Not sure if this should be here or in the General

Due to location, family, job and a whole list of other things I've not truly RP'd in a long time. During my time off I see lots of game systems take over from the "old Standby" I tried to get back into the basic AD&D game a while ago under 3.5 but for some odd reason I never really wrapped my head around it. Sad because 1st and 2nd made complete sense to me.

Many of these systems are a variation of the D20 system. What are the differences? From what I can tell Pathfinder is basically 3.5, AD&D is coming out with 5th? When I "left" gaming CoC was my game of choice by it CoC by gaslight or modern. I want to get back into gaming but I was never a huge fan of the D20 system in the first place. I do not own any "new" books heck my CoC is like 4th ed. I'm more of a RP player when it came to tabletop, at least I was compared to the groups I was around in my local area.

I guess, long story short, can anyone "sell me on a system". I see lots of Pathfinder games around, however if it is anything like the old AD&D then I need a dozen books to play. AD&D 3.5 left a bad taste in my mouth so I'm hesitant to simply "jump in". I see few/no of the games that I remember like Shatterzone, Tales from the Floating Vagabond, BRP, Heck even "chart"master. Do these systems just not translate well in this medium?
This message was last updated by a moderator, as it was the wrong forum, at 15:16, Mon 01 Dec 2014.

Try something else then.  There are lot's of systems out there, and quite a few GM's out there willing to teach them.  I myself love to teach systems to new players, I'd invite you in, but at 12 players my group is full.

In reply to Mrrshann618 (msg # 1):

PF depends so much on the DM.  I have lots of books and most of the games I play I only really use the Core Rulebook.

But that is my personal style.  I just grok it, but you have to like and hate specific aspects of 3e to really get behind PF.

If you feel the whole system is just too deeply flawed to ever work or be fun for you, no one will ever be able to change your mind.

I would encourage you to perhaps look into the generic rules light systems that have become popular and see if one sings to you.  I love Savage Worlds.   Fate is pretty clever though not my favorite.   The * world engine is interesting.

These systems are less rule intense than the old school ones, which is great for adults with jobs.

Perhaps one of the modern 3rd party revamps of 1e/2e would be a good fit for you.  Swords and Wizardry is free.

Well from my lurking i have noticed lots of AD&D 1st & 2e games on here, so there is no need to switch to a system you are uncomfortable with. But if you did'nt like 3e you may like 5e, there is a free basic pdf on the WoTC website.

And I feel you, my current players are all five or six years younger than me and say I'm old because I have the d20 Modern book. So whatever lol, that book is still brand new hah!

To Drewalt
I've played in a single 3.5 game that I enjoyed, It was a Ravenloft game and the GM was truly great. It was the only time that 3.5 felt like a game to me. I do understand where the whole "GM makes the game" comment.

To Undeadbob
I haven't played, really played, in a game for about 8ish years. The exception is the Ravenloft game mentioned above, that lasted about 5 sessions as the GM was accepted for a great job and moved several hours away.

I no longer even have many of my game books due to basement flooding. I lost a good 60% of them, which is why I'm here asking about the new systems. Biggest step I'm facing is that in "my old area" I WAS the GM, few people ran games in genera that I liked (Lots of Superhero games and they simply are not my cup o' tea) Never had a want for players, but as any long term GM knows they simply want to play in at least 1 game.

I played AD&D2 and haven't really gotten on with 3.0, 3.5, or PF. I haven't even looked at 4E.

Role of Cool's Legend is quite good. It's based on d20, has only one (free) book and significantly simplifies character advancement. You pick 3 talent trees and can swap one of your class talent trees for one from a different class in order to multiclass (instead of levelling in different classes).
But I'm not much a d20 RPer and I'm running that system as more or less diceless. I don't know how someone used to D&D or PF would take to it.

Savage Worlds is great: much easier to get rolling, very adaptable, and although there are many books for many settings, you really only need the core Deluxe Edition book to run or play anything.
In summary: your attributes and skills rank in dice size rather than number, so a climbing check might be Strength d6 + Climbing d4.
I wouldn't call SW dice light, but it's a lot less crunchy than D&D.

