A RPG without a lot of math.

[Nifft]

Cortex+ is all about finding the maximum number in a dice pool.

Optimization of when specifically to use your extra dice might involve math-ish thinking, but the mechanics themselves are very low-math, and you can ignore optimization & just use your extra dice on RP-important things without much loss of functionality.

Edit: Avoid GURPS. GURPS can do pretty much anything. It's also got stats for EVERYTHING. I'm sure it's fine in playing, but creating a character was a chore for me when my friend tried to get me to join a game.

GURPS with pregens could potentially be around as low-math as Apocalypse World / Dungeon World / PbtA.

Character creation is to be avoided for the math-averse.

[jojo]

Of all the games we played the only one I truly had fun was Paranoia since everything was simply solved with the roll of a d20 and the stats were simple and easy to deal wit.

Do you guys have any tips, advices or recommendations on how to deal with this problem?

A good but simple game without many stats or rolls?

OP, here's my actual advice. You enjoyed Paranoia. So use the mechanics of Paranoia. Presumably you have access to the rules already, as do your players and presumably your players as well as yourself are already familiar with those rules.

So you get the advantage of:

1) Not spending additional money.
2) Not spending additional time, you are already familiar with the rules.
3) Playing within a system which you know you enjoy.

Presumably your players benefit from these advantages as well.

Altering the "tone" to be setting appropriate should be fairly easy. Paranoia works because everyone has two character sheets, understands satire and is actively encouraged to go full Henderson at all times.
So play with one character sheet and a modicum of seriousness and you're good there.

Name swap stuff to alter the setting from sci-fi to fantasy. Players don't have "clones" they've got "golems." Vary to taste.

There's no one rules system that is going to satisfy all your needs, hopes, wants, desires and dreams.

[Faily]

But then they all have to get special dice, and learn how to use them....just as bad as a lot of math IMHO when you are just starting out.

Honestly, I think I spent less time learning the symbols for the custom dice than I did learning other rules in most other system's I've tried. And being a person who struggles with math (RPGs have helped me a ton with improving my math skills), the symbols are a nice change of pace.

Helps too that the system is incredibly easy to learn.

And yes, there is the Genesys for generic use that isn't just for Star Wars. I just completely forgot about it.

[Anonymouswizard]

I highly HIGHLY recommend this system. Its so much fun and yes there is some bookkeeping but once you understand how it works tis very very simple and takes much less time then DND to deal with and trust me I run both systems. To the people that cry CUSTOM DICE WAAAAAAA. Jesus people its not that expensive for the dice or you can buy the app for five bucks and if you want to be cheap there is a simple conversion table and use the dice you bought for DND. Or do what I did and buy the starter adventure for each addition. Each one comes with a set of dice and a map with adventure book and basic rule book with pre-made characters. If you look around you can literally find them on sale still for 20 bucks and you can get a lot of use out of them and get several sets of the dice for the table.

Okay, I literally once wrote a blog post on why FFG's Star Wars and it's special dice annoy me a lot more than they do for Fate.

Now I'll admit that it's a fun system. I don't really like it, I find that assembling a dice pool can take too long ('okay, I have the dice it says on my sheet, GM what's the basic difficulty? Are these worth boosts? Any negative circumstances not in the basic difficulty?'), and that advantage can sometimes be hard to spend outside of combat (although I turned out to be one of the best at coming up with uses when I played, due to my character mainly rolling tech-based checks). But when you're playing it's fun, and does work really well at Star Wars (which is why I don't own it, my preferred space games are much less fantasy).

But the problem is the dice. Converting with the table takes ages compared to using the dice, which are another investment on top of the relatively expensive rulebook. It seriously takes me several times the time to determine a roll with the table compared to using the dice. Compare this to Fate/Fudge, where the dice can be simulated by taking a d3 and subtracting 2 (or, with a bit of paint and a bunch of d6s, you can make your own easily). I can convert a d6 to a Fudge Die with my eyes closed, I can't do the same to FFG dice.

Now if the rulebook came in a box with a set of dice, I'd be much less against it. Because it's giving me the opportunity to play the game, at the speed it's meant to run at, without making an extra purchase. But they expect me to buy the book (£43), plus the dice (£14 per set), for nearly £60 to start playing? In practice it's more, because you'll want more than one set of dice and players are rarely willing to stump up the money in my opinion (compartively, if you want to use official Fate Dice you get 12 for £13, which is enough for three people to have a full set*). Bare in mind that you get on average two of every die type, and both difficulty 5 and 5s in Attributes aren't as difficult to get as it seems (which means you likely want three sets).

