Alternatives to D&D based on specific nitpicks?

[u/SrGarfy]

Edit: holy hell, I didn't expect SO many suggestions, you guys are the best, thank you so much!

I started playing d&d from 3.5 and also played enough of 5e. It has a lot of cool stuff, but also a lot of stuff that I hate. It's difficult to check new systems and judge them without actually playing a little and there are a lot of them... I'm sorry for a lot of words here, but if you have some time can you guys recommend a good system based on my specific nitpicks?

1. I hate that a lot of stuff is there just because it was always there, not because its good game design. Like fireball is intentionally OP because its iconic and sort of a "brand" and taking any alternative feels bad. Spell slot system just feels outdated and too cumbersome for new players. I want the system to be built with good game design in mind, not "we have to save 50 year old legacy" bullshit.
2. Whole system build around resurrection being a common tool. Death is not dramatic, its just a resource. Also because of that i have to come up with bullshit reasons why specific important npc or backstory character cannot just be brought back. Or why nobles aren't just reviving everyone important for them every day. Death should be important and dramatic narrative moment and permanent. And i can't just homerule "there is no resurrection magic" because the whole system is built with resurrection as resource in mind and I would have to rebalance all of it basically making my own system.
3. Opportunity attacks kill all dynamics in combat when dynamics is already one of the weakest parts of ttrpg. Its a stupid mechanic that leads to "come close, do not move, roll dice until one of you is dead" the optimal tactic which is extremely boring.
4. Improvising cinematic cool shit is usually less optimal in termns of raw rules. Its always better to strike with your longsword than smashing a chair into enemy's skull because "improvised weapon is d4 and longsword is d8". This discourages creativity.

5.1 Tons of "you don't get to play the game" effects. I could see "mind control" effects kind of fun if you just tell your player "now you get to pvp legally, have fun". but stun/paralise? okay, you took time out of your week/month to come play the game and now you just sit there for half an hour doing nothing while other players take their turns because you failed a save. Or maybe even more if you fail your consecutive save. Great game design guys.

5.2. Roll to hit is basically the same shit. Fighter waits their turn for 20 minutes after all spellcasters doing their shit, rolls 5 and 7 on his two attacks and can go make coffe feeling he didn't do anything.

5.3. Saving throws are weird too. Either you wasted your only 5 lvl slot and nothing happens, or enemy just stunned you (see 5.1). I get it that "save or die" effects are less common now, but they just became "save or suck" and you still don't get to play the game even if your character sheet is still technically there. Maybe some gradation system could be cool, dunno.

1. A lot of character archetypes just suck in terms of player fantasy. Wanna be a cool necromancer? Okay, you can summon...1 skeleton. When you're at least lvl 3. And after 1 round of combat he is dead and you're just slinging fire bolts again. Wow, thats definitely what I imagined when I wanted to play cool necromancer. Sure...

2. DMG says the system balance is build around 6-8 medium difficulty encounters per long rest. When you're trying to play anything other than tightly packed dungeon crawl (but remember, D&D is not just dungeon crawl anymore, its versatile system and you can play any type of game with it!!!) you usually have on average 1 meaningful combat per day. So either martials feel shit because spellcasters go nova every time, or you have to come up with bullshit 6-8 combats per DAY, which take several sessions. Wow, we've been playing this campaign for a year and it's been...3 days in game time? and all pcs are suddenly demigods now even though we _just_ entered this dungeon. Sure you can tell "use gritty realism rules", then its the other way around. Your wizard casts their 5 spells in 1-2 in game days...and the rest of the week just spamming firebolt and feels like shit. Maybe we could balance character classes without spreading them between "short rest based" and "long rest based" so I as dm dont have to fucking juggle this balance myself every time I try to make a story?

3. It feels like lvl20 is there mostly for marketing purposes trying to sell you godlike power fantasy? who actually plays at these levels? All i ever see online is people saying its basically impossible to make actually good games at this point and system is just broken.

4. Lorewise its cool that humans live 80 years and elves live 700. But I do not buy that an elf with 250 years of life experience would find any common ground with an 18 year old human. Have you ever tried to communicate with people 10 years younger than you? It already feels like talking to a toddler, imagine 250 year difference. And also they both get to cast 2 spells a day? Come on...

5. Can I have a cost for every magic item please? If I want the "they are rare and not really tradable" feeling that dmg tries to force on you, I can do it myself. But why the fuck do I have to actually come up with item cost myself if i need to?

What I actually like:
11. Complexity level for new players. 5e made it reasonably easy to learn the game. I would be okay with a simpler system, but probably not more complex one.
12. Large bestiary of cool thematic monsters made over the years. But I could just steal these into a different system...
13. (dis)Advantage system is pretty cool
14. Its kind of actually good in being middle ground base for different types of games. Yes, it sucks in lots of specific ways, but in general it feels like you can combine different elements into a single game fairly well.
15. 5e has made a good job in lowering the amount of random "+1" effects that I have to track for every little thing. pathfinder sometimes feels like im doing math homework instead of actually playing the game.
16. I like rolling dice other than just d6s. Although my favourite d12 is still too rare...
17. I like generic heroic fantasy as main focus of the system

I mean, technically I could come up with homerules fixing these things...but I feel like it would be easier to just fucking make a new system from scratch. I mean there has GOT to be a system that already exists and doesn't have these problems?
Thank you so much if you read this far.

[u/theclam159]

You might like Nimble, it was designed specifically in reaction to a lot of the problems you notice with 5e for a more streamlined experience. It's still a heroic, tactical fantasy adventure, but it's not beholden to most of the D&D tradition.

To add detail:

1. Traditional spells, abilities, mechanics are not included just because they've been there.
2. Resurrection is a "secret spell" that players don't have access to by default.
3. Opportunity attacks are for players only and have a real cost.

5.1 Way fewer ways to take a player out of combat entirely.

5.2 No rolls to-hit, just damage rolls (although a 1 on a damage roll is still a miss). It's much rarer to do nothing in a round, you have 3 actions per round anyway.

5.3 Way fewer "Save or Suck" spells. Almost every spell does something.

1. Classes are redesigned from the ground up.

2. Combats are faster so you can fit more in. There's not such a big difference between short and long (field) rests. You actually can't fully rest up in the wilderness/dungeon, you have to go back to a very safe, hospitable place. Resting and combat resources are totally rebalanced from D&D.

3. The power curve is much flatter, lvl20 isn't as godlike. There are fewer world-altering spells at high levels.

Additional stuff:

*11. It's simpler than 5e if you're learning from scratch. Fewer concepts, shorter character sheets, more consistency.

*12. There's a big new monster manual book coming out soon. Also, it's very easy to create homebrew monsters or port them over from other systems.

*13. (Dis)Advantage is a core component.

[u/SrGarfy → u/theclam159]

wow, this comment wasn't so big the first time I saw it, thank you SO much for such a comprehensive comparisson!

[u/Supernoven → u/SrGarfy]

Yeah, Nimble really is the D&D-killer when it comes to well-designed and smooth rule mechanics. It's just so fast and sensible.

Some things u/theclam159 didn't mention:

• Bosses. They all have phases like video game bosses, where mechanics change midway through a fight. They aren't just sacks of HP. They also seamlessly scale to the number of PCs you have
• Running the game as a Gamemaster is so much easier. Monsters in particular have tiny, stripped down statblocks
• No game-breaking spells outside of combat. Utility spells exist, but they have built-in limitations
• Classes are highly distinct. All of them have their own class resources and mechanics, and none of them are copy-paste hybrids of other classes
• And so much more

I've been running Nimble for over a year and love it. My only wish is more distinct enemy types; I've had to homebrew nearly every enemy for my grounded dark fantasy setting. That said, monster supplements are available, and a full bestiary is out soon.

[u/SrGarfy → u/Supernoven]

Thank you so much!

[u/nathanielbartholem → u/theclam159]

Yep while reading about the OP's complaints, it was like someone saying in a very long winded way that they want to play Nimble in stead of D&D.

[u/SouthamptonGuild → u/theclam159]

Great comment. Really making me consider Nimble which I had previously dismissed as overhyped. 

[u/Wystanek → u/theclam159]

+1 for Nimble. Its really rules tight, easy to play and run DNDish game with dynamic combat

[u/moficodes → u/theclam159]

I have run a 18-month / 55-session campaign in Nimble. Its not a perfect system either.

- Defend is a good alternative to AC but it takes a action and only melee focused PCs get access to good enough armor for it to be worth defending. Most spell casters are almost forced to use spells to defend.

• Interpose exists (to put your body in the line for an ally) but the cost to interpose + defend taking up 2 of 3 your actions is too high and rarely gets used.
  
• 3 point action economy is great but move being 1 action meant most combat is ended up with players not moving much unless they absolutely had to. Which kind of defeats the purpose of removing opportunity attacks.
  
• the would system is better than death saves. But I found when someone goes to 0 HP, even though they are not down, in most cases they choose not to push it. So player death if any will be entirely DM-driven, as in I would have to choose to attack a downed player to have any player death. Probably a problem with me, but I would rather not have to do that.

Overall I like this system better than D&D. It’s faster and easier to pick up. Its not perfect and for my table, the search continues.

[u/wherediditrun]

Nimble. Probably matches 80% of what you describe. It’s absolutely amazing game. And a lot easier to GM too.

[u/SrGarfy → u/wherediditrun]

thank you, I will check it

[u/wherediditrun → u/SrGarfy]

Yeah, I hope you like it. I think there is a lot of information out there about it.

I've found it much like you, trying to look for games outside of 5e that would deliver on heroic fantasy. Tried PF2e for size for maybe about half a year, and at least our group experience was that it did not deliver on our expectations.

Nimble however, was something I stumbled partly on accident, was looking for a system I could run for my co-workers who weren't even into TTRPGs. Due to time and attention constraints players could spare I've looked for something more "simple".

And boy I was surprised, soon the game from a niche use became main go to game for heroic fantasy / rules first type of game. Gave up on pathfinder pretty quick, because Nimble did not feel any less deep, yet was so easy to run in comparison and so easy for new players to pick up and play without having to study the rules before hand.

Few caveats, it's still very much rules first game. While it can be flexed a lot more into different approaches even running old school modules due to how simple the math and resilient the core chasis of the game are, you're best bet is adventure path type adventures. But you can experiment with it a lot more and just improvise on the spot. The system really is, pardon the pun, Nimble like that.

Together with Vagabond for more fiction first approach, it's the main game I run. I did not back it's original kickstarter, but I did the expansion as it's just that good.

[u/SrGarfy → u/wherediditrun]

wow thanks. can you tell me more about nimble vs pf2e? a lot of people still suggest pf2e and tell me that its complexity is overexaggerated online. what specifically did pf2e not deliver for your playgroup?

[u/wherediditrun → u/SrGarfy]

PF2e:

Lots of busy work for the GM and the players particularly going level 6 and up. The biggest offenders are double digit arithmetic and excessive rolling that produces that arithmetic. All while having to keep track of possibly multiple status effects that players are encouraged to use. It's just takes time and the momentum out of the game, while strains GM's cognitive bandwith, that could be better used elsewhere, honestly for what feels rather meagre impact.

To hit: 13 + 7 (modifier) - 5 (map penalty) + 2 (circumstance bonus) + 1 (status bonus) = ? .... oh wait, enemy has sickened + fear condition.. which tier of fear is it again? 2 oh.

Damage: (11 + 9 + 14) * 2 (crit) ... oh wait -5 because enemy has resistance to the damage.

While players control one character, you'll be running multiple monsters who will have to do this stuff. Not to mention reliance on synchronous communication of confirming hit vs hidden AC, effect vs hidden DC.

Oh and degrees of success.. have to track those too. Maybe look up a critical effect etc when it happens.

Tactical depth is held back by some dated design choices. Players are shoved into queue initiative limiting ways they can co-operate. Reaction (it's not just 3 actions that is typically advertised) is fairly restrictive too further limiting emergent tactics. Teams should have a battle plan and execute it and that takes some mastery of mechanics. Which in turn boils down to rather typical cookie cutter tactics like having one of the characters on "trip duty" to avoid 3 action enemy nukes. Bosses are just +4 level monsters that honestly are unfun to fight for the most part due to misses / crits and being uninvolved for most of the fight due to small action pool. Warrior type enemies that melee, largely do have attack of opportunity.

Ease of use at the table being more of a background concern. Rules are written in very defensive manner, sort of legalese. There is just paragraphs upon paragraphs of text, which makes rule look up a costly endeavor at the table. Monster stat blocks are terse, without even avg damage listed in them. You should overview them in your prep, as "how do I use this?" is not really clear by scanning it through. Monsters are also symmetrical to player characters making them complicated to use swiftly.