New World of Darkness is also good. A lot of books, but mainly people buy into their favourite set of splats. It's a supernatural horror/urban fantasy game (depending on how the GM runs it). The core book is used for normal humans. Mirrors covers some other ways to use the system for other settings, and each supernatural has its own core book. A lot of information has put up for reference online in places like the WoD index and rp.thesubnet.com.
nWoD uses d10 dice pools: the number your attribute and skill add up to the number of d10s you roll (ie Str 2 + Athletics 2 makes a climbing roll of 4d10).
I wouldn't call nWoD dice light, but it's a lot less crunchy than D&D.

Those are really the main ones I know, but I've recently been introduced to WRM which is another free dice-light system.
This message was last edited by the user at 16:33, Mon 01 Dec 2014.

CoC has just come out with 7th edition, the first real revision of the system since 1st ed. Even so, it is still much the same game. Besides, I haven't seen anyone yet advertise a 7th ed game on Rpol, so you should still find games that are pretty much compatible with your 4th ed book.

A lot of games now have a 'basic' rules set available as free download or SRD, so it's easier than it was last century to get a taste of a system before buying. Also, pdfs tend to be appreciably cheaper than print books.

I find Savage Worlds to be a good system and it has a lot of support from Pinnacle Press, lots of various genres run under its rubric.

You might also want to check out Trail of Cthulhu, which came out a few years ago.

Chart Master, huh?  Haven't heard that term in years, but due to some industrious programmers, no longer chart master.  I do feel ya about trying to find a system to play.  I have played 1e & 2ed AD&D years ago and went to role master.  I have looked at 3e and refused to look any further.

I love to rp, but do not want to learn another system.  Have thought about free form and seen a couple that really piqued my interest, but not exactly sure how it works, so I stay away.  I like my structure and rules I guess.  Keep looking and you will find something you like.  There are a plethora of systems here on rpol.  Perseverance will get you to where you want to be.

There is far more to the world of gaming than D&D and its derivatives. Why the hesitancy? I enjoy checking out new systems, often widely different from one another. I like discovering 'indie' rulesets and seeing how they compare with more established systems, but I tend to avoid anything expensive or with large page numbers or large numbers of costly supplements.
Jump in and try a few systems - what's the worst that can happen?

Some systems are as simple as board games - you can learn the rules in an evening, and freeform is good if you find a GM who thinks like you, but it can be annoying if they create events that you find unbelievable.

Even so, why not give it a try? If you don't like it, try something else.

Once upon a time you tried out a game called Dungeons and Dragons...

If you're looking for a good game system, try GURPS.  It is a point buy system that can cover any genre imaginable.  I think it's been around for over twenty years.

... except, that in my experience, GURPS is even worse than the DnD line as far as 'need lots of supplements' is concerned.

In reply to willvr (msg # 11):

Well yes, it can be.  The more types of world timelines that you wish to run/play, the more supplements you will need.  But you will not need to invest in a complete system of core rulebooks for each type of game.

Just jump in, throw caution to the wind and wing it. How can you know what you will like till you try it? For example, I have played in 2 games of mutants and masterminds, correct me if I am wrong about the name lol. The first game, saddened me when the gm vanished. The second game... ARG it felt so tedius! So much involved in character creation that it was hard to get through.

On the flip side, several of the game I am in are free forming and involve students... go figure?

Heh. On the other hand, I know people who say that character creation is the best part of Mutants and Masterminds; at least 2nd edition.

Firstly, Savage Worlds is awesome and versatile (handles everything from supernatural old west [Deadlands] to My Little Pony [not joking about this])

Most of the d20 games are basically the same only the classes and options change according to setting, though Pathfinder "fixed" some issues while upping the power level of characters.

Thanks for all the replies.
This gave me a great place to start looking into things that I may like.
As I mentioned the D20 system was never my cup o' tea, but it was what was familiar in my area. If I wanted to RP, well that was it unless I ran something.

Savage worlds looks really great. I did play a game of Deadlands when it first came out. The GM had a deck of cards and to resolve things you played a single hand of either 5 Card or 7 Card stud. It was a blast.