The beginner boxes are also a bit annoying as a suggestion because to those who don't want the extras (which is an entirely valid stance) it's essentially a set of dice and £11 wasted (more via Amazon).

It's a great system, but the dice set the price for playing it high (not as high as D&D, but that can shove it's three book core where the sun will never shine). The table isn't really a viable solution, as it either bogs down the game as you reference every die against it or even worse (if you haven't printed a seperate copy) have to keep flipping between it and the rest of the rules.

With regards to phone apps, phones at the table are an entirely different issue.

* I have 12 full sets of Fate Dice, although one set is currently in storage, thanks to a family member buying me some as a present. But I've successfully run a game with only three sets, because you'll almost never have more than eight being rolled at once.

[Knaight]

I have 12 full sets of Fate Dice, although one set is currently in storage, thanks to a family member buying me some as a present. But I've successfully run a game with only three sets, because you'll almost never have more than eight being rolled at once.

I ran Fudge with just normal d6 dice for years, only switching because I had one player who just couldn't do the conversion, despite literally everyone else at the table explaining it to them at least twice (we were teenagers at the time, so everyone else at the table also got in a few jabs about them being stupid).

Now I have 19 sets, although to be fair 8 of those are actually my brothers and only ended up with me because his group refuses to play anything but D&D anymore. Also some of those dice were just very pretty.

[Faily]

But the problem is the dice. Converting with the table takes ages compared to using the dice, which are another investment on top of the relatively expensive rulebook. It seriously takes me several times the time to determine a roll with the table compared to using the dice. Compare this to Fate/Fudge, where the dice can be simulated by taking a d3 and subtracting 2 (or, with a bit of paint and a bunch of d6s, you can make your own easily). I can convert a d6 to a Fudge Die with my eyes closed, I can't do the same to FFG dice.

While for me, who struggle with math (and yes, even subtractions is hard if you already have problem with math), it's not easy. I mean, good for you that you can do it with your eyes closed, but that doesn't mean it's easy for everyone. Different strokes for different folks, and all.

I personally didn't have problem with learning the dice for Star Wars, and if you use apps or online-rollers, it goes even faster. Orokos is a free online dice-roller, which I've used for the times I've played Star Wars on play-by-post, and it's worked excellently. Especially when a group of 10 people didn't know the system at all going in apart from 1 player and the GM.
Example of Orokos-rolling for this system:
D9 ME Huttball Round 2! Deception/Cunning: 1eP+3eA+3eD 1 success, 2 threat, 1 Triumph


There are apps you can download for your phone too to roll the dice if you don't want to compare the symbols on the dice yourself when playing on tabletop. (With a bunch of dice you already have from D&D, you can make your own symbols easy with a bit of paint. Just like your Fudge die!)


I don't find the dicepool to be anymore difficult to assemble than it is in some other systems I have tried over the years. The only thing that might take time is to decide what to do with Advantages/Disadvantages or Triumph/Despair in certain situations, but I find that to be an acceptable thing for an otherwise fun system.

[Anonymouswizard]

I ran Fudge with just normal d6 dice for years, only switching because I had one player who just couldn't do the conversion, despite literally everyone else at the table explaining it to them at least twice (we were teenagers at the time, so everyone else at the table also got in a few jabs about them being stupid).

Now I have 19 sets, although to be fair 8 of those are actually my brothers and only ended up with me because his group refuses to play anything but D&D anymore. Also some of those dice were just very pretty.

Oh sure, I own the dice because I like the systems. I can certainly still run it with d6s, although I don't because I have the special dice now and it goes slightly faster with them. I honestly suspect the only real reason Fudge Dice exist is because the original designer wanted that exact bell curve.

While for me, who struggle with math (and yes, even subtractions is hard if you already have problem with math), it's not easy. I mean, good for you that you can do it with your eyes closed, but that doesn't mean it's easy for everyone. Different strokes for different folks, and all.

Oh sure, but I didn't say 'it's easy to' I said 'I find it easy to'. I know a lot of people have real trouble with maths, it's literally the reason I bought my first pack of Fudge Dice. My point was that for one set of 'special' dice the algorithm is easy to memorise and perform without tables, while with the FFG dice it's not a simple thing.