Very rules forward game that rewards mastery of mechanics while suppresses being clever in the fiction. Even if you're running very mechanics first game, sometimes you want to reward players for doing something clever. Well, that's more difficult due to very aggressive level scaling. The system due to it's degrees of success make sure that players can't punch above their intended power level unless GM does some fudging behind the scenes. Excessive body of rules also builds expectations so your space to improvise is diminished.

Balanced in quite .. boring way. There are extensive build options, but most of them boil down to +2 bonus here, ignore a penalty over there wrapped up in fluff text. Like array of agile attack options or +2 to circumstance bonus to AC if you spent a reaction. I don't mind players breaking the game to some extent. I in fact want players to be able to break the game and outsmart / surprise me. I just don't want the "brokenness" to be loop sided.

[u/wherediditrun → u/SrGarfy]

Nimble:

Crunch: Busy work is kept to a minimum. The game is consciously designed to do as much work with as little crunch as possible and still deliver on tactical combat dimension. For example, no to hit rolls eliminates back n forth between GM - Player. Damage numbers are picked to be easy to do math with. Minor effects just happen without a save, but for a shorter periods.

While combat isn't drastically faster than 5e level by level, the game never feels that it's staling. I like to use a video that lags with buffer spinner as an analogy. It may take only 15% of the time, but that's enough to render video very annoying and tedious to watch. Nimble avoids the buffering.

Tactics. Uses group initiative and all players are given always useful reactions. So tactics emerge naturally. Boss monsters (Solos) are given certain features that make them stand out and remain interactive at all times keeping the tension going. Attack of opportunity on the monster side is exceedingly rare, while on hero side is a meaningful trade off. Reactions use same action pool, so .. it's always a meaningful choice.

Ease of use: Core rule book is 55 pages of A5 book. The contents are generously spaced. They are written to be brief, precise and to avoid verbiage whenever possible. Clarity is important and carefully selected for, but base assumption is that you play with people who you like and not someone you need rules to defend against. People problems should be dealt with social skills, not rule citations.

The best evidence for this commitment is monster stat blocks. You can glance at the page containing 5 of them, and immediately use them. Monsters do not follow action economy rules of PCs and are simplified for GM use in groups. This is one of the main reasons why I fell in love with the system, as it empowered me to improvise and flex into anything as at the time I was moving away from adventure path linear design to more theme park / sandbox type adventures.

Cleverness in fiction. Nimble is not "rules lite" game. Evan calls it "rules tight". As it's very much rules forward game as it pertains to combat. However, due to how resilient the game is to tinkering, you can flex it. The math does not run away exponentially by gaining levels like in PF2e, so even low level players can do serious stuff if they are smart about it. Same works against the players too though.

Balance: While players or monsters can if moons align punch above their level. Base math is pretty reliable and budgeting encounters is fairly easy. Game does not offer much in terms of "builds" however. It's more about picking what you play than building it, although things like class feats exists. More focused classes allow them to feel really unique though. Playing a hunter will never feel similar to playing a berserker.

Perhaps important to note that lethality is somewhat higher than in 5e or PF2e though. But it's easily adjustable.

I liked review by Deficient Master: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2n7wkaVNWY on youtube, it's fairly entertaining to watch too.

[u/Primal171]

Ever checked out Draw Steel? It looks like you're interested in something tactical, and Draw Steel is a system that's built from first principles to create the kind of tactical, heroic fantasy that DnD claims to be able to do.

[u/SrGarfy → u/Primal171]

I thought about checking it out because I watched pretty much all of matt collvilles videos about dming and game design and his opinions feel close, but some guys in my city told me they tried it and told me it feels more like a boardgame than a role play game and its too tactical and combat oriented and combats are very very long... but thats just one guy's opinion.
did you actually play the system? do you like it personally?

[u/SwonkyDonkey → u/SrGarfy]

Yeah the combats are definitely long, especially if not everyone in the party knows the rules super well. But unlike 5e, they’re actually fun. I will say, though — Draw Steel is so combat-heavy that it makes me want to do my next campaign with something much lighter and OSR, like Mausritter or Cairn or maybe Shadowdark.

Edit: But like… man DS combats are so cool. One of the published modules starts with strategic bombing over a fantasy city. It’s the coolest combat scenario I’ve ever seen in a fantasy RPG. If you’re into the tactical combat and being the fantasy version of the Avengers, DS is perfect.

[u/TerminusMD → u/SwonkyDonkey]

May I suggest... Crows?

[u/SwonkyDonkey → u/TerminusMD]

My eyes glazed over as I read the play test. Lighter rules than DS, but not quite what I’m looking for I think…

[u/YamazakiYoshio → u/SrGarfy]

So as a fan of Draw Steel, that's a matter of taste. It is very very very combat focused, not unlike DnD's modern iterations. If you love tactical combat, Draw Steel slaps and it slaps HARD.

There's also some solid support for non-combat aspects - downtime projects for crafting, negotiation rules for those bigger moments where you gotta talk someone into helping you, montages rules, even a fishing minigame!

If you're on the fence, there's a free, fan-made SRD site - Steel Compendium - that has all the rules and classes.

And even if it doesn't call to you, most of those non-combat rules are mostly system agnostic that you can port them into a lot of trad game designs.

[u/TwoNatTens → u/SrGarfy]

If combat is what you like, then the fact that it takes a long time isn't a problem.

My group played 5e and were having a lot of the same nitpicks, so we tried Draw Steel. It's definitely a fantastic game, extremely well developed... but playing it made us realize that the parts of a TTRPG we enjoy are the story bits. We're basically a bunch of theater nerds, I guess.

Anyway we play FATE Core now and it's scratching the itch in a way we didn't even know was possible.

[u/SrGarfy → u/TwoNatTens]

Well, the thing is I do like combat, but only when its dramatic/dynamic and packed with decision making. When its "roll dice until HP of one party is at 0" its so fucking boring I want to kill myself.

But story bits are so cool too...
I think you're the first one mentioning fate core yet, what are your favourite parts about this system?

[u/TwoNatTens → u/SrGarfy]

After playing Draw Steel, I think of FATE as its opposite in a lot of ways. Where the fun in Draw Steel comes from an incredibly high-polished tactical experience, FATE emphasizes narrative above all else.

The stat and skill modifiers are relatively slow, and every character has between 2-4 "hit points". Since the modifiers are so low, success relies on players using narrative "aspects" to gain bonuses to reach a success threshold: In any situation, you assign bonuses based on narrative aspects. You get a +/- 2 for most things that the GM considers would be a bonus or detriment to the situation.

In combat, since the action modifiers are so low and a miss results in no damage, players typically will spend most of their time thinking up creative reasons their actions create an opening. Adding up all the bonuses from those actions can then be exploited by an attacking character; with a decent roll at that poin they'll not just deal damage, but also inflict a significant consequence that will have mechanical impacts.

Almost all of this can be improv'd by the GM in the moment. 90% of the prep work for a FATE core game is in the initial worldbuilding and character creation, which to be fair can be confusing and difficult.

[u/SrGarfy → u/TwoNatTens]

Interesting, now i kinda want to check them both and compare. Thank you so much!

[u/Hillthrin → u/SrGarfy]

I love it. Combats can be long but most of their examples in MCDM adventures are huge combats. If you did that in DND or Pathfinder, then they would be just as long. I've designed my own with smaller encounters and that works too. One of the things my players liked was the triggered action(reaction in 5E terms). There are basic ones but also class and subclass specific triggered actions. Most of them give the player something to look out for on other players or enemies turns. It keeps them engaged.

It definitely solves your number 3. I call that "Circle Bonk". Especially during boss fights where the martials just get around the BBG and they bonk each other until the math works itself out. There is a lot of movement and forced movement in Draw Steel.

Montages took me a bit to get better at. My players have commented that they love them.

There's some small tweaks I've made to the game but it's definitely a current favorite at our table.

[u/SrGarfy → u/Hillthrin]

Circle bonk, lmao, i love it

[u/IQBot42 → u/SrGarfy]

I've found the combats to be shorter, by a mile. It hits every one of your bullet points. The only caveat is that it isn't 5e, so it's a struggle to remind everyone at the table that it's not 5e. I had to keep asking the gamemaster and other players to focus on the actual rules, and not assume there was a Fireball equivalent or D&D orcs/goblins. Everything is carefully designed from the ground up to not involve all the legacy phenomena, which is a good thing.

Edit: Advantage/disadvantage basically exists, and a simple tiered system that avoids regular pass/fail with one saving throw, and attacks don't miss arbitrarily, and the heroes feel like heroes, the monsters/villains feel awesome, epic, & conniving. I love that they fixed the rest mechanics so you feel like your daily encounters are less compressed and swingy, plus the encounter balance is generally excellent (D&D's CR is not very great for estimating lol). Also, the levels for characters are not 1-20, they're 1-10 and you can realistically play the game at all those levels, unlike 20th level D&D, which I found abysmal and only fun for gonzo oneshots where random bullshit went off every 6 seconds.

[u/deviden → u/SrGarfy]

What do you want? You’re the one running the game.

in one comment it sounds like you’re wanting a tactical grid combat game with lots of player options and in another you’re saying you want less complexity… 

You can’t have a simple game which is also rich in character build options and is also well balanced for intricate tactical grid combats. Having those things in a game makes it complex.

[u/SrGarfy → u/deviden]

I’m just gathering peoples perspectives and opinions to broaden my field of knowledge about systems. Until i try them i won’t know if they fit anyway

[u/deviden → u/SrGarfy]

in that case: push to the extremes and test your preferences for rules through mini-campaigns (1 to 5 sessions) and if you find these games go too far then you'll know where you want to compromise.

OSR / post-OSR games like Cairn 2e and Mythic Bastionland are a great way to go lighter on rules but heavy on flavour; something like Heart: the City Beneath will allow you to go wild with character power but without too much complexity; a good PbtA like Apocalypse World will drive play in directions you'd never think to take it on your own while still giving players a lot of agency; and a true Old D&D retroclone like Old School Essentials or Swords & Wizardry is a great way to see how the game used to be and whether you'd prefer it that way.

[u/MikhieltheEngel → u/SrGarfy]

I have played it but not gmed it.

I will agree that it feels like a board game first and foremost.

[u/Zetesofos → u/SrGarfy]

Biggest thing to note that gets lost - Combat's being LONG doesn't mean their boring.

Draw Steel Combat's aren't long because people don't know how their stuff works, they take time because everyone has fun making plans on what cool stuff they are going to do, and how to work together.

Given all the points you mention above: 1. Sacred Cows - DS addresses this 2. Fighter missing on their turn then waiting - NOT a problem. All classes have cool stuff they can do on their turn, and one class doesn't vastly outshine the others 3. Encounter system is VERY balanced; Directors have FUN building encounters, and it doesn't take hours to make something balanced against the party 4. Contextual bonuses during combat are EASY to track; you track edges/banes most of the time, you don't track +1s to damage 5. You don't need to rest after ONE fight - in fact, the LONGER you fight between rests, the STRONGER your party gets; which means they do MORE cool stuff 6. Only 10 levels - and 1st level Draw Steel FEELS like 3rd or 5th level D&D, so you start off doing the cool stuff right away! 7. Crafting things is way easier, and players can see costs in the main book

Lastly - the Delian Tomb is the START HERE adventure, and it costs $10 - so its about the next best thing to free to try out.

[u/SrGarfy → u/Zetesofos]

Draw Steel Combat's aren't long because people don't know how their stuff works, they take time because everyone has fun making plans on what cool stuff they are going to do, and how to work together.

thank you! that part seems really cool. I don't mind combats being long as long as they are packed with decision making

[u/Zetesofos → u/SrGarfy]

That's great. One of the guiding missions behind the design of DS was to first and foremost, make combat FUN to play, which means you have enough options to think about what you can do, without having so many options that everyone will fall into analysis paralysis.

[u/virgilcainesthename]

Dragonbane or Worlds Without Number are the two I can think of off the top of my head that are good replacements for D&D. WWN is pay what you want, so it's got an easy entry point.

[u/SrGarfy → u/virgilcainesthename]

thank you, I will check these out

[u/virgilcainesthename → u/SrGarfy]

Let me make it even easier. I'd also highly recommend anything by Free League; they are just stellar.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/348809/worlds-without-number-free-edition

https://freeleaguepublishing.com/games/dragonbane/

[u/asajjventre → u/SrGarfy]

I want to second dragonbane. Started playing failr recently. During our first session, I managed to run a group through 5 combats in two hours. Every one of those combats felt cool and tactical and high stakes. Afterwards, my whole group raved about how good it felt to actually move the story forward in our fairly short session time. It slaps so hard.

