanda]

Shadowrun: Cyberpunk+Fantasy? Sign me up!
World of Darkness: I've always liked Vampires, Magie, Werewolves and the like
From Another Time, Another Land: Deserves special mention as a benchmark

סּ_סּ
You horrible person. You horrible, horrible person. Trying to disguise it like that.

[Satyr]

Wushu doesn't judge quality, just quantity of appropriate narrative. It's not a story-building engine, but a genre emulation one.

So it tries, but it doesn't try very hard? I don't know if hack-writing is a genre in itself, but wit this neglection of quality, it seems that this is what Wushu can do best, if your descriptions are to be believed.


You aren't rolling for success or failure of an individual action. You're rolling to see how significant your chosen action was in bringing the scene closer to resolution. This is the stumbling block that has people not understanding how it works.

Doesn't that mean that player characters can hardly fail at all? At least as loong as they do not describe their action as failure that is; and even then when they describe their failure with enough fill phrases, they at least fail spectacular?
That looks a lot like a training wheels RPG.

Sigh. For a short moment, it actually sounded like an interesting system.

[Kiero]

So it tries, but it doesn't try very hard? I don't know if hack-writing is a genre in itself, but wit this neglection of quality, it seems that this is what Wushu can do best, if your descriptions are to be believed.

No, it doesn't try to write story "quality" at all. All it tries to do is ensure all description is appropriate to the genre. As I said, it's not a story-generation engine.


Doesn't that mean that player characters can hardly fail at all? At least as loong as they do not describe their action as failure that is; and even then when they describe their failure with enough fill phrases, they at least fail spectacular?
That looks a lot like a training wheels RPG.

Sigh. For a short moment, it actually sounded like an interesting system.

The system doesn't say who succeeds or fails, ultimately it's about assigning the right to close a scene the way you, and not someone else wants to.

You earn dice just the same describing your character failing at the tasks they attempt as you do succeeding. You are under no obligation to describe either success or failure at the task level. All description is the same, as I said before what you describe is largely irrelevant to the mechanics besides saying how many dice you get to roll.

It's not a "training wheels" RPG, because it's frankly nothing like a lot of other RPGs. Mechanics and narrative are not directly linked. What you describe has no bearing on the mechanics, bar how many dice your roll (and which Trait is the relevant one).

[Raum]

Inspired by the d100 thread, what are some of your favorite non-d20 RPGs?I think I've liked something about every RPG I've played. Not always the same thing, but something. Shadowrun, Savage Worlds, Champions, Rolemaster, Over the Edge, Unisystem, World of Darkness, etc. They all have something to offer - even if some appear to have chips on their shoulders regarding one system or another. :smallwink:

[Swordgleam]

So it tries, but it doesn't try very hard? I don't know if hack-writing is a genre in itself, but wit this neglection of quality, it seems that this is what Wushu can do best, if your descriptions are to be believed.


If you're playing with a bunch of hacks, then don't play Wushu. It won't be fun. Kind of like if you're playing with a bunch of people who have trouble adding two-digit numbers, d20 systems are not for you. (I'm not suggesting the two skills are comparable.) If you want to play a game with a bunch of people who want to and can describe awesome stuff consistently, Wushu is great.

I should add that in "big boss fights" you often have a limited pool of dice for all the players. So if one person wants to take a big action, you can help them do that by describing your action for the round simply. It isn't all over-the-top chained actions.



Doesn't that mean that player characters can hardly fail at all? At least as loong as they do not describe their action as failure that is; and even then when they describe their failure with enough fill phrases, they at least fail spectacular?
That looks a lot like a training wheels RPG.

Sigh. For a short moment, it actually sounded like an interesting system.

I'm not sure what you mean by "training wheels." One could argue that it's the opposite - systems that rely on dice to tell them what happens are "training wheels" for systems where players have to be mature enough to declare that their characters sometimes fail without it being forced on them. But that's an unrelated discussion.

Player characters can still fail by the numbers, if that's what you need - run out of chi before their opponents do, and get knocked out. You can fail as spectacularly or un-spectacularly as you desire. You can also succeed only partially, if you describe your success as being complicated. I once had a character take down a large number of enemies, but get wounded several times while doing so. Describing the wounds gave me the dice I needed to make the action a success.

[BudgetDM]

סּ_סּ
You horrible person. You horrible, horrible person. Trying to disguise it like that.

Longcat never specified that it was the benchmark of QUALITY.

[Kiero]

Player characters can still fail by the numbers, if that's what you need - run out of chi before their opponents do, and get knocked out. You can fail as spectacularly or un-spectacularly as you desire. You can also succeed only partially, if you describe your success as being complicated. I once had a character take down a large number of enemies, but get wounded several times while doing so. Describing the wounds gave me the dice I needed to make the action a success.

And it's worth noting that the Example of Play in the back of Reloaded, which I wrote out as I "played" it (real dice) nearly resulted in a TPK. Two out of three PCs were narrated out of the scene, it's only because the last one standing beat the last Nemesis that they won the scene.