It’s sister setting, Earthdawn, also had a lot going for it on top of the typical D&D formula. Weaving, instead of casting magic, was a much more involved process for the player/character which did a lot to ground such awesome power. At the same time, fighters of all stripes were also more or less magic users, which unified the whole rule system in a nice way. The setting itself was a fantasy post-apocalypse, troubled by evil horrors that dominated the landscape in the centuries before. In fact, much of the lore was intertwined with how people survived those times.

And like Shadowrun, there were lots of dice thanks to the “step table” system. It could be a huge PITA to sum all the rolls on high steps, but then when else do you get to roll entire fists full of dice all at once?

I never got a campaign off the ground, but Palladium had, I thought, a great system.

I loved the approach to alignment (good, selfish, evil) and awarding xp for roleplaying, clever ideas, and problem solving, rather than simply killing an enemy.

I was introduced to flyweight RPGs a few years back and I absolutely love what they can do in the hands of a creative group.

Roll for Shoes is about as minimal as it gets. You will need one D6, and something to track player inventory. The game world is best started by the GM in the abstract, letting the players fill in the world’s details through creative use of questions that prompt die rolls. This is fantastic for players that want to stretch their improv skills.

Lasers & Feelings has a tad more structure. Everyone has exactly one stat that sits on a spectrum of “lasers” to “feelings”. The difficulty of challenges in the game sit on the same spectrum. Depending on the nature of the challenge and what the player’s stat is, a single D6 roll decides the outcome. Everything else is role-playing in what is encouraged to be a Trek-like setting.

In my experience, Roll for Shoes usually turns into a cartoon-esque “let’s see what else is in my backpack” affair, that usually ends with everything on fire (because of course it does). Lasers & Feelings typically devolves into Lower Decks. All of these are positives in my book - I’d play again in a heartbeat.

Out of curiosity, what is the 3 action system?

I know FATE has 4 actions (overcome, attack, defend, create an advantage) so did PF merge attack and defend? Or is it a different choice?

You have three actions that you can spend freely on attacking, moving around, etc. If you want to attack more than once, you get a penalty on the roll. Some things and spells cost two actions.

Thank you for sparing me the rant I was inhaling to deliver.

The system is so good. You wanna run a political intrigue campaign? Great! Not only are there dozens of skills to navigate the nuances of that style, but there are multiple supplemental guides if you want to get real nitty gritty. You wanna run a hyper-tactical combat heavy campaign? Great! The combat can be extremely rich, with an entire book dedicated to Martial Arts.

You can run any setting you can think of: sci-fi, fantasy, modern, historical, cinematic, realistic. The mechanics are there. But the base system is so simple and modular, you can run it off an index card. I almost think of it less as an RPG than an RPG engine. You really can adapt it to any kind of game concept.

At least fading suns had something similar in the 90’s with one action for free, 2actions with a - 4 and 3 actions a - 6(if my memory is right). The interesting part is that dodging would count as an action and you had to declare your intention at the start of the round.

Dungeon crawl classic, start with 3-5 level 0 chars each and hope the best rolled character survives the initial onslaught. Using magic is dangerous, a miscast spell could leave you disfigured or worse. Thick boy rule book.

The downside was so many six sided dice.

While indeed it can get pretty extreme, it’s also so fun to roll handful of dices. This is one of the reason I find dice-pool fun (and not just better statistically speaking)

You can easily convert them to 5e

No no no … 5e 2024 sucks.

I have seen people try to add systems to D&D to let them play Dragon Age within the system. I have then turned my head to the left and looked at the Dragon Age RPG on my shelf. If you want to play Dragon Age as a TTRPG, I’ll tell you the easiest way to do that. No gutting, no retrofitting, no ship of Theseus…

If you see that as hostile, that’s on you.

I never had a chance to try Earthdawn, but it looked like a lot of fun.

Pathfinder - for people that think D&D doesn’t have enough rules!

No, 5e sucks. And it’s most obvious when you play on level 1. DnD is a superhero sim with paper cutouts for humans. When you leave out the super powers, then the characters can’t really do anything. Like… at all.

Combat is DnD’s only fleshed out system. Everything else is just “roll a D20” and sometimes add your proficiency modifier depending almost entirely on your class. Give me 20 different bards and I bet 18 of them will have a 90% overlap in the proficiencies they choose.

During combat, the wizard throws fireballs, the cleric casts spiritual weapon and the barbarian rages. That’s cool, interesting and diverse. During investigations the wizard rolls an investigation check, the cleric rolls an investigation check and the barbarian does nothing because they dumped wisdom. That’s boring.

That’s why DnD sucks!

All you’ve done is permanently write off any opinion you have on a replacement. It’s insanely arrogant to push your own opinion as fact but even more so when the thing you’re shitting on is something people actively enjoy and then expecting anyone will pay attention to a thing you say.

Everything you just said is opinion and subjective.

The only thing that sucks here is you for believing that your opinion is a universal truth and the arrogance of believing that everyone else is wrong.

I’m just straight up tired of this shit on a massive level. It’s pure arrogance and I’m over seeing it.

I don’t find it funny. I find it monumentally irritating to have someone pretend their opinion is fact. I’m just done with it.

I know I straight up refuse to play pathfinder because until this thread I’ve never seen anyone ever recommend Pathfinder without actively shitting on dnd. If I did then maybe I’d have tried it some point in the past few years. Taken up the many offers to play in a pathfinder game. But I hard refuse everytime. If they just said how pathfinder does stuff better, that’d be fine. But it always devolves into what dnd does worse and the endless nitpicking and complaints. No longer is pathfinder the focus. The focus becomes bitching about everyone under the sun that dnd does to the point pathfinder doesn’t even get mentioned anymore. It’s not what it does better. Every convo I’ve seen isn’t about how good pathfinder is but how bad dnd is and that level of negativity being focused on constantly just to recommend you play their game instead has always made my skin crawl. Should stand on its merits, not its competitions failures. If you can’t do that then I’m not sure what the point of it is other than “HAHA DND GET FUCKED”

The only thing subjective here is the very first sentence. Everything else is either fact and enforced by the way DnD is designed or an example to illustrate said fact.

What exactly is subjective about the fact that DnD doesn’t have any depth or variety when it comes to anything besides combat?

Oh, and before you answer. Homebrew and cinematic encounters are not part of DnD as a system and using them in your argument will only strengthen my point.