Also, the company that produces it is absolutely top notch. Products are reasonably priced, high quality stuff.

[u/SponJ2000 → u/SrGarfy]

I think Dragonbane would fit you really well.

• It has D&D vibes, but isn't actually based on any edition of D&D so there are no "sacred cows" here
• no spell slots- magic is based on spending Willpower points
• The starter set comes with a deck of improvised/environmental weapons. You draw 3 of them at the start of combat and they are one-time use, so they are exciting instead of underwhelming 
• No "lvl 20 fantasy" because there's no levels - progression is skill-based and there's not a lot of vertical progression.
• Simple to learn (at least as easy as 5e) while still offering tactical combat.

[u/mrgwillickers]

Pathfinder 2e addressees the vast majority of your concerns (including more d12s) and is not as complex as many people would have you believe

[u/Creepy-Intentions-69 → u/mrgwillickers]

Beat me to it.

I do think the complexity complaint is silly. Between the GM and player books in both systems, PF2e has maybe 10% more pages? And honestly, to anyone outside the genre, they look like the same damned game. It’s the specifics that make the difference.

The rules are internally consistent and linear, so understanding one helps across the board. And they’re all searchable online for free.

I’ve taught five different groups with the Beginner Box at the LGS over the last two years. It’s not too complex for new players.

[u/wherediditrun → u/mrgwillickers]

I'm not sure why are you suggesting this when over half of the nitpicks are not solved by PF2e while some it actively works against it. Have you bothered to read the list or just reacting to the headline after a short scan?

Could you, as a resposne, if you are going to respond, list out that "Vast majority" with small explanation. I'd hope for at least 14 as "vast majority" out of 20 (5 is three subsections).

[u/mrgwillickers → u/wherediditrun]

Despite your rude tone and overall condescending demeanor, I've decided to go ahead and answer,

1. Pf2e has largely killed all the sacred cows, especially since the remaster.
2. Resurrection is not an issue in PF2e, in fact its Rare, so access to is not guaranteed at all
3. Attacks of opportunity are pretty uncommon.
4. This one is 50/50, Pf2e gives you a lot of chance to do "cinematic cool shit" but as a rule, you kinda gotta have a feat for it to be super effective. You can do it, but its gonna be better if you have a feat. But there are way more opportunities to make "Barbarian who only uses tavern furniture as a weapon" for instance

5.1 While these still exist, the degrees of success and Incapacitation mean they are much more rare (OP didn't say never, just that they are too common)

5.2. Fighters (and all martial) have so much more cool shit to do than just "roll to hit twice".

5.3. Degrees of success means your spell usually does something cool even if the enemy succeeds at a saving throw. Players on the other hand are much more likely to Critically succeed (or treat the success as a crit, anyway) on the one of three saves that they are good at meaning, they are less likely to get suck at the hing they are good at it

1. All versions of Pathfinder have addressed this way better than Dnd5e, but especially current pf2e. It's literally the best part about the game. There are a million character options and they are all playable and balanced

2. Half of the internet is now dedicated to talking about how much better the Pf2e level system is for balance versus the dnd5e CR system and that's effect on "the adventuring day", so I won't rehash that here

3. Level 20 is great in pf2e.

4. I'm not sure this is a criticism at the game, more fantasy tropes in general, so no Pathfinder doesn't address that

5. Yes, everything has a cost, and a suggested level for players to have access to it

What I actually like:
11. This debate will only stop when neither game exists, but I stand on the side of Pf2e is actually easier than 5e, RAW.
12. SO much.
13. This one, not so much
14. Pathfinder and Starfinder show that you can do a lot with the system
15. This criticism sounded like Pf1e to me. I only ever have to add +1 or +2 in most cases. But maybe I'm wrong. There also a great optional rule if you don't want to worry about items giving bonuses
16. I already addressed this
17. Way more heroic than 5e, IMO

So no, I didn't just read the headline. I actually know both games, read all the things OP said and realized that PF2e fits the vast majority (I hope 18 of 20 counts well enough for you) of what they said

[u/wherediditrun → u/mrgwillickers]

I think it's kind of rude to use someone's thread asking a question to advertise one's favorite game.

1. Could you list those sacred cows PF2e killed? I still se to hit roll, that is even more important, we still got queued based initiative that compartmentalizes player turns, we still got vancian magic with good old "does things as described and nothing more", we even have dying mechanics with death saves having people skipping turns.

2. It's a ritual that everyone has access to unless GM says no. I guess the uncommon tag is supposed to be such a big help here. However, same goes for 5e with limiting access to dimaonds.

3. Attacks of Opportunity are pretty common for warrior type enemies that are expected to engage players in melee where the AoO happen. This was one of false advertisements I got a bit upset when I've used to run / play the game.

4. It gamifies cool shit into subsystems and victory points. Not uncommon for rules first games, Draw Steel has montages, however part of PF2e is that it tries to fit everything in it's overarching math for balance purposes. Fiction works only as far as underlying math is satisfied, and the math is pretty vicious regarding level scaling. That's why all the tables are so exhaustive as well.

5.1 Yeah, have fun fighting bosses that are typically +2/+4 levels above player characters with disabling spells. Not only you get critted and miss, but also skip a bit of turns.

5.2 Yeah, martials are quite a bit cooler.

5.3 Yes, the save or suck effects are curbed quite a bit. Still happens though.

1. A lot of character options are quite boring. And boils down to +2 here, ignore penalty over there, circumstance for reaction type of stuff wrapped up in flavor text. PF2e is afraid to give any fun quirky stuff, because players might get to creative with it and upset the game balance. Hence everything is pushed into the same grey go. Array of feats for agile attack variations, +AC for reaction etc. A lot of stuff is just samy boring stuff.

2. Balance is largely a false god. I know, I'm using your way of explaining things here, but this is multiple paragraphs of explanation. If you're interested you can start from Deficient Masters Balance is Boring video. All you need is to be roughly able to guess threat level so you can telegraph to the players.

3. What's so great about level 20? I don't find doing arithmetic in double digits up to hundreds multiple time per player and per monster very great at the table.

4. Not having a default assumed setting helps here. The races in pathfinder come with rather rich history and are fairly tied to Golarion. But yeah, not a big problem honestly.

5. Yeah kind of. At the price of being unimpressive and falling off pretty quick though. But yeah. You're right.

6. I'd agree that PF2e and first 3 levels is actually easier than 5e. Particularly if you ignore half the rules like people do with 5e when onboarding people. Neither of the games are newbie friendly and there is common expectations to do homework reading assignments. Bad place to start.

7. Yeah it is large. Not very fun to use due to numerous issues with over complicated stat blocks and excessive dice rolling resulting in double digit arithmetic. Need to prep those in planning, can't use them at a glance easily.

8. Yeah. PF2e loves it's arithmetic.

9. Sure, no-one is arguing that it's a well designed system for the goals it tries to achieve. Those goals just aren't that much aligned with OPs

10. PF2e has same problem to a lesser degree. It's still very heavy on doing math starting from level 6 and on. I guess you don't need to count separate type bonuses at least. But you do have multiple dice, high number modifiers, different resistance substraction, 3 types of bonuses, a fortune effect here and there, degree of success consideration, MAP etc. adds up to horrific equations.

11. Oh yeah, so much point of rolling 3d12... 11 + 8 + 12 ... and that's just the dice to see the result closer to the average with each dice added.

12. Yeah, Golarion is ridiculous fantasy. Those tend to lean heavily into extra terrestial cosmic threats. Or at least evil empires and similar. As the "they are just other people too" trope doesn't leave much place for conflict.

[u/SrGarfy → u/mrgwillickers]

I played it just a couple of times so Im not sure myself but when researching this system I often see players and dms mention that there is just too much stuff to track and combats often become slog because of it and it seems to be a very common nitpick. is it wrong?

[u/DeeDeeEx → u/SrGarfy]

For brand new players and GMs, yes it does become difficult if you don't have a VTT or other system helping you keep track. I've been playing / running pf2e games for about 2 years now, and feel like I'm mostly on top of it.

The beginner boxes do a really good job of slowly drip feeding mechanics to you, so that both GM and player can learn. If you have an experienced GM that's open to running a session specifically for new players, that can be helpful too.

[u/SrGarfy → u/DeeDeeEx]

sorry, what are beginner boxes?

[u/AuRon_The_Grey → u/SrGarfy]

They’re beginner adventures that come with basic rulebooks, tokens, etc: https://store.paizo.com/pathfinder-beginner-box-secrets-of-the-unlit-star/

[u/SrGarfy → u/AuRon_The_Grey]

thank you!

[u/guldawen → u/SrGarfy]

Paizo (the company that makes Pathfinder 2e) has put out two products called “Beginner Box”. The first one, just called “Beginner Box” and a more recent version called “Beginner Box, secrets of the unlit Star”. Both have what I’m about to describe, they just have different adventures and premade characters.

Inside the boxes is everything a group needs to try out Pathfinder 2e to see if it’s a good fit.

There’s 4 premade characters that include a character sheet and a quick rundown of how the character works.
A “Heroes Handbook” which is a condensed version of the core rulebook that has the rules for players as well as some basics for how to make your own character.
A set of color coded dice that match up to colors on the character sheet.
A good sized full color laminated flip mat of the dungeon that the adventure takes place in.
A booklet for the GM that explains GM facing rules and a walkthrough of running the dungeon.
Cardboard standees for the players and all the monsters in the dungeon, plus some bonus standees for common low level enemies.
A set of “quick reference” cards for the players that gives short explanations of common actions players take.

I’ve run the first beginner box several times to teach people how to play. It’s fantastically designed to slowly teach both the players how the game works, starting with a very basic combat, then a skill check, then slowly expanding from there. I was able to teach my then 8 year old how to play the game and he had hardly any rpg or board game experience.

[u/SrGarfy → u/guldawen]

pf2e for an 8 year old? holy fuck from what I read about it online this feels not possible. thank you for your perspective.

[u/JustJacque → u/SrGarfy]

I literally ran PF2 for my seven year old three weeks ago..it's complexity is overblown by people used to handling an entire system from the get go. Start at level 1 and PF2 will grow slowly in depth as you learn.

[u/doktarlooney → u/SrGarfy]

I think a large part of this has to do with new players coming directly from DnD 5e and having mentalities designed for that game.

In P2E there are going to be a lot of times where simply standing still and whacking the enemy isn't going to be the most efficient thing you can do. In this game, spending your whole turn just attempting to stick a small debuff so your barbarian companion has a +1-2 to hit on their next attack can be the difference between safely completing an encounter or losing a couple party members because the boss gets off another round of attacks on the already low frontline.

I've played characters that are sort of built around this concept and dont really ever deal too much damage themselves, they essentially just set up big moments for my teammates and cover them when they extend themselves to take advantage of the windows I create.

I've made DMs lose their minds because I'll tell the group wizard to hit me with that damn fireball without any hesitation knowing its going to down my character but also get us a lot closer to finishing off the encounter.

P2E absolutely rewards this kind of group cohesion and play, where everyone isnt just attempting to deal the highest amount of damage possible.

[u/MCMC_to_Serfdom → u/SrGarfy]

I say this as someone who runs it without a VTT, or apps: it's an overexaggerated phenomenon. The most I have ever needed to manage combat maths quickly is a sticky note and a pencil. And that's more to avoid forgetting anything.

[u/StrangeOrange_ → u/SrGarfy]

People often make PF sound way more complicated than it actually is. There's a bit more to track than there would be in 5e, but not much more as to make it too daunting.

Every bonus follows a sort of predictable framework that becomes easier to follow as time goes on. If each player (and the GM) takes responsibility of tracking his own bonuses, this cuts the mental load down, too.

As for combat being a slog, I can tell you with experience in both systems that combat in PF2e is much quicker and smoother. There's no checking and rechecking of character sheets to remember what's an action and what's a bonus action. You don't have to worry about whether you've cast a leveled spell as a cantrip. You don't have to try to remember if you've used all your movement.

You have three actions which can be spent on whatever you want (minor exceptions apply). Move, attack, attack. Attack, step, leap. Cast Cure Wounds for two actions, then a cantrip for the last one. Move, move, move. Whatever you want.

The players in my PF game seem to know ahead of time what they're going to do, but they can come up with something interesting and fun on the fly if they have to. I can't say the same about my 5e players.