I personally didn't have problem with learning the dice for Star Wars, and if you use apps or online-rollers, it goes even faster. Orokos is a free online dice-roller, which I've used for the times I've played Star Wars on play-by-post, and it's worked excellently. Especially when a group of 10 people didn't know the system at all going in apart from 1 player and the GM.
Example of Orokos-rolling for this system:
D9 ME Huttball Round 2! Deception/Cunning: 1eP+3eA+3eD 1 success, 2 threat, 1 Triumph


There are apps you can download for your phone too to roll the dice if you don't want to compare the symbols on the dice yourself when playing on tabletop.

Phones are soft-banned at my table for a variety of reasons, you're only allowed them when your character is not in the scene. Otherwise electronic dice rollers bring the curse of facebook (and don't get me started on laptops, I keep a strict ban on them for everybody, even me, when I run games).

(With a bunch of dice you already have from D&D, you can make your own symbols easy with a bit of paint. Just like your Fudge die!)

A side note here, it's actually quite hard to freehand two different symbols onto the face of a standard d12 (although blank d12s do exist, which makes it easier), especially if you're like me and have dyspraxia. Fate dice are really easy to make by comparision, especially as with pipped d6s you can use the pips as a guide.

I don't find the dicepool to be anymore difficult to assemble than it is in some other systems I have tried over the years. The only thing that might take time is to decide what to do with Advantages/Disadvantages or Triumph/Despair in certain situations, but I find that to be an acceptable thing for an otherwise fun system.

Oh, trust me, assembling the dice pool takes more time than in say Chronicles of Darkness or Victoriana (where the only real question is 'what's the adjustment for difficulty'), although this is more to the fact it uses six types of die. As I said, the system is fine, I just think that the core book really should come with a set of the freaking dice, plus an additional £43 when I want to run another sub area? It's literally the expense that annoys me, if you're not using technology and don't want the pain of converting it's 'spent over £70 to run one of these three games, or make your own dice'.

[Jormengand]

Flanking, higher ground, charging, Bless, Inspire Courage, Point Blank Shot, Dodge, Bulls Strength, fatigue, ...

Apart from the first three, the numbers they change are written in the description of the ability you're using. And no-one takes Dodge.

You're doing the thing where someone asks the forum for help, and the forum tells them the thing they're having a problem with isn't a problem.

No, I'm just really confused how people can fail to add a bunch of numbers up have someone else add a bunch of numbers up for them. I'm not saying it's "Not a problem" just "I don't understand the problem, can you explain?" This is why I asked "What game are you playing where you have to do more than first-year maths, like multiplying by two or three on rare occasions but otherwise adding and subtracting? Like, FATAL or something? Stick to literally anything else and I don't get what the problem would be."

I can't help someone if I don't know how they arrived at their very unlikely-sounding problem.

[Knaight]

Oh sure, I own the dice because I like the systems. I can certainly still run it with d6s, although I don't because I have the special dice now and it goes slightly faster with them. I honestly suspect the only real reason Fudge Dice exist is because the original designer wanted that exact bell curve.

He's basically said as much. Fudge got built around the idea of a central ladder used for most everything, which necessitated a 0 centered curve. The ladder has 7 central and 2 peripheral steps because there's a big jump in how hard it is to memorize a list when going from 7 to 8 items in most people. Once that's there the idea of each die having an even chance to move you up the ladder, drop you down the ladder, or have no effect makes sense, and the use of 4 dice then produces a big enough curve (I personally drop it to 3).

[Davrix]

Okay, I literally once wrote a blog post on why FFG's Star Wars and it's special dice annoy me a lot more than they do for Fate.

Now I'll admit that it's a fun system. I don't really like it, I find that assembling a dice pool can take too long ('okay, I have the dice it says on my sheet, GM what's the basic difficulty? Are these worth boosts? Any negative circumstances not in the basic difficulty?'), and that advantage can sometimes be hard to spend outside of combat (although I turned out to be one of the best at coming up with uses when I played, due to my character mainly rolling tech-based checks). But when you're playing it's fun, and does work really well at Star Wars (which is why I don't own it, my preferred space games are much less fantasy).

But the problem is the dice. Converting with the table takes ages compared to using the dice, which are another investment on top of the relatively expensive rulebook. It seriously takes me several times the time to determine a roll with the table compared to using the dice. Compare this to Fate/Fudge, where the dice can be simulated by taking a d3 and subtracting 2 (or, with a bit of paint and a bunch of d6s, you can make your own easily). I can convert a d6 to a Fudge Die with my eyes closed, I can't do the same to FFG dice.