As for "just jumping in" I would feel guilty taking up a GM's time to have them teach me a system only to find that I do not like it because I went in flat footed. At least this way you have all armed me with what is now out there and I can take a look to help me find a game.

I haven't played D&D since AD&D was THE game on the market.  I couldn't even really get into 2E, just for the fact that there were all these additional skills to be tracked, I tried 3E (or maybe 3.5, I'm not sure which it was, my friend had all the books so I never worried about it) and it just served to confirm that I was, indeed, still tired of D&D.  I've got a friend who wants to try out 5E, I might just give in and do it for the simple fact that I miss playing face-to-face with people and the only other people I know who game live an hour further away than he does.

While I've had good luck finding games in systems that I'm at least marginally familiar with, I have, occasionally, stumbled onto games with a setting that sounded cool enough to me that I agreed to try and learn a new system.  The GMs I play with are understanding of the fact that I don't know the system and don't have the books...they've pointed me to online resources to help me figure things out, or they give me a nudge here and there (I'm very much into the role-playing side of the game and am perfectly content with not having to roll dice, and have no problem with the GM prompting me for a dice roll.  In some of the games I'm in, the GM actually does almost all of the rolling for us, we just keep track of where the characters advance.)

My personal favorite system, ever?  The D6 system developed by West End Games for their Star Wars game (it's been recently re-released as a generic rules system, and it works well for that because it's bare-bones enough to be easily adaptable.)  But I could take someone who had never played ANYTHING before, sit down with them and a Star Wars character sheet, and take them from vague character concept to ready-to-play character in a little over an hour.  The mechanics of the game are explained in just a couple of chapters, really...if you had that, you could play pretty much anything (you didn't need any of the multitude of additional sourcebooks to play Star Wars, they just made for good reference material).

I also play a lot of freeform (or near-freeform) games, but those definitely require the right combination of players and GM to succeed, if your players and GM don't have a similar vision of what the game should be and how that should be achieved, you wind up with a lot of frustration on both sides of the game (I've been through that one, as well.)

But, basically, when it comes time for me to look for a new game (which I haven't done for a while now, since I'm in five games that are rolling along at a pretty good pace and have been for a couple of years, now), I start off by looking for games in systems that I know...then see how many of those actually sound appealing in terms of setting.  If I don't get any 'matches' out of those, then I'll go back and look at games with unfamiliar systems...but look specifically for really intriguing settings.  If I find anything that appeals THAT way, I'll contact the GM and explain that I'm interested in the game, but I don't know the system and would need a lot of coaching.  Many GMs are fine with that (and a lot of other players are good at coaching, as well).  I've dipped into Shadowrun 4e, Scion, Burning Wheel, and three or four others as a result.

With d20 & the like, you're already playing what most of the crowd will play, so it's not a big deal. Wait for a d20 or D&D-inspired system to get up on the list, and have at it.

Of course, familiarity with d20 obscures a HECK OF A LOT of good gaming out there. Why be in love with a system? Sometimes, system actually does matter, and makes for games that vary wildly (and in a cool way) from what you expect out of gaming. This is hardly a bad thing, I think... although it can be a scary thing to do because we all tend to be so familiar & comfortable with what D&D brings to the table.

It took massive disappointment with certain versions of D&D for me to try a new thing... but I was soooo very glad that I did so. I had no idea what I was missing, and it turned out that I was missing a lot. D&D may be the elephant in the room, but it's not necessarily the best for every situation & every gamer. Why not try a new thing?

Most GMs who advertise will say whether or not system knowledge is required. If no knowledge is required, that means the GM wants to teach the rules. Teaching the rules is implicit in a number of game systems, anyway... it's part of the GM's duty to you, the player. The responsibilities in this PbP thing are not just a one-way street.

If the premise looks interesting, then dip a toe in it. Especially if it doesn't look like a crazy long-term project. Not every game on here is an endless sandbox event.

Many GMs of 'fringe systems' find it difficult to recruit players and are only too happy to to teach anyone willing to give it a go - they don't expect anyone to know the system. It's only the GMs of mainstream games, who are inundated with RTJs, who get picky. ;)