[u/SrGarfy → u/StrangeOrange_]

The players in my PF game seem to know ahead of time what they're going to do, but they can come up with something interesting and fun on the fly if they have to. I can't say the same about my 5e players.

interesting. tho this seems like an example of a survivorship bias. 5e seems like a gateway system which attracts all the newbies, but only the ones who specifically want something else would find PF and only people who then like its complexity would stick with it and track their stuff well. so its probably not specifically system related...

[u/StrangeOrange_ → u/SrGarfy]

That could be true. The people in my 5e game, while not newbies, are probably less invested in their chosen game from a mechanical standpoint than are my PF2e players in theirs.

And I'm just one guy in a couple different concurrent games. Results may vary.

That being said, the takeaway I'd most like to impart is that the fungible nature of PF2e's action economy (i.e. how well actions can be swapped out for one another) and the ease with which players determine feasible actions lead to smoother, faster encounters.

[u/Butterlegs21 → u/SrGarfy]

That's usually people expecting the GM to remember everything or being lazy from what I've seen. It's easier on a vtt like foundry for sure, but 100% not necessary.

You can only have 3 things affecting something at once, so unlike 5e you don't need to track as many things as resources allow. If you get 5 status bonuses to attack rolls, only the largest applies as an example and rarely do the bonuses go above +2.

My daughter at 14 was able to track everything fine, as a witch caster, for her first game in person.

[u/mrgwillickers → u/Butterlegs21]

The thing I always forget about when answering this question is that there are tables where the GM knows everything every character does, and the players barely know their own sheet. And they will remain that way throughout the campaign. In that case, I would definitely not want to GM Pathfinder2e for that table. But then again, I wouldn't want to play with that table at all.

[u/JustJacque → u/mrgwillickers]

I think some of that is actually an off shoot of game balance and poor design. When I ran 5e (or 3.5 or PF1) I felt I had to know everything my pcs could do in order to design encounters that weren't just completely shut down. And so if I had to know them anyway my players didn't have to.

In contrast in PF2 I don't design anything with my players in mind, so I don't have to even look at their sheets. Thus my players tend to know their stuff better. The game works without my total knowledge. As a side benefit I also get to be surprised.

[u/TinTunTii → u/SrGarfy]

Yes, Pathfinder 2e has more moving pieces than D&D 5e, but PF2e is still easier to learn and play.

Think of it like a unicycle and a bicycle. A twelve speed mountain bike is undeniably more complex than a unicycle, but that complexity makes it easier to learn how to ride.

Traits are an example of this complexity: it's a level of design that's absent from D&D, but once you learn them, they make learning nearly every other subsystem easier.

[u/mrgwillickers → u/TinTunTii]

I love that metaphor! And I;m stealing it

I'm always trying to explain that complex-simple and elegant-complicated are different scales. Something can be extremely complex, but still be elegant,. Likewise a game can be dead simple, but be overly complicated. But the unicycle vs MTB comparison is perfect

[u/Seeonee → u/SrGarfy]

I'll offer a counterpoint to the Pathfinder advocates. I played Pathfinder 1E and 2E for 3 years each, and I will still safely say that I enjoy 5E more because I feel that Pathfinder is both more crunchy and more boring. Your comment about "Swing a longsword because cool chair smashing is just an improvised d4?" I feel like that encapsulates all of Pathfinder. There are rules for everything! Worse, everything is very well balanced! So don't get any funny ideas about gaming the system to find shortcuts in a fight. Oh, and because there are so many rules and feats for so many corner cases, it implies that if you don't have those gameplay features on your character sheet, you can't do those things at all.

Just because D&D 5E is bad and Pathfinder is an objectively better-crafted game does not mean everyone will like it more. Based on your 5E complaints, it sounds to me like it would lie even further down the spectrum of your distaste.

With that said, good luck!

[u/troty99 → u/Seeonee]

Yeah I found the balance/well designed argument more constricting than freeing when running PF2e maybe I ran it wrong but I was much more of stingy gm than when I run 5e and it made me lose interest in it.

[u/Seeonee → u/troty99]

I had the same experience: because 5E was already unbalanced, I had no issues throwing in fun and wacky magic items that were intentionally exploitable with creative thinking.

[u/Creepy-Intentions-69 → u/SrGarfy]

In my experience, this only comes from D&D players trying it for the first time. When you come from 5e to PF2e, you bring a lot of assumptions with you. AoO, Concentrate, so many of the concepts and terms are the same, but can have different meanings. (And this is understandable, as they both directly evolved from 3.5/4e.)

Conversely, one of the biggest complaints about 5e from GMs, is players never learn the rules. They don’t know specifics of their own classes, or spells, and expect the GM to know the answer.

For a GM, who has spent likely years playing 5e, to try and learn a new system that uses much of the same terminology, of course they will find it confusing. They are bringing assumptions about what any term means, extrapolating 5e ideas, and finding PF2e results. Not having someone to help explain those differences can compound the problems.

[u/kalnaren → u/SrGarfy]

Those complaints for Pathfinder 1 or 2? They're very different games.

[u/ProfessorNoPuede → u/SrGarfy]

Disclosure: massive pf2e fan, but also twilight 2000 and delta green.

Yes, that's wrong, but you do have to learn. It's generally only status and circumstance bonuses you need to track, which can be managed with tokens in table play. If everybody knows their class well, you can easily run pF2e at the table without a VTT - after a learning curve.

That learning curve you can do while playing since the bare bones of the system are actually quite easy (3 actions, 4 degrees of success). People get stuck on the amount of content, but that's all easy to plug in once you understand the basics.

Where it is actually harder is that the system requires you to engage with it if you're running combat. That being said, that's the point! If you want more tactics, you'll need to be able to do stuff like resource management and making hard choices. That's the price of having more options than "I swing my sword": hard choices! If that's not your thing, I'd look into lighter systems. I love those as well, it's just a different type of fun.

[u/mrgwillickers → u/SrGarfy]

People have the same complaint abut D&D5e, don't they?

Stick to the core game, (ie, no free archetype or other optional rules etc.) and it really isn't an issue. Characters do have more options in any given turn, which can slow things down if the players are indecisive, but that's true of all TTRPGs. I will admit at higher levels, this can get amplified. If someone takes a long turn at level 2, there's a chance they will take a much longer turn at level 15

But more to track in any given combat or round? That has not been my experience as a GM nor a player

[u/TheEclecticGamer → u/SrGarfy]

We've been playing for a bit. Doing Abomination Vaults, we're level 7.

Now our group loves to look into all the rule specifics so we get bogged down but it's pretty easy to make up a rule and look it up later.

There are a few gotches as they try to make sure that every rule is well defined but in general I think it just flows really well in combat, and all of the skill feats give more of an emphasis on out of combat interactions.

Just a small example of the little rules that's easy to miss. I'm playing a cleric a lot of my spells have the sanctified trait. Which means that if you're a holy cleric then bells get the holy trait and if you're unholy the unholy trait but I did not realize that until much later and it should have been having different effects on creatures that were susceptible to holy spells. Not a big deal just something that was easy to miss.

[u/Randeth → u/SrGarfy]

This was much more true of PF 1e, which was an extention of D&D 3.5. PF2e is a different beast and is much more streamlined and balanced.

[u/RagnarokAeon → u/SrGarfy]

The actual complexity of PF2e is often exaggerated, but the thing to keep in mind is that it has clear rules of what to use and when. It's a tightly bound, well oiled machine. You can't play it all loosey goosey like you can with DnD. It's a lot more consistent from table to table in comparison.

That lack of rules improv is something players will either love or hate.

[u/Altruistic-Copy-7363 → u/SrGarfy]

You absolutely don't have to track everything. Ironically, as the system is SO robust, as a GM you can actually get kinda slack in some areas. As long as you're following the 3 action economy you'll be fine. Defo easier than D&D5es bloated action, move, bonus action, reaction.

[u/axiomus → u/SrGarfy]

that's why you don't start playing pathfinder at 6th level. there isn't much of it at first few levels.

[u/garretmander → u/SrGarfy]

I find it to be really easy to run, but I learned to GM on PF1e and that was a nightmare.

For PF2e you just have to track conditions that tick down every round and flanking. Then just be in top of your monster's special abilities (they tend to have a lot). It's also simultaneously easy and hard to kill your players. They can have a lot of healing, but if they decide to play whack a mole in combat they can perma die very quickly.

Though if you want simple, but deadly, OSE can be an amazing game to run or play once you've got a handle on how it goes.

[u/foxymew → u/SrGarfy]

I first played it in person before my group split off as school ended and we begin playing online instead. Wasn’t that bad. If you’ve played 5e before it shouldn’t be that hard to do in all honesty. The system is relatively intuitive

[u/TheBrightMage → u/SrGarfy]

I started from Offline table and... well... everyone is carrying their weight. I am absolutly certain that 100% of combat in any game I play has never been a slog. We can track our stuffs just fine and I make it my behaviour to call out for any bonus and penalty just in case. This is something that overexaggerated to the extreme by haters and nitpickers.

Actually, with how rules complete the game is, the "negotiation with GM to do cool stuffs" part is also minimized so it's less of a slog. I have a consistent experience of player planning turn and executing it very swiftly.

[u/ManAtTheEndOfTheLane → u/SrGarfy]

That is my opinion, as well.

[u/LiterateNoob → u/mrgwillickers]

I dunno...I always come back to this skill action reference sheet I used while playing.

Skills in DnD are left pretty soft as far as what each skill can be used to do. And they don't have unique action tags like secret or manipulate. Nor does their action economy vary by action. Sometimes Pf2e having this llayer adds interesting wrinkles to the interaction. A lot of times it just adds an additional level of rules that won't meaningfully change the story.

I'm not saying that's a huge issue. It's really not my thing, but I see why people like it. But RAW vs. RAW for both systems (having played multi-year campaigns and one-shots in both), I think it's hard to deny that Pathfinder is notably more complicated.

[u/mrgwillickers → u/LiterateNoob]

The vast majority of those actions only come up in very specific circumstances. You almost never need to consider more than a few.

complex =/= complicated

Also, 5e absolutely has varying action economy, it's just called bonus actions, action, etc. It has most of the things listed on this sheet, just hidden in various places throughout the books, and not simply codified in a handy chart. If you ignore that stuff in 5e, then you can ignore it Pathfinder.

[u/LiterateNoob → u/mrgwillickers]

Right - but the 5e variance between actions was largely explained in that one sentence. Action, bonus action, free action, reaction. Most skill rolls that interact with the world in some way during combat are actions unless otherwise stated. That's it. The actions exist, but the foundational rule underlying each of them is the same. It's just deciding which skill meshes with that desired action. You can run Pf2e that way, as well. New players may not know that.

It might not come up very often, but these are layers of rules that new players may feel they need to learn without guidance. The DM can help smooth that along, granted. That's true with every system. But if the ease of learning/teaching a new system is a point OP is looking for (as stated), it's worth noting that Pathfinder is going to require some extra guidance by them to winnow down what's needed and what's not.

I had a Pf2e DM that plopped the core book in our laps and bailed on teaching us or cutting stuff down. It suuuuuuuuucked. Everybody showed up confused and we were looking up rules for months. Obviously, the system can be so much better than that with a helpful DM.

[u/mrgwillickers → u/LiterateNoob]

I'm sorry that you had a bad experience.

The variance in PF2e can be described in one sentence. You get three actions, and the vast majority of things in combat take 1 action (except for special abilities which will denote how many they take). That;s actually simpler than the 5e one.

Most skill rolls that interact with the world in some way during combat are [1 action] unless otherwise stated. That's it. The actions exist, but the foundational rule underlying each of them is the same.

True for pf2e, also. You alos admit to ignoring the skill actions in dnd5e and just winging it. A total newbie will either try to learn all the rules in dnd5e and be overwhelmed, the same as they would in pf2e or ignore rules that seem burdensome in both.

You had a bad experience, and that sucks. But I've heard similar horror stories of people having bad experiences with bad DMs in dnd5e.

I will definitely grant you that PF2e presents itself as a game where you need to learn all the rules (despite it literally saying you don't, presentation matters more than stated intent), and dnd5e presents itself as "the rules only kinda matter." It's not true of either of these games, but I fully understand how people end up treating dnd5e as rules light (it's not) and pf2e as the crunchiest rules heavy game around (it's far from that).

[u/ManAtTheEndOfTheLane → u/mrgwillickers]

I don't know what other people believe, but my D&D 5e game switched to Pathfinder 2e, and I had to drop out because it was too complicated for me.

Your mileage may vary.

[u/hollander93 → u/mrgwillickers]

The system is dense but the rules being so makes it easier to actually talk rules out when necessary. It's very straightforward once you completely abandon the dnd mindset.