Now if the rulebook came in a box with a set of dice, I'd be much less against it. Because it's giving me the opportunity to play the game, at the speed it's meant to run at, without making an extra purchase. But they expect me to buy the book (£43), plus the dice (£14 per set), for nearly £60 to start playing? In practice it's more, because you'll want more than one set of dice and players are rarely willing to stump up the money in my opinion (comparatively, if you want to use official Fate Dice you get 12 for £13, which is enough for three people to have a full set*). Bare in mind that you get on average two of every die type, and both difficulty 5 and 5s in Attributes aren't as difficult to get as it seems (which means you likely want three sets).

The beginner boxes are also a bit annoying as a suggestion because to those who don't want the extras (which is an entirely valid stance) it's essentially a set of dice and £11 wasted (more via Amazon).

It's a great system, but the dice set the price for playing it high (not as high as D&D, but that can shove it's three book core where the sun will never shine). The table isn't really a viable solution, as it either bogs down the game as you reference every die against it or even worse (if you haven't printed a seperate copy) have to keep flipping between it and the rest of the rules.

I can understand the investment part i guess but its no different then investing in the dice you buy to play DND, yes it works for more then one system but your still buying fancy dice to play said game. As for the beginning box set I find that a harsh way to look at it. If your just wanting to try the game its a great cheap way to get into it. you get basic rules, a set of dice, pre gen characters and tokens with maps so you can see if you like how the system works and runs. And if you buy the book and run a game after that you have some great tokens to use. Personally I would rather spend the little extra just for the tokens and the adventure book for encounter idea's than just buying the dice. But that's me I guess. But I like narration based gameplay a lot so i was all in for the new star wars system.

[Knaight]

I can understand the investment part i guess but its no different then investing in the dice you buy to play DND, yes it works for more then one system but your still buying fancy dice to play said game.

The dice are a bit more expensive in this case, and that's on top of an expensive rule book. Then on top of that they don't transfer to other games.

D&D is worse overall, but Anonymouswizard was pretty clear about their opinion on having a three book core. Meanwhile most of the industry comes in cheaper. REIGN is about $40 and pretty dice heavy, but because it uses d10s you can get 50 dice for $20, which should be enough pretty much indefinitely.

[Davrix]

The dice are a bit more expensive in this case, and that's on top of an expensive rule book. Then on top of that they don't transfer to other games.

D&D is worse overall, but Anonymouswizard was pretty clear about their opinion on having a three book core. Meanwhile most of the industry comes in cheaper. REIGN is about $40 and pretty dice heavy, but because it uses d10s you can get 50 dice for $20, which should be enough pretty much indefinitely.

I get that but you dont have to have full set for everyone Two or three will suit a table and the first few games I played at mine we just passed around the one set. And while it might take some time I have found full sets on sale for under 10 dollers at my local game store and on amazon sometimes. Currently I own 6 full sets.

But lets look at the set up cost broken down. Taking a quick look on amazing it looks like prices have gone up from what I've paid so lets go by FF site

• 60 for one of the setting books - chosen based on your pref
• 15 for the dice
• 30 for one of the start sets

Now for a table you can get away with just one book. I would recommend at least 2 sets of dice so you can form large enough dice pools for most checks in the game and pass them around.

So that would be around 90 and with tax and shipping probably a little over 100- 105 for your investment Vs about the 70 you quoted above. Its a bit more I agree but that's going by base prices, not accounting for sales or discounts if and when you find them. Personally I paid 40 for a core book and I was getting the dice sets for around 8 dollars and i picked up the starter sets when they were on sale for 19.99 so my investment was much less. That being said the OP was asking about less mathy systems, not the cheapest you can buy. Its a good system and a very fun one. it has its downsides but I could sit here and nit pick any system for its faults DND especially for its huge up front book cost. Thankfully they have been more restrained with 5th vs what they did with 4th.

[Anonymouswizard]

I can understand the investment part i guess but its no different then investing in the dice you buy to play DND, yes it works for more then one system but your still buying fancy dice to play said game.