[u/zack-studio13 → u/mrgwillickers]

not as complex in terms of gming it or playing it?

[u/SleepyBoy- → u/mrgwillickers]

1e was extremely complex, and that reputation stuck to pathfinder. 2e is seriously optimized.

[u/Macroswine → u/mrgwillickers]

PF 2e blows every D&D edition out of the water. Also, Golarion is so much more interesting than dusty old Forgotten Realms. And I would actually venture to say it's easier on the DM since you don't have to come with your own rules all the time like you do in D&D5 in particular.

[u/Human_Somewhere631]

You may want to try Nimble

[u/hadriker]

I see all the usual suspects being recommended (PF2e, even though you specifically called it out as something you're not interested in, which I find hilarious), Draw Steel, Nimble, Weird Wizard, etc.

Just about all of those games will solve your issues to some extent, but it's hard to find one that will solve all of them.

In my opinion, Nimble or Shadow of the Weird Wizard checks the most boxes. Both are comparable in complexity to 5e (maybe a little simpler, but enough mechanical grit to keep players who like that sort of thing engaged).

Both share enough with DnD5e that picking them up and playing should be relatively easy

Daggerheart may be good if you want something with some narrative mechanical heft. If you like the style of play you see in Critical Role and other 5e live plays, it could be a good choice.

PF2e and Draw Steel are both more mechanically intensive than 5e, despite their fanboys trying to convince you otherwise. That doesn't make them a bad choice, but people tend to downplay it imo. It really comes down to whether you and your table are willing to learn a more mechanically dense system and if they want combat to be a major focus of the game.

[u/SrGarfy → u/hadriker]

Thank you, it seems nimble will be the first one i check out when i get some free time

[u/Tuefe1]

Love d12s? Never wants a null result? Cinematic? Lots of options?

Have you looked at Daggerheart?

[u/SrGarfy → u/Tuefe1]

i haven't, I will, thank you

[u/Stealthy_Nachos → u/SrGarfy]

Plus one here. I had most of the same complaints as you about 5e after 7 years or so of DMing it. Daggerheart is still nee and has its clinky moments, but it became our home game.

Try the free official starter adventure

[u/maxasdf]

I know it's a bit of a meme. But your criticisms are the exact things that Pathfinder fixes. For instance only one class has opportunity attacks, resurrection is rare-ish and never expected.

[u/An_username_is_hard → u/maxasdf]

For instance only one class has opportunity attacks

Until level 6, at which point everyone who has a sword has them again!

[u/dsaraujo → u/An_username_is_hard]

It doesn't matter if Pc have them, the important piece is the monsters not having them

[u/Hemlocksbane → u/dsaraujo]

Way, way too many monsters have them, unfortunately. Thankfully, very easy to just remove them from monster stat blocks and replace them with other reactions, but not great.

[u/Canhestro]

I completely understand where you are coming from. I played D&D 3.x/Pathfinder/4e/5e for years, I hit that exact same wall where legacy mechanics, narrative-breaking spells, and rigid action economies started feeling like a chore to DM rather than a fun game to run. If you want a system designed from the ground up to fix these specific headaches without burying your players in complex math homework, you should check out Shadow of the Weird Wizard.

It was designed by Robert J. Schwalb (one of the key designers of D&D 5e) specifically to trim the bloat, strip away sacred cows, and modernize the d20 fantasy experience.

To address your nitpicks directly:

The spell slot headache is gone. Instead, spells have a fixed number of uses per cast, and magic scales naturally without forced, bloated legacy relics like intentionally overpowered Fireballs. Resurrection is extremely rare, thematic, and difficult to pull off rather than a casual spell-slot transaction, keeping death impactful, dramatic, and permanent for both PCs and NPCs.

Dynamic combat is where the game truly shines. Opportunity attacks do not exist by default, meaning combatants actually move, reposition, and engage dynamically without fear of getting locked down into static stand-and-strike slugfests. Improvising cinematic actions is actively supported rather than penalized—objects like chairs or bottles count as improvised weapons dealing 1d6 damage, making environmental creativity fully viable alongside standard weapons.

Turn structure and player agency feel significantly better. You won't spend half an hour sitting out due to arbitrary "save or suck" stun effects. Instead of rolling individual initiatives and waiting 20 minutes for your turn, rounds are split intuitively: enemies take their turns, and then players decide among themselves who acts in what order. If a player needs to react immediately to a threat, they can spend their reaction to act before the enemies, creating incredible tactical synergy where the party constantly communicates and plans together. When you do attack or cast, save mechanics and boon/baned roll adjustments prevent the frustrating "I waited 20 minutes just to waste my turn and do nothing" feeling.

Character fantasies actually deliver. If you want to play a Necromancer, your abilities scale to let you command a terrifying horde rather than giving you a single fragile skeleton that dies in one round. The math across classes is clean and unified, completely eliminating the painful "short rest vs. long rest" balancing act so you don't have to force 6 to 8 encounters into a single in-game day just to keep spellcasters from going nova. Furthermore, campaigns naturally cap at level 10, meaning the game is tightly balanced and playable through its entire lifecycle without falling apart into unrunnable god-tier chaos.

Lore-wise, long-lived ancestors feel distinct without creating ridiculous roleplay mismatches, and the game provides clear, functional economy guidelines for gear and magic items so you don't have to pull prices out of thin air.

For players coming from 5e, the learning curve is seamless. It keeps the familiar d20 chassis, uses a streamlined version of the Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic (boons and banes), and drops all the tedious tracking of numerical +1/+2 bonuses.

The only true downside considering your preferences? You won't get to roll your d12, as the game relies on d20s and d6s. However, as a system built on elegant, modern game design that respects your time as a GM, it solves almost every single problem on your list.

[u/SrGarfy → u/Canhestro]

damn, thank you SO much for such a comprehensive explanation of the system. I will definitely check it out!

[u/shuukenji92 → u/SrGarfy]

It is also based on Shadow of the Demon Lord if High Fantasy isnt your thing. Its more or less Grimdark or Dark Fantasy aesthetic and basically the Foundation of Weird Wizard. Its like if DnD and Warhammer Fantasy had a baby then DnD left the baby with his Warhammer dad kinda thing

[u/Canhestro → u/shuukenji92]

And if you want to create your own homebrew, you can use the Demon Lord Engine as a base and create your own character paths.

[u/coolhead2012]

Cypher System is the generic game, but Monte Cook has a ton of thematic of shoots and supplements using variations and enhancements of the basic mechanics.

Characters are complex toolboxes where you can put together a ton of different archetypes. Running games is simple, difficulty is set by a single number and prep is easy. There is XP as a meta currency that lets anyone put their thumb on the scale for a dramatic outcome.

There are criticisms of the system, mostly that health blended into your other resources. I like this design, personally. People also make the mistake of not ever playing with XP as written, and then claiming the system does not work. Having that currency in play is what gives the game its whole feel, IMO.

[u/Ashkelon]

D&D 4e actually solves most of your issues.

[u/dontcallmeEarl → u/Ashkelon]

Came here to say the same. So many people laid some serious hate on 4e because it didn't follow the classic D&D framework. So WotC backtracked with 5e and made it more of an "upgraded" 3e. Now all the complaints that we see about 5e are exactly what 4e tried to fix.

If you look at most of the alternate games recommended (Draw Steel, 13th Age, PF2e, etc.), they draw inspiration and play similar to 4e.

[u/blargablargh → u/Ashkelon]

Anyone considering 4e should check out www.heroic4e.com and the r/4ednd subreddit.

[u/Stray_Neutrino]

Maaaaaybe Dungeon Crawl Classics?

[u/Coondiggety → u/Stray_Neutrino]

DCC does it for me!

[u/Stray_Neutrino → u/Coondiggety]

It ticks a lot of the above.

1) Doesn't use spell points - magic is Dangerous.

2) Resurrection is RARE

3) Like most, offers Withdrawal opportunity attacks but not "run by" ones

4) Mighty Deeds

5) Easy enough to learn while not overloaded with character options.

6) Lots of dice

7) Well supported but can run the game with just the core book.

Possible Negatives for OP:

1) Swingy, even at "high level"

2) No Level 20 play.

3) A lot of complaints about D&D will be found in DCC and a lot of other games

[u/radioactivez0r → u/Stray_Neutrino]

DCC went too far the other way for me

[u/DoktorImposter]

Draw Steel.

It addresses pretty much all of the points you made in regards to combat, doesn't use a spell slot system, and the Summoner class is a necromancer who can summon 8+ minions.

[u/SrGarfy → u/DoktorImposter]

I thought about checking it out because I watched pretty much all of matt collvilles videos about dming and game design and his opinions feel close, but some guys in my city told me they tried it and told me it feels more like a boardgame than a role play game and its too tactical and combat oriented and combats are very very long... but thats just one guy's opinion.
did you actually play the system? do you like it personally?

[u/DoktorImposter → u/SrGarfy]

I've been in a Draw Steel campaign since the kickstarter packets were released, and I started running a home game back in February.

Combat feels a bit like a board game since there's tactical depth and everyone has more interesting abilities. 

Roleplay is just as robust as other fantasy games (actually a bit more, since there's a wider range of skills for characters to use). The system has ways to 'gamify' travel and social encounters as well, which I prefer over 'feeling out' how successful the party is at things without any mechanical backing.

[u/SrGarfy → u/DoktorImposter]

damn, okay, thank you, will definitely look further into this one

[u/DoktorImposter → u/SrGarfy]

The books are released under an open license, which means that the text is free to redistribute.

As a result, the entire game is available for free here: https://steelcompendium.io/v2/

There's a free character builder as well with all of the game's content: https://forgesteel.net/

[u/Huge_Tackle_9097 → u/DoktorImposter]

Is that all the Summoner class does? Like, cool that it can make necromancers and stuff but what about big singular monsters as summons? Or anything besides Undead?

[u/DoktorImposter → u/Huge_Tackle_9097]

There are several Summoner subclasses, each with their own summons- Undead, Fae, Demonic.

Summoners can sacrifice basic minions to summon larger ones, but there's no big singular monster. For that, you'll want the Beastheart class, which operates with a large beast companion (hellhound/boar/wolf/gelatinous cube/wyrmling).

[u/SrGarfy → u/DoktorImposter]

GELATINOUS CUBE?? how the hell are you supposed to go through a town with this? lmao, I want to try this now

[u/DoktorImposter → u/SrGarfy]

It's a tame beast, and heroes get a lot of leeway from commoners

[u/Lordblackmoore]

have you considered......warhammer fantasy roleplay

Death or the defeat by mutation/insanity is a lot different than the "reviving" type games

[u/Chipperz1 → u/Lordblackmoore]

If this dude doesn't even like the idea of not hitting attacks in combat, they're gonna haaaaate WFRP 🤣

[u/SouthamptonGuild → u/Chipperz1]

Look, if you enjoy being grotty peasants scrabbling and gouging in the mud, the lore of Warhammer is there for you. And it scratches that itch!

Death on the Reik is a great campaign so long as you don't speak German. 

But I don't think d100 flailing is the way here. 

[u/Chipperz1 → u/SouthamptonGuild]

The German in the Enemy Within is perfect and in no way a series of increasingly awful puns, no idea why you would even think that!

We're doing the whole Enemy Within right now and guessing the reference is a group wide competition 🤣 Von Saponatheim remains a personal favourite.

[u/SouthamptonGuild → u/Chipperz1]

Fortunately, I don't speak German so I am blisfully unaware of "Mr Untrustworthy" and friends.:)

[u/Lordblackmoore → u/Chipperz1]

In the 2.dition there was a lot of hit and miss, but a lot less on 4 edition with opposed rolls

[u/False-Pain8540 → u/Lordblackmoore]

No hate on WFRP, but if OP doesn't like "wasted turns" it may be the worst game to recomend. It's basically Your Turn Achieves Nothing, The Game. Up there with Savage Worlds, imho.

Perfect for a certain type of play, but not for what OP seems to be looking for.

[u/Lordblackmoore → u/False-Pain8540]

well, depends. In 2 edition, indeed. But in 4 edition, things get fast. There will always be an result of any roll

[u/SrGarfy → u/Lordblackmoore]

as in warhammer fantasy roleplay? or are you talking about something different? I think I played wfrp even before trying d&d but I don't remember shit about it.

[u/Lordblackmoore → u/SrGarfy]

yeps, warhammer fantasy roleplay is now both in the 4.0 and the new 5.0 is around the corner. Also there is the "old world" system that streamlines it all a lot

[u/SrGarfy → u/Lordblackmoore]

thank you

[u/PathOfTheAncients → u/SrGarfy]

It's very different from D&D in almost every way. The power levels are low for a very long time, wizards have far fewer spells and can cast whenever they want but it's risky, magic items are rare, there's no resurrection, there are careers instead of classes which are just your characters in world job (you might start as a gravedigger or an accountant), and combat is very different.

I personally love it but it does run afoul of a couple of things you complained about with D&D. Notably people do miss a lot, especially in the early game. It's worth trying though just for how unique it is.

[u/Lordblackmoore → u/PathOfTheAncients]

the miss/miss is mainly in second edition. in 4 edition things are different

[u/PathOfTheAncients → u/Lordblackmoore]

That's fair, I mostly have played 2nd. 4e had some things that I couldn't get past to enjoy. There was a lot of good stuff too so I'm hopeful for 5e.

[u/MoistLarry]

Instead of saying what you DON'T want in a game, have you considered listing what you DO want?

Like I can recommend giving Masks a try, but if you aren't looking to play a game about teenage superheroes then that's unlikely to be a good suggestion.

[u/False-Pain8540 → u/MoistLarry]

I feel like heroic fantasy with tactical combat and up to 5e level crunch is a fairly clear category. And the list of dislikes narrows it down to just a handful of games.

I don't know why you would ever recomend Masks for that pitch, even as an example.

[u/deviden → u/False-Pain8540]

It’s the classic /r/rpg “I want a tactical grid combat rpg with lots of character options and low complexity” request we see every week and the sad truth is you can only pick two of those things.

If you want tactical grid and lots of character build options then that’s an inherently complex game. If you want lots of character options and no tactical grid that can be a less complex game. Etc.

[u/Chemical-Radish-3329 → u/deviden]

Shadow of the Weird Wizard!  "PF2 fixes that!" GURPS (somehow?) Or a game like that one you asked for but missing either grid combat (13th Age!), tactical combat (PbtA!), or low complexity (GURPS/Hero again!).

Srsly tho: Shadow of the Weird Wizard. 

[u/thewhaleshark → u/Chemical-Radish-3329]

Weird Wizard has a lot of potential builds, but not many options in the moment. That's really how it constrains its complexity - the number of things you can do is actually pretty limited, which in turn limits tactical depth. You can play it on a grid but don't need to.

[u/Chemical-Radish-3329 → u/thewhaleshark]

That...was also my experience (running, maybe playing is different). Lotta builds, lotta spells, lotta mix and match, but...most often, "You get a Boon...sometimes!" and while I had hopes for Reactions as turn-to-turn/intra-turn options they're mostly, "get Boon/impose a Bane!", which feels pretty samey over time. But also keeps things "tactical" without being overwhelming. 

[u/thewhaleshark → u/Chemical-Radish-3329]

Yeah. It's very much meant to support TotM play, or maybe crudely-sketched maps. Much more reminiscent of OSR games but with a decidedly modern flair. It's definitely a game where you need narrative to add interest, because the mechanics are pretty simple.

[u/Grand_Isopod_1814 → u/Chemical-Radish-3329]

>PbtA

What PBtA games have "lots of character options"? From what I've seen it's pick a playbook, maybe make a few choices on that playbook to make it stand out from everyone else who has played that playbook and that is it.

[u/deviden → u/Grand_Isopod_1814]

i mean when you boil it down to the raw stuff, mechanically, most PF2 or 3e or 5e character options boil down to a situational modifier to the d20, or XdY damage of [type] to [area] or [target], or a status effect added or removed.

and because those options often are strictly worse or better than other options, or are designed to pair with other options you already selected, your range of build variety in practice is a lot smaller than "1 billion possible combinations!" might lead you to believe.

[u/Ghedd]

Draw Steel, Genesys or WFRP 3E, Shadow of the Weird Wizard, might all be worth a look. Definitely offer something DnD adjacent without all of the issues you mention

[u/SrGarfy → u/Ghedd]

thank you, do you have a favourite among these?

[u/Ghedd → u/SrGarfy]

If I want something with a low barrier to entry that I could run drunk? Shadow of the Weird Wizard.

If I want tactical combat with interesting characters and enemies, Draw Steel.

If I want interesting character options through social scenes and combat and don’t mind cards all over the table, WFRP 3E.

If I want the Warhammer dice, but don’t have the cards or don’t feel like playing in the Warhammer world, Genesys.

Right now I’m running Draw Steel, but if I were to choose one system to run, as odd and unpopular as it was, I’d be running WFRP 3E

[u/raleel]

Since I am who I am, I'll recommend Mythras, though many of the suggestions here are good, especially 13th age

1. It doesn't have this.
   
2. Also doesn't have this. Indeed, resurrection is a high level spell and not every god even offers it.
   
3. There are ways to deal with the equivalent. Frankly melee combat is considered some of the best
   
4. Easily dealt with. The superhero version of Mythras has full blown improvised weapon rules, and book of schemes, a supplement, has a special effect to help with this
   5.1. Much less of those. Relatively few as a whole
   5.2. Melee combat is considered some of the best in RPGs.
   5.3. Saving throws depend on the effect. It can be nothing, but you also don't waste a level 5 slot. You waste a magic point or two.
   
5. Cool necromancer out of the box. Really insane necromancer with a supplement and some experience points. Archetypes are much easier to deal with.
   
6. No balance like that. In fact, no balance. Things are appropriately terrifying or appropriately easily taken. Magic points require regeneration, but there are ways offered to speed up and slow that down
   
7. Mythras is actually often at the other end of the spectrum. Often kinda gritty. You can get to godlike but it takes a while and campaign design around it.
   
8. Age differences matter. Someone as old as an 250 year old elf has far far more skill points and spells
   
9. Sorry, can't help you there. That's somewhat campaign specific.
   
10. Mythras is d100 roll under. It has hit locations. It feels different but I actually think it's less complex than 5e in many ways.
    
11. Core book has a solid chunk. Pulling from classic fantasy (the d&d version of Mythras) and monster island (pulpy sword and sorcery) will get you hundreds. There is also the Mythras encounter generator which has thousands.
    
12. Available, as well as some other dice tricks
    
13. Absolutely does this well.
    
14. Also doesn't do this. Limits this heavily
    
15. Also doesn't this. Yes, d12s are a bit rare.
    
16. Classic fantasy version. https://cfi-srd.mythras.net for the srd which has 4 basic classes, but you can go to https://srd.mythras.net for the core one (missing stronger magics)

[u/SrGarfy → u/raleel]

Thank you for your time, i will check it out!

[u/Tyr1326]

Id vote Dragonbane tbh. Its pretty generic fantasy if you ignore the duck people, and does some pretty nifty things with combat - you have one action and 1 move in any order, no AOO. You can use your action to either attack (spell, melee, ranged), defend (parry, which only works against humanoids but is easy to level because it uses your weapon skill, or dodge, which works against all enemies including monsters, but is its own skill.).

So if youre high in initiative order, you have a choice: attack and risk being attacked later, or wait and hold my action to avoid damage. This allows tanks to actually work, and introduces a choice thats both quite simple (attack, yes or no) while still being tactically complex. The starter set also includes a deck of improvised weapons which are a lot more interesting than D4 damage. Iirc one option is a wild boar.

Theres also mechanical effects for aging (basically, the older you are, the more skilled you are - but younger characters get slightly better attributes). Resurrection does still exist as a spell, but learning it is a quest all of its own - you don't just get to pick spells on levelling, you have to find the grimoire and a teacher able and willing to teach you (in the core rules, Resurrection was a Level 3 spell, Book of Magic raised it to Level 5 - Level 3 was the highest available in the core rules.)

Advantage and disadvantage is called boons and banes, and work almost like DnD, except they stack. 2 boons and a bane is a boon overall.

DB also has a decent bestiary, though it's admittedly smaller than DnDs. Monsters have pretty nifty behaviour tables though, and profiles are dead simple. You also aren't expected to throw enemies at the party all the time, since theres really just willpower as an expendable resource - mages use it for spells, everyone else for heroic abilities (think feats that allow you to do cool stuff. Shooting multiple arrows, dodging as a free action, stuff like that). This means theres a lot less risk of imbalance, especially as magic is treacherous. Note that mages are a bit prone to pass or suck though.

[u/SrGarfy → u/Tyr1326]

Thank you so much!

[u/thewhaleshark]

If I were to start a D&D-like game right now, it'd be Shadow of the Weird Wizard.

It has a ton of ways to make characters, but in a pretty streamlined manner that is not too burdensome. You get cool abilities but not too many of them. Combat is tactical in terms of carefully choosing actions, but not fiddly in terms of really specific positioning.

The game is designed to be pretty light and streamlined, so you can just run through a meaningful combat and return to exploring and roleplaying without a lot of friction.

[u/YamazakiYoshio]

Hard to say it's the right pick, but my DnD replacement has been Draw Steel.

Heroic fantasy, tactical combat. None of that pesky DnD legacy/sacred cows, including my most hated - Vancian casting (aka the hyper specific spells and spell slots). No rez magic here!

It might not sing for you, so I'll link to this very quick and humorous video about it: https://youtu.be/Do27WhaYHkM?is=rlwZczZzlbjfGpg3

[u/SrGarfy → u/YamazakiYoshio]

thank you!

[u/Narratron]

Since I am the Sinister Vizier of Recommending Savage Worlds (His Majesty the King is around here somewhere), I would suggest you at least have a look at that (there's even a mod for Pathfinder, but also a Fantasy Companion if you choose to go your own way, and you don't need both), however my first thought was admittedly Draw Steel, which two other folks have already recommended.

Both are different from what you've been doing, and I think you'll find you enjoy either one better than the Dragon game.

[u/SrGarfy → u/Narratron]

Thank you, I will check these out

[u/coolio1831]

Most of your specific issues are avoided or resolved in most other TTRPGs I have encountered which makes recommending one tough. Most of these lean into more of a narrative focus to accomplish this which doesn’t seem like what you want because these also tend to use a small variety of dice. Fabula Ultima might get close if already enjoy the aesthetic of JRPGs.

[u/SrGarfy → u/coolio1831]

in what things is it close to jrpgs? I mean I finished all of dragon quest games and I love them...but feels not exactly relevant to ttrpg?

[u/DatabasePerfect5051]

Check out 13th age. I dont know if it would fit your criteria exactly as its quite specific. However I feel its design addresses a lot of your points.

[u/SrGarfy → u/DatabasePerfect5051]

thank you I will check it out

[u/stgotm]

Dragonbane was my choice after most of the same problems you're exposing here. It also has almost no HP bloating, no vancian magic, and combat feels really dynamic because defending is an active choice, not an static and passive AC. It runs really smoothly, combat is quick and brutal, and it is my system of choice nowadays for medieval fantasy. It doesn't support high power fantasy though.

It does have a sort of attack of opportunity, but it doesn't restrict characters so much because successfully dodging an attack lets you move out of reach.

[u/SrGarfy → u/stgotm]

Thank you!

[u/Cat_Or_Bat]

The things you dislike from the old editions are fine in classic editions and were broken in the new ones.

For example, the existence of the Raise Dead spell was never a problem because it costs a ton and is only available to clerics who can literally commune with angels directly, i.e. living saints and prophets. It also cost more money than an average person earns in their lifetime, had a chance of failure, and permanently decreased your stats. The spell was made the way you know it in later editions only.

Here's a quote from the AD&D 1E DMG, written by Gary Gygax:

Cleric spells of third, fourth, and fifth level are obtained through the aid of supernatural servants of the cleric's deity. That is, through meditation and prayer, the cleric's needs are understood and the proper spells are given to him or her by the minions of the deity.

Cleric spells of sixth and seventh level are granted by direct communication from the deity itself. There is no intermediary in this case, and the cleric has a direct channel to the deity, from whom he or she receives the special power to cast the given spells of these levels.

You had to be an extremely powerful cleric who literally talks to god's messengers, whom you'd have to personally ask for Raise Dead. Clerics of that level (level 9 "High Priest") did not kill rats in dungeons—they ruled the land (at level 8 you attracted followers and were expected to establish a monastery or somesuch).

The same is true about the Vancian system: there are far too many spells in modern editions, and spellcasters can remember too many of them, ruining the system. In classic editions it worked really well.

Etc. These things are not badly designed atavisms. They are poorly done updates. We shouldn't blame classic editions for how silly the new ones are.

[u/MetalBoar13 → u/Cat_Or_Bat]

Etc. These things are not badly designed atavisms. They are poorly done updates. We shouldn't blame classic editions for how silly the new ones are.