Except for the extra £5? Also the lack of cross compatibility, I can take my World of Darkness dice and use them to play Keltia, or Legends of the Wulin, or Anima: Beyond Fantasy, or Rogue Trader. That's about £5 (in reality about £10 for WoD in specific, because I tend to GM and more dice is useful there) between four systems that I own, compared to the £13 for FFG Star Wars. Those D&D dice also cost about £8, so assuming I just use them for D&D (I don't) it's still a better investment (okay, good dice can get expensive, but I'm looking at the minimum investment). If I pick up dice individually a 7-piece set would cost me about £4.20, or £6 for a 10 piece set (and I actually regularly pick up lowish quality dice from as I need to).

While I own a couple of games that come in under £20, most of my collection retails for £30-40. Because I tend to own enough dice to play the system already that's the barrier to my entry, making it much easier to try, although if I didn't have the dice most systems would require I can probably pick up enough for £5. So, because it's weighted towards the higher end, the average game has a barrier to entry of ~£40. Compared to £43+2*£13 (when I was playing Difficulty 4 rolls would tend to happen at least once a session, which you'll need at least two packs to roll) means the barrier to entry is £69, or over half again the standard.

Then if I want to actually play that Gungan Jedi I've always wanted it's another £43 (assuming they've even remembered to stat Gungans) for that core book, but that's not a barrier to entry. Seriously, GURPS gets away with it in my opinion because it's essentially one book with all the character generation options and one book for most of the actual rules, and the character's book used to be much more reasonably price (when I bought it it was about £27 for Characters and £23 for Campaigns, characters has jumped up to nearly £40 apparently, while Campaigns has followed inflation better at now being £27). I wish it would go back to the 3e 'Core for human and near-human characters, Compendium for all the options that wouldn't fit' model, but that would still be two books for the same stuff.

As for the beginning box set I find that a harsh way to look at it. If your just wanting to try the game its a great cheap way to get into it.

I'm not a big fan of beginning boxes in generaly because I don't like running prewritten adventures. I agree that they can be great, but there is a significant demographic that just isn't interested in anything inside them bar the dice and maybe the peak at the rules (which for most systems are generally online in the starter set form as an officially free taster).

But I like narration based gameplay a lot so i was all in for the new star wars system.

I also like narrative gameplay, but I find that the new Star Wars system isn't significantly narrative for me (there's actually a lot more simulation going on than in something like Fate). The dice pool rules are funky, but not overly narrative whenever I've played ('no you can't spend your advantage on something unrelated to the roll '), the only really great bit of narrative in it is the Light Side/Dark Side nature of the Fate/Plot/Metacurrency points giving a really good swing between 'the heroes are on a roll' and 'oh no, we're in trouble', which I'm planning to swipe for a Space Opera game I have planned (run with either a modified GURPS or modified Traveller, I've not settled yet).

[johnbragg]

I can't help someone if I don't know how they arrived at their very unlikely-sounding problem.

Agreed. Which is why I asked OP the followup question, is it the arithmetic (rolling 4d6 plus 3d6 for modifiers, ok add it up) or having to track 20 different numbers to model a character (3rd edition D&D with 6 attributes, 12-20 skills, 3 saving throws, 3 ACs, etc). I think we scared OP away.

But before you asked, you said some stuff that could easily be read as insulting and dismissive.

No, I'm just really confused how people can fail to add a bunch of numbers up have someone else add a bunch of numbers up for them. I'm not saying it's "Not a problem" just "I don't understand the problem, can you explain?"

A lot of it was in how you said it. Your response can be read as "you're just too stupid to play this game."

This is why I asked "What game are you playing where you have to do more than first-year maths, like multiplying by two or three on rare occasions but otherwise adding and subtracting? Like, FATAL or something? Stick to literally anything else and I don't get what the problem would be."

Re-read that. Does it sound a little like "What kind of a dolt can't do simple math?"

Knowing games as much as you do, you probably have some guesses as to what the problem actually is, even if OP wasn't clear.

1. They're playing a system (probably D&D) where you (or at least someone) have to track a lot of different numbers and modifiers. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html

2. They're playing a system where you roll a fistful of d6's or d10s and add them up, maybe with "exploding dice", and 3+2+1+5+6+4+4 = 25 is taxing.

[Aliquid]

The thing is all the bookeeping and stats and rolls are killing me, killing the fun. They love the stories I make but all the numbers are soooo boring.

Someone suggested FATE. I will go a step further and suggest FATE Accelerated. Clean rules with very little stats to keep track of.

A different game style though... don't know if it would fit your preferences. It gives the players more control over how the story progresses (beyond just what their characters do). They can spend a limited pool of "fate points" to dictate the environment around them or the behavior of the NPCs. Note that this isn't a free-for-all, they can only do this by taking advantage of other facts that are already established.

Player: "So, massive chunks of the exploding building are raining down all over the place right?"
GM: "Yes, you are actively dodging them... that's why I got you to roll on your 'quick' approach"
Player: "It sure would be convenient if one of those chunks came down and smashed the bridge to pieces just after we finish running across it" (hands the GM a 'fate point')
GM: "Luck is on your side, a big chunk of stonework falls down and shatters the bridge after you cross it, cutting your pursuers off"

[Jormengand]

1. They're playing a system (probably D&D) where you (or at least someone) have to track a lot of different numbers and modifiers. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html

2. They're playing a system where you roll a fistful of d6's or d10s and add them up, maybe with "exploding dice", and 3+2+1+5+6+4+4 = 25 is taxing.

Either can be solved by either your players or a calculator or both. It sounds like they're having extra trouble now that they're trying to DM, which seems unlikely.

[Pelle]

Apart from the first three, the numbers they change are written in the description of the ability you're using. And no-one takes Dodge.

So what? Someone suggested that it was maybe not the addition itself that was taxing, it was keeping track of the situational modifiers. You responded that keeping track of the situational modifiers shouldn't be a problem, because the static permanent numbers should be written down. That just seemed a bit dishonest to me, so I listed some common situational modifiers to call you out on it

In play, it is very much my experience that players spend a lot of time to track these modifiers, even if we know perfectly well how big the numbers are. It is keeping track of if they apply that is bothersome. "Roll 10, add +11 (BAB, Str, Weapon Focus) from my character sheet, is 21 hit? Oh wait, I charged and am flanking, 25? Ah, and that cancels the -3 Power Attack I did, 22?" "Remember I cast Bless on you" "and I did Inspire Courage" "So 24?" "Wait, those don't stack, 23?" "Oh, I cast Bull's Strength last combat, is it still active?" "Yes, but also remember that you are fatigued, so 24 then?" "Oh, fatigue, that means I couldn't charge, 22?" "You just miss!" "Wait, let me double check if I missed something..."

You may be perfectly able to keep track of this stuff, that's good. But you can't understand that others can find it overwhelming?

[Anonymouswizard]

He's basically said as much. Fudge got built around the idea of a central ladder used for most everything, which necessitated a 0 centered curve. The ladder has 7 central and 2 peripheral steps because there's a big jump in how hard it is to memorize a list when going from 7 to 8 items in most people. Once that's there the idea of each die having an even chance to move you up the ladder, drop you down the ladder, or have no effect makes sense, and the use of 4 dice then produces a big enough curve (I personally drop it to 3).

Yeah, the more I look at Fudge the more I have to admit the ladder is neat. I still find numbers easier to work with than adjectives, but that's a simple change to how I record (the core part of the ladder is equivalent to 1-7, the edges are 0 and 8, just note down the conversion on your sheet).

Someone suggested FATE. I will go a step further and suggest FATE Accelerated. Clean rules with very little stats to keep track of.

While I'd normally argue against specifically FAE, considering what the OP said I think it's really the better option for them over Core. It sounds like what they have the most problems with is the prep work, which FAE cuts down even compared to the relatively-light Core.

Either can be solved by either your players or a calculator or both. It sounds like they're having extra trouble now that they're trying to DM, which seems unlikely.

Actually, having extra trouble when trying to GM is incredibly likely. I have trouble GMing and suffer from burnout, and I'm good at mental maths. For someone who is average or worse at maths, the sheer number of calculations can easily start to take it's toll.

Sure, it's just addition and subtraction (assuming you're not just eyeballing numbers) most of the time, but doing it for twenty NPCs a week gets tedious (this is why I spend a lot of my campaign prep time making a folder of NPCs and enemies I can just pull out at a moments notice), before you get into the plotting you need to do if you don't run a sandbox (which varies, but requires you to at least know the important NPCs' intended actions). Sure a calculator makes it easier, but it doesn't stop the 'urgh, fiftieth calculation this week' burnout.

This isn't about in session math. But maths that's bearable as a player because you only have to do it once can quickly become overwhelming when you have to do it for almost every important NPC.

[Beleriphon]

It's called Risus and it's frankly not a good system.