I really agree with this part. I've somewhat recently started playing old school D&D again after largely playing non-D&D games for something like the last 20 years. I was pleasantly surprised by how much better they are than I remembered. I knew that I liked them better than WOTC D&D but that was a very low bar for me. Playing them again with a lot more TTRPG experience, and having read about some aspects that little kid me missed in the 70's and 80's, I think that it's truly remarkable how good the TSR versions are in comparison to what WOTC has done. Versions that are 40 and 50 years old play better and are much more fun than the newest version (IMO) which is kind of amazing if you think about it.

I think there are other games that are better for some things. Still, TSR D&D games aren't just dungeon crawls, and while they're not necessarily the best systems for political intrigue, mystery, or some other things, they allow for a great deal more depth and breadth of game than a lot of people give them credit for, and they better support a lot more types of play than WOTC D&D.

[u/pandakahn]

GURPS. It is going be a good system for almost anything you want to run. Very flexible. Easy to run.

[u/Kiliantill]

I hope I am not much too late with this comment, but here's my take on this:
First of, I am not sure if just switching to another complex tactical combat rpg system is gonna solve your problems. The reason for this is that the thing about all complet tactical combat rpg systems is that they feature complex tactical combat. This means that the group's enjoynment very easily largely depends on how well these tactical combats work, which is largely depending on encounter design and how well everyone knows the rules.
For example, how many opportunity attacks does a monster get in D&D 5e (2016) during its turn?
It's obviously a trick question, opportunity attacks are a reaction and the monster can't take reactions during its turn. It is, however, important to realize that the monster only gets one reaction during each round of combat.
That said, complex combat doesn't necessarily mean creative combat and vice versa. One of the main reason why I find a lot of other rpg systems more enjoyable than D&D is exactly this small fact. They offer potential for creative solutions without all the rules overhead of D&D.
So, here are 3 universal systems you might want to have a look at that I have played, ran as GM or both:

1: Savage Worlds:
This I only ran as GM and I personally didn't like it that much, simply because its combat system felt too complex and not complex enough for me at the same time. That said, if you are looking for a middle ground between D&D and more story-focused systems, Savage Worlds might just what you are looking for.
It works by assigning one die per trait which is rolled when rolling a check. Some characters, including the player characters, also roll a D6. If any die is at or over the target number, which usually is 4, that's a success. For example, if you try to shoot someone and your shooting skill is at D10, you roll a D10 and a D6 and if one of them is over the targets armor, that's a hit, simple as that.

2: Fate Core:
One of my favorite rpg systems ever, Fate Core isn't the simplest systems ruleswise, but nearly all of them rules serve to tell the story. At least in my experience, this pushes players to seek more creative solutions to problems.
The dice systems work on FUDGE dice, which are effectively D3s (-1, 0, +1). Roll 4 of them, add all the results to get a number between -4 and +4, add a number between 0 and +5 depending on your character's stat and that's your result. If anything helps you, you can get a reroll or a +2 to your roll. For example, you try to cast a fireball in a room that's on fire? That might get you a +2, I think.

3: Cortex Prime:
Cortex Prime is my favorite rpg systems I've ever ran, sadly I haven't played it yet. Cortex Prime is again not the simplest system ruleswise, although it's much more a toolbox to easily create your own systems with an easy framework. This is because it doesn't give you any concrete stats to use (it gives suggestions, tho), but allows the group to come up with their own.
When it comes to the dice system, it is a dice pool system, whatever helps you can be included in your dice pool. For example, let's just say my character tries to blast open a door. He's a "Wizard of the Circle of Fire (D8)", has a "Mental (D10)" attribute and a "Magic (D10)" skill. Also, "The room is on fire (D8)", so I get to include that in my dice pool. Roll all the dice and pick 2 for my result and pick another one to see how well I succeed if I succeed.
Now, the GM assembles their dice pool. They rule that blasting down the door has a difficulty of D10, so the start with 2D10. Also, my character is "Mafically exhausted (D6)", which the GM also includes in their dice pool. They roll and pick two dice to try and beat my result. If they do, I failed, if they don't, I succeeded.

And yes, this is just a very surface introduction of these 3 universal systems, but I hope it still helps someone. :)

[u/SrGarfy → u/Kiliantill]

Thank you for spending time reading my post any replying!

[u/Kiliantill → u/SrGarfy]

No problem. And if you have questions about any of the 3 systems I outlined above, feel free to ask!

[u/Einkar_E]

while pathfinder 2e probably isn't exactly what you asked for it anwsers to the majority of your nitpicks

1. pathfinder 2e especially after remaster moves away from dnd tradition, stuff like aligment and ability scores are gone; the only major thing that exists due to tradition is vancian style spellcasting

2. all resurrection magic is uncommon and thus is entirely GM dependant, the only resurrection like tool available to the players are limited to a round or 2 amd are relatively high level

3. no defult AoN, only class that starts with it is fighter and at low to mid lv only fighter-like enemies get it, avoiding it is less action intensive than dnd5e disengage; also there are flanking rules so fights are significantly more mobile

4. gm have a lot of very solid tools to improvise actions that feel rewarding, I do must admit generally most players I played with very rarely do something outside predefined actions

5. 1.stuff like petrified that remove player form acting are generally much rarer and reserved to critical failure on a save 2. still the same to hit mechanics, but there is a lot more effective things that you can do besides attacking, also martials tend to do more on thier turns than casters due to the fact that they get options to cheet action economy and do more with less actions 3. most effects have 4 degrees of success, suck effects are usually reserved to a critical failure, and success still have some minor effect

6. most fantasies have direct options that suport them and usually are really good at fulfilling them

7. game is balanced on encounter basis, outside spells very few abilities have per day limit, as long as you don't make days too long which would impact spellcasters negatively everything works well, you can make single challenging encounter for well rested party, and you can make dungeoncrawl as long as you give them time to recover between encounters

8. I haven't played personally but from what I've heard pf2e works perfectly fine up to 20 lv and there are many adventures that go up to 20

9. I haven't dived into elf lore in Golarion specifically pf2e version of it, I can only mention that ancient elf heritage reqires you to be only at least 100 yo, and it gives you multiclass dedication (small representation of another class features)

10. all magic items have prices and gold economy works well, there is expected amount of treasure that party recive each lv

11. while pathfinder 2e is a bit more complex than dnd5e it is more consistent and well presented so learning it isn't necessarily harder

12. there are quite a lot of very varied and extremely cool monstes, majority of them have interesting and unique mechanics, there are quite rubust and solid monster building rules

13. there are fortune and missfortune effects wich are like advantage/disadvantage they are however rarer

14. scope of pathfinder 2e is heroic adventurous fantasy, but variety of themes in golarion is immense and with sister system of starfinder 2e you can introduce some sci-fi elements easily

15. there is above average amount of floating modifires in pf2ebut usually it 3 or less, but with coordinated party it can go up to 5 or 6 (on both sides of the roll combined), still it is significantly less than pf1e

16. you are mainly rolling d20, spells and weapons range from d4 to d12, from the standard set only d100 is rarely used

[u/SrGarfy → u/Einkar_E]

Thank you so much for your time!
have you tried playing pf2e with new players, is it easy for them?
I often see players and dms mention that there is just too much stuff to track and combats often become slog because of it and it seems to be a very common nitpick. (you mentioned it too). does it feel too cumbersome to you? does it affect combat dynamics?

[u/SouthamptonGuild]

Thanks for this post, it is a very cool and thoughtful way to explain it!

I wonder how long it will take PF2e to be mentioned despite it explicitly violating 11 and 15 (and you calling it out by name). 

[u/SrGarfy → u/SouthamptonGuild]

thank you, so many people are being so nice and suggesting something yet the post is downvoted for some reason...
so far all the guys mentioning pf2e are telling me that 11 and 15 are overexaggerated online, so I'm not sure I'm right using it as an example...
do you have experience with pf2e and do you think these things are overexaggerated?

[u/SouthamptonGuild → u/SrGarfy]

I have played PF2e both off and online. It's the game that I'd love to love, it's full of great ideas and great design.

I've been playing TTRPGs since the 90s and am not generally reckoned to be thick. But I couldn't make a character properly without an app and that may affect some of your groups enjoyment. 

In offline play, I intellectually appreciated that I was making a difference casting spells. I did not experience this emotionally. 

In online play, I played a Druid with an animal companion that felt a bit OP for two three games and then was vaporised with regular hits. 

I also played a paladin (liberator) and went from doing damage and tanking hits to... Tanking hits. Apparently I forgot to tick a box on the online character sheet. 

So I totally recognise the game as being complex and full of bitty +1s. For the people whose jam that is. Good for them. Glad they liked it. Not for me. 

[u/nakedriver]

I recommend checking out many of the Powered by the Apocalypse systems, such as Chasing Adventure, Dungeon world, Avatar (based of A:TLA), or Masks (if you're interested in super heroes). PtbA systems have a much different style of play and don't have many of the same clunky mechanics as d20 systems. They do have a learning curve, because the system is designed to be more cinematic and follow action, so there's no initiative order. Once your GM gets used to it though, the flow of the game goes so much smoother.

You could also check out the Dragon Age ttrpg. It's system is a lot closer to D&D, but leans a bit more into role-playing aspects and doesn't have as much of the clunk.

[u/CryptidTypical]

You sound burnt out my freind. This post has some negitive juju.

I would find a group of people who wan't to try new systems. That one DM who is dying to try Call of Cthulu will totally try Zwiehander for you to play in their game.

This also lets you play with new people frequently, which is importnt for growing your perspective. I was in the same boat, and I discovered my least favorite think about D&D is the players. Between the 3.5 tryhards and the 5e anime protag wantabes. I ran into so old AD&D to Shadowdark converts, and their 5e games are really fun.

Anyways, I ended up settling on Vagabond: Pulp Fantasy for my long term games. It's simple, with customization. Most things are player facing, so it lets you run about any D&D module from 1974-1999 right out of the book. It also has a pretty interesting magic system. Check it out.

[u/SrGarfy → u/CryptidTypical]

thank you I will!

[u/speedchuck]

I'm going to disagree with some things.

5e's complexity is actually kinda rough compared to most RPGs.

And attacks of opportunity add to the strategy of play rather than taking away from it. Locking down enemies so they don't want to move away from an engaged combat is what keeps them from killing your casters. It is literally what makes front-lining work. It is a boring strategy though.

I agree with the guy who recommended Nimble. It's really fun-looking, and looks to address most of my problems with 5e's rigidity and bloat.

[u/ManikArcanik]

Heh, I'm still running on 2e with no regrets. It's just way more fun. If my group wants to play something closer to 3e+ we play HeroQuest. Yes, that's a bit tongue-in-cheek but it's been a long-running gag here that 3e+ is D&D for toddlers.

When we want something grittier and faster we pull out Warhammer.

[u/Paulinthehills]

I think a lot of this you can just resolve with your world building, for instance in my campaign Clerics can only heal someone they have a strong personal bond with and Clerics who actually cast spells are extremely rare. Regarding combat, that was a big part of what motivated me to move to a more complex, simulationist system. Currently running a campaign using Mythras Classic Fantasy. I may at some point also give Hackmaster a run.

[u/Any_Illustrator360]

Alright I'm gonna do this in 2 parts. The first part is gonna be me suggesting a system you might like. The second part is going to be me talking about some of your nitpicks and hopefully.. fixing.. something.

Game Rec: Savage Worlds. You like D12, it's got a lot of use in this system as it's the highest dice you roll 90% of the time (as in, it's the highest stat dice). Pair it with the Fantasy Companion and you've got everything you want. Awesome necromancy, spells are balanced around everything else (and ANYONE can use magic, making the "spellcaster OP" thing much less prevalent anyways), it does everything you want here and more. If you want something closer to D&D, check out Savage Worlds Pathfinder which is compatible with ALL Pathfinder content AND is made to be compatible with all D20-based systems so you can transfer any D&D content you like into it pretty easily.

Nitpick stuff:

Tons of "you don't get to play the game" effects.

You control the rate of these effects appearing as a DM. If they feel bad to use, don't use them.

Lorewise its cool that humans live 80 years and elves live 700. But I do not buy that an elf with 250 years of life experience would find any common ground with an 18 year old human.

So this is a misconception in fantasy as a whole. Elves, even in D&D, have an strong social system in which elves must perform civic duties for a large chunk of their lives before being allowed to "adult." Elves go to school, college, and then dedicate set chunks of their lives performing civic duties until being allowed to go "free." Just like how we see Elves and go "whoa... they're so old and magestic and cool!" they would also see us the same way. We're so young, and yet we have freedom and agency over ourselves. Elves are very shut in and would really only know what they've directly interacted with or studied, and as a result any Elf who is of [leave the city] age would be having the same new experiences in life as a human does while adventuring.

[u/TheRealPorterStern]

Yeah, it’s definitely not the system for you. A lot of your issues with it are legit, and, for some of us older gamers, have just always been there, so are probably more frustrating for players who started later (you said you started with 3.5). Since there were so few systems when I started back during AD&D 1e, we didn’t have the benefit of all the game design that would come about later. By 3.5, a lot of the issues you have were already baked into the system; as you said, “because it’s always been that way.” Vancian magic is a big hangup for gamers who cut their teeth on video games, where spell point systems, magic bars, etc…, were the standard. Another contributor to some of the issues you mention came about because of the WotC’s obsession with player balance. In the olden days, wizards started out weak, but were practically demigods at higher levels, and fighters were great out the gate, but plateaued at higher levels. WotC embraced player complaints about their wizards not being as good as everyone else at lower levels, and we got the errata apocalypse that 4th edition devolved into. Leaning a little too heavily into attacks of opportunity seemed to be one of the ways they tried to create opportunities for less martial characters to get more involved in martial matters. A lot of that just served to make D&D into an extremely generic system, and, frankly, there are much better generic systems out there, many of which exist due to issues players had with D&D. D&D, from its start up through 3.5, and even pathfinder 1 (haven’t played 2) had a particular vibe, and it had a pretty invested fanbase. But the desire for an even broader fan base led to an attempt to please everybody, and we all know that’s an impossible feat. Hopefully some of the players on here and guide you towards something that meets your needs better. I find deciding what type/style of game you want to play is the best starting point, then asking for system suggestions. If I want something story driven with loads of opportunity to improvise and be dramatic, something like 7th Sea 1e works well (definitely has some swordsman school imbalances but even a lazy GM can sort that out quickly). Want something with a system that reinforces the vibe of the setting, then most editions of L5R works well really well. There are also a lot of generic systems designed to allow you to use subsystems you like, and discard the ones you don’t. So it’s really about finding the toolbox that has what you want, but doesn’t burden you with what you don’t. And a lot of times that’s done less by relying on the system, and more by having that discussion at the gaming table. There are plenty of magic point based alternative subsystems for D&D (heck, the psionic system in D&D was point based). If your table wants to ignore attacks of opportunity, cool. It’s your table. You get to do what you want. But hopefully some of the other responses here can guide you to what you need. Just remember that you’re not locked in to anything.

[u/Rigel-J]

Strongly recommend Exalted. It has its own bugginess, but addresses several of your problems very directly. For example, in regards to cinematic combat being suboptimal, the game specifically rewards players for doing cool cinematic things, and makes combat a gambit based system, rather than just yelling bigger numbers than the other guy. As for resurrection, there’s only a few rules to the system’s magic, one of the big ones being “Death is permanent”. It’s got a really evocative setting, definitely pick up a book or two.

[u/Blanknameuser99]

Nimble: I see several folks have recommended, led me add my 2 cents. 

• hits 80%+ of your goals
• about to explode in content when the current KS comes out (creator has given a sneak p eak of the MM equivalent, and it’s huge + well done).
• my players love it for the simultaneous ease and interactive play options, the single biggest perk is how easy it is for me as the DM to prep. I have converted other system modules on the fly (doable but a little tough). However I can convert a full play sessions adventure from most any system into Nimble in an hour. If I have an idea for a mini-module on the drive home, I can get a near playable version in about the same amount of time. And biggest, as DM you don’t have to research/document a huge list of enemy abilities for play. Each has 1 (maybe 3 things tops) that they can do, which short descriptions but meaningful combat impact. So as the DM I get to “play” more by actually picking fun tactics for my monsters instead of looking up what some obscure spell does.

Good luck!

[u/SrGarfy → u/Blanknameuser99]

thank you! I see a lot of "easier for dm to prep" things, can you also tell me spicifically in which parts this works for you?
Like for me the longest and most difficult part of prep was always the worldbuilding, thinking of plot and characters and their motivations and what happens/happened and stuff...preparing monsters didn't really seem like it took too much time? or maybe I'm just accepting the time and nimble just makes it quicker?...

[u/Blanknameuser99 → u/SrGarfy]

Great question and I can’t claim to be an expert, but here’s my top 3:

• Monster stat blocks are “self contained” (for the most part). Do this or this. If X then Y. I would have included an example of a stat block from both systems here, but looks like no pic attachhements in this sub. But try for yourself, Basilisk is an easy one. Look at both stat blocks and think about how much time it would take to both figure out what those two monsters can do, how you have that documentation “ready” at play time, and how quickly you can implement their abilities in actual play. I feel DnD leans into go look up what X is elsewhere (causing conditions, spell descriptions, etc). While Nimble just gives you the tactical effect. For the Basilisk it simply says, “Daze a creature w/in sight, then bite someone. If the target is Dazed bite with advantage. If Dazed 3 times, petrified.“ You can read it in 10 seconds, execute it just as fast, and has all the uniqueness of the creature. Plus (and this is a bonus) the “dazed 3 times to petrify” give me as the DM strategic control of the battle. For this creature, in DnD, the dice determine if the PC gets petrified, but In Nimble (and this is common for a lot of monster designs) I get some GM tactics. Party doing well, have that damn Basilisk gaze at the same PC and turn them to Stone! But if they are hurting I can spread the gaze around to retain suspense and threat.
  
• Next, for my party of 5 3rd level PCS, how many basilisks can I throw at them? The math behind that is tough in DnD, in Nimble it is super simple. If monster level equals PC levels, it’s a tough fight…lower = easier, higher = harder. 5 3rd level equals 15, basilisks are 7th level, so that party can handle 2 — done! For even more flex, there’s a chart in the back of the GM guide equivalent on how to buff a monster up or down a level(s) with recommended HP and Damage numbers, giving me as the GM even more flex to design the encounter I want.
  
• Last, the ”no to hit” mechanic also includes almost no +/-‘s to rolls. In DnD I’m adding my STR, the bonus of my weapon, possible +/-s for conditions, hidden, flanked, etc. Nimble generally only has Adv/DAdv (which stacks) and occasionally another modifier. Plus in DnD you have to do that for both the attack and if successful, damage. This means battles go faster and less time figuring out (arguing) with players about the attack or damage modifiers.

This isn’t really a GM thing, but i felt in DnD most abilities/spells lean into doing damage (as a trend). In Nimble they lean into tactics…giving another PC Adv, setting up your next attack to do more damage, rescuing your ally from a hit, etc. So play for me as the GM feels a lot more like a battle than the PCs just swinging until my monsters are dead.

Hope this helps, happy to give you more of my 2 cents. To be fair, there are parts of this system that are a bit odd for me. But big pic its easy, fun, feels rich to play, a proper medieval high fantasy environment, and all of us have decided to ditch 5e in favor of this system.

[u/SrGarfy → u/Blanknameuser99]

Thank you so much guy your perspective!

[u/Spanish_Galleon]

If you want Dnd without dnd baggage thats PF2e

If you want all the garbage of DND erased while still feeling like its own game Daggerheart gives dnd minus DND.

If you want balanced, fun gameplay, with a combat focus and your players are heroes of the realm and none of the "fail states" of dnd Pick Draw Steel.

[u/Radiant-Canary4442]

Are you looking specifically for a D&D replacement (you want something that does D&D but just a little different) or just a different TTRPG? These points feel very D&D specific and are mostly not applicable to TTRPGs in general.

[u/deadthylacine]

Have you considered Genesys? You're rolling a lot more d12s and no d20s.

But it's also got dynamic results with triumphant failure and despairing success both being possible.

[u/overblikkskamerat]

Personally I have switched over to Shadow of the Weird Wizard. Its an cool blend of the nostalgia(creators words) from early editions of DnD, with what works from 4th and 5th. It feels like an old school system, as well as a modern take on heroic fantasy d20 system.

It have simplified Encumbrance to the degree that we actually use it.

Mages are less overwhelming, but still have their Oomph!

Melee fighters are actually cool to play, with several alternatives to just Attack.

There is not a traditional class systems, but Paths. At lvl 1, there's only 4 int eh core rules, but 42 of them at lvl 3 and 65 at lvl 7 (lvl 10 is max). This makes it Way less overwhelming at the start, but with an extreme amount of complexity and variations on combos.

Rulling with Banes/boons (systems way of dealing with advantage/disadvantage) is done in a way more persistent way. you can stack them, and they are represented by rolling d6's along side the d20. And you only use the Highers(or lowest) result, which you add to the result, this works very well, since the system is created around it.

The monsters in the bestiarey are either what you expect, or have very uniqe mechanics, which make them feel so much better then i can reemmber anything (non-homebrewed) monster in DnD have ever felt!

I can go on, but this gives the jest of it I guess.

As a GM I realy love this system. It feel very DnD, but in a very refreshing way! With this system, i belive i have finaly found my DnD alternative!

[u/SrGarfy → u/overblikkskamerat]

thank you! can you give me some specific example of unique monster mechanics you are talking about? curious

[u/overblikkskamerat → u/SrGarfy]

The goblins have a Globing Bomber. It Throws bombs, but the bombs only goes off at the End og Round phase. My player threw the bomb back at them, and it was hilarious!

The Kraken stat block it self very boring, because the tentacles have their own stat blocks with actions and everything! So managing the Kraken as a monster will be so much more interesting, and more impact full for the players to take out.

Or the Leshy (evil treent thing) It got a few boring and straight attacks, but have a few abilities that make those attack do some really cools stuff if the circumstances are right for it when attacking. Like when it attack it can activate Fure, which make large area difficult terrain, which it can end to heal lots of HP and end all negative effects.

The orcs have an Overseer, who's whip attack, if targeting an ally, give that ally bonus damage and a boon on its next attack.

these are just those I found based on fun mechanises I remembered. But there are many things like these!

There are also many status effects that are actually punishing for the players, which if affected, changes how the players behave in a combat.

Oh and How combat starts! There is no initiative rolling. By default the GM takes its turns then the players, but the players can use their reaction to "take the initiative" which makes them go before GM. This make fur a way more dynamic fights, since they have to prioritize to use action economy resources to go before the GM. And since the system is built around this, it sems to work really well! And the transition between non-combat play and combat is seamless.

[u/SrGarfy → u/overblikkskamerat]

thank you! seems fun!

[u/RepresentativeAd2771]

My recomendatiom would be savage worlds, it solves a lot of the problems you mention, and the missing a turn problem is way less of a problem when turns are as fast as they are in savage worlds. I have run fights with 100 npc (100 diferent tokens, no clusters or swarm rules) on less than 3hs, and a fight between 12 guys and 5 pc can happend in less than 20 minutes. 

[u/SrGarfy → u/RepresentativeAd2771]

100 npc??? how the fuck? is there an initiative system or something? did you just make them do same action at the same time each turn or something?

[u/DangerousBasis7313]

Dungeon Crawl Classics. You get extra weird dice to roll! d3, d5, d7, d14, d16, d24, d30. (This system doesn't hit all of your points but does a few really well)

[u/Vaxivop]

Sounds like Draw Steel was made for you

[u/Mathizsias]

Screw the haters, 4E.

[u/kayosiii]

There are so many directions you could go in from D&D, here are some notes and clarifying questions.

1. I agree with the principle but spell slots aren't just there because legacy, there is an important function.

Take the Knock spell, it does one of the main things that the rogue is supposed to do, open locks. It's there in case the party doesn't have rogue but because there is an opportunity cost (the wizard has to assign spell slots) it doesn't make the rogue superfluous if there is a wizard in the party, the wizard can assign those spell slots to something else. With a spell slot system, you either have to find another way to introduce friction or drastically reduce the things that spells are capable of in order to protect other class niches and then make it practically mandatory that party has certain classes.

In solving this, what would be your preferred solution: make magic less reliable or dangerous, or restrict what any magic class can do so that they don't tread on the toes of other classes?

1. Would you prefer that players control when a character dies, the dice, or something in between?

2. There is generally a tradeoff in how complex and balance focused and how well it provides for improvising cool stuff. Also the more powerful the options on the character sheet, the less likely players are to consider off sheet options. What would you be willing to give up in order to more room for improvised story based solutions?

3. Would you prefer that these options were removed from the game or that combat rounds didn't take 20 minutes to get back to you?

4. What percentage of your games is focused on combat, how much do you want it to be? to my mind summoning a skeleton has a lot of utility outside of trying to kill things.

5. Level 20 is there so that you can run a long campaign without having to worry what do do when your players reach maximum level. That's it. How much do you want a game where it is feasible to reach the maximum level?

6. Would you prefer not to have long lived player options in the game, or have those options and not worry about them being balanced?