I suggest FATE. The math is limited to substraction and addition in ranges that rarely go higher than 8-10. Not a lot of book keeping either, mostly "these aspects exist" in the scene.

I'm going to suggest FATE as well, largely because it has very simple math and is meant to ape the pacing of an action movie or adventure novel. The resolution mechanic isn't math heavy, especially if you get their fancy dice and even without them a handle of six-siders will work.

[Stan]

Another possibility include Basic D&D, which has little math and not a ton of modifiers. There's a ton of free content and most adventures from 2e or earlier are adaptable. There are a bajillion free retroclones, a list of which is here.

For even less math, you could take the mechanics of Storium and do it in live play. It's not really an rpg, it's a a tool for interactive story telling - you pile on thigns that help or or hurt the current task and work to complete the story goal and personal goals.

[Knaight]

Yeah, the more I look at Fudge the more I have to admit the ladder is neat. I still find numbers easier to work with than adjectives, but that's a simple change to how I record (the core part of the ladder is equivalent to 1-7, the edges are 0 and 8, just note down the conversion on your sheet).

I like the adjectives, but it's not like you can't just use -3 to +3 and get effectively the same results. Scaling everything up by 4 produces your ladder, and as there's no multiplicative mechanics tied to the ladder that works just fine.

The Fate ladder on the other hand can get bent. It's needlessly long, the new terms feel out of place, it lost its nice symmetry around zero, and the changes to it coincide with the loss of some excellent mechanics tied to the ladder (Scale in particular. Scale works so beautifully, and is just so elegant).

[Cluedrew]

To Knaight: ... Now I have to track down a copy of FUGDE rules too. It seems to not be as similar to FATE (or FATE to it I suppose) as I was lead to believe.

[Knaight]

To Knaight: ... Now I have to track down a copy of FUGDE rules too. It seems to not be as similar to FATE (or FATE to it I suppose) as I was lead to believe.

http://www.fudgerpg.com/goodies/fudg...95-Bookmarked/

Fudge is a GURPS descendant, and while part of the way that shows is as a deliberate departure from GURPS's GURPSiness, that tends to come across more in terms of reduction of mechanical load than anything else. It's still a pretty simulationist system by default, although "by default" is a dangerous phrase to use when discussing Fudge.

[Jormengand]

So what? Someone suggested that it was maybe not the addition itself that was taxing, it was keeping track of the situational modifiers. You responded that keeping track of the situational modifiers shouldn't be a problem, because the static permanent numbers should be written down. That just seemed a bit dishonest to me, so I listed some common situational modifiers to call you out on it

In play, it is very much my experience that players spend a lot of time to track these modifiers, even if we know perfectly well how big the numbers are. It is keeping track of if they apply that is bothersome. "Roll 10, add +11 (BAB, Str, Weapon Focus) from my character sheet, is 21 hit? Oh wait, I charged and am flanking, 25? Ah, and that cancels the -3 Power Attack I did, 22?" "Remember I cast Bless on you" "and I did Inspire Courage" "So 24?" "Wait, those don't stack, 23?" "Oh, I cast Bull's Strength last combat, is it still active?" "Yes, but also remember that you are fatigued, so 24 then?" "Oh, fatigue, that means I couldn't charge, 22?" "You just miss!" "Wait, let me double check if I missed something..."

You may be perfectly able to keep track of this stuff, that's good. But you can't understand that others can find it overwhelming?

If you can't remember what your abilities do, keep them on cards. Give out buff cards to people who are buffed telling them what that does. Have a cheatsheet with the condition summary bulletpointed on it and another with the charging, flanking, firing into melee, high ground, and nonproficiency modifiers on it. If you really find it that hard to keep track of. I can't remember what all of the dwarf modifiers do but I remember they're something to do with giants and unusual stonework, so I check the dwarf card if we're fighting giants on an unusual stone wall.

[Florian]

If you can't remember what your abilities do, keep them on cards. Give out buff cards to people who are buffed telling them what that does. Have a cheatsheet with the condition summary bulletpointed on it and another with the charging, flanking, firing into melee, high ground, and nonproficiency modifiers on it. If you really find it that hard to keep track of. I can't remember what all of the dwarf modifiers do but I remember they're something to do with giants and unusual stonework, so I check the dwarf card if we're fighting giants on an unusual stone wall.

You know, I think the key phrase in the OP is rules standing in the way of the story. I think that has less to do with rules complexity and more with complex rules geared towards generating a system-based outcome, which in turn forces the in-game reality. A basic disfunction between "fluff" and "mechanics", if you want.

In cases like this, sets of (task) resolution mechanics can be the more appropriate choice than fully fledged "game systems", especially ones with deep roots in either simmulationism or gamism.

[johnbragg]

If you can't remember what your abilities do, keep them on cards.

Give out buff cards to people who are buffed telling them what that does.

Have a cheatsheet with the condition summary bulletpointed on it

and another with the charging, flanking, firing into melee, high ground, and nonproficiency modifiers on it.

I check the dwarf card if we're fighting giants on an unusual stone wall.

This could almost be a political attack ad for 5th edition against 3rd edition D&D.

(And I prefer DMing 3rd, in that I've modified and houseruled and tinkered it into something comfortable, while I'm still having teething problems DMing 5th.)

[Anonymouswizard]

A side note, this is why I like games like Anima, where it's possible to have a optimised character who's abilities amount to 'spend a point of X and you can Y for a turn', with no actual numerical boosts in abilities. Sure, it's as heavy as 3.5, maybe more so, but that's because of how involved levelling up with and the five magic systems (of which a character will most likely use one, maybe two if they're not going to put many points in skills). There's still a lot to keep track of, but the total bonus should be static in the session (with the rare circumstances that drop ability points, picking up a new weapon, or of you decided to go for psychic powers).

[Pelle]

If you can't remember what your abilities do, keep them on cards. Give out buff cards to people who are buffed telling them what that does. Have a cheatsheet with the condition summary bulletpointed on it and another with the charging, flanking, firing into melee, high ground, and nonproficiency modifiers on it. If you really find it that hard to keep track of. I can't remember what all of the dwarf modifiers do but I remember they're something to do with giants and unusual stonework, so I check the dwarf card if we're fighting giants on an unusual stone wall.

You have no problem with this, and I don't either. I have seen plenty players struggling to keep up with all the abilities though. Writing it down doesn't help, they still need to remember to look at their sheets, and have to sort out which ability apply in the given situation.

Even with cards, I don't think D&D 3.5 is what the OP is looking for.

[Aliquid]

If you can't remember what your abilities do, keep them on cards. Give out buff cards to people who are buffed telling them what that does. Have a cheatsheet with the condition summary bulletpointed on it and another with the charging, flanking, firing into melee, high ground, and nonproficiency modifiers on it. If you really find it that hard to keep track of. I can't remember what all of the dwarf modifiers do but I remember they're something to do with giants and unusual stonework, so I check the dwarf card if we're fighting giants on an unusual stone wall.

I don't think this is a matter of "I can't do X", it is a matter of "I find doing X tedious, and it saps the fun out of the game"... all of your suggestions add a different layer of tedium to the game. Writing down and keeping track of cards, and making sure they aren't missing anything takes time and effort... tedious time and effort.

A much better solution is to remove the tedium by playing a game where you don't need to deal with that crap in the first place. If monitoring and keeping track of all of those stats don't add any fun to the game for him, why do it? To what end?

[Nifft]

So what? Someone suggested that it was maybe not the addition itself that was taxing, it was keeping track of the situational modifiers. You responded that keeping track of the situational modifiers shouldn't be a problem, because the static permanent numbers should be written down. That just seemed a bit dishonest to me, so I listed some common situational modifiers to call you out on it

In play, it is very much my experience that players spend a lot of time to track these modifiers, even if we know perfectly well how big the numbers are. It is keeping track of if they apply that is bothersome. "Roll 10, add +11 (BAB, Str, Weapon Focus) from my character sheet, is 21 hit? Oh wait, I charged and am flanking, 25? Ah, and that cancels the -3 Power Attack I did, 22?" "Remember I cast Bless on you" "and I did Inspire Courage" "So 24?" "Wait, those don't stack, 23?" "Oh, I cast Bull's Strength last combat, is it still active?" "Yes, but also remember that you are fatigued, so 24 then?" "Oh, fatigue, that means I couldn't charge, 22?" "You just miss!" "Wait, let me double check if I missed something..."

You may be perfectly able to keep track of this stuff, that's good. But you can't understand that others can find it overwhelming?

There are also those situations where you lose part (but not all) of your static modifiers.

Here's one great and terrible example: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/ps...tm#chaoticMind