For those who have played multiple different TTRPG systems, particularly ones with different dice & rule systems, which did you like the most? What did you like about it over the other games you've played?

>>96030969 (OP)
Genesys.
Nice blend of everything and it's universal with a nice toolset for home brewing.
The dice are nice, if you were able to get them at a reasonable price. Sure the non binary results are notable, but the best thing about this system is just how well everything fits.

>>96030969 (OP)
My favorite ttrpg by far is Polaris. I love the setting, lack of DM, and conflict resolution. You need the right group for it though. I played one amazing night with the right group but could never get them all together again.

>>96031005
>>96031018
Hadn't heard of either of these before, Genesys seems wild, seems like you can run just about anything with a little setup.

Polaris looks like it could be great too. d20, but at a glance I like that there's some non-neutral tests and the degrees of success/failure could be neat with the right group. I hadn't considered this type of setting before, but the more I read of the preface the more it hooked me.

BRP (namely Call of Cthulhu 7e)
d100 so everything is a percentage, making it easy to understand and gauge how likely an action is to succeed. Roll under skill system so there's no need to come up with arbitrary number on the spot, the target is laid out clearly in front of you. Thresholds for hard and extreme successes also baked in.
I'm most familiar with Call of Cthulhu but it's used in a bunch of different settings and also as a generic system so it can be used for anything. It's been going for decades at this point so it has a plethora of content, both by Chaosium and from third parties to use. All of it's editions over the years are more like small refinements and tweaks rather than large scale overhauls, meaning old content can be run with the newest editions with little effort.

My favorite games are the one who use 1d100.
I love the percent dice give me the prospective of beign more real and grounded both setting and rules. I love the idea of
>you have 50 at sword skill
>Throw a d100
>below 50 it's a hit up 50 is a miss
IDK why i find logic and balance, like my favorite system is warhammer fantasy 2nd edition that use this method, I like the idea that if you find a sword master even if it has 70% of Weapon Skill he can stil miss or not hit, like mimicking the real world where (it's just an example) an olympic medal 9/10 will do the thing in his sport right while the 1/10 will fuck it up.
Honorable mentions of 1d100 games i love:
>call of cthulhu 6th edition
>rune Quest
>Clockwork and Chivalry
So as I said for me the 1d100 is the perfect system

>>96031094
>d20
>degrees of success and failure
I have no idea what you’re talking about. There is only a d6 in polaris and that’s only as a last resort. Otherwise it’s a negotiation between the player (heart) and the mistaken. It’s a 20 year old game but left a lasting impression on me. https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/polaris/chart.html

>>96031103
Man I wish I had a better experience with Call of Cthulhu. I liked the setting and the d100 system seemed good from what I've played of WH40K TTRPGs, but CoC felt like the whole thing was designed for the players to fail. Maybe it was us being terrible at a new game, maybe the GM was a dick, idk, but every time my turn came up it just felt like a bad situation got worse.

>>96031169
I guess I found a completely unrelated TTRPG that also happens to be called Polaris. :/

>>96030969 (OP)
Gumshoe
>free use of investigative abilities means that solving mysteries is more about player intelligence than lucky rolls
>rules-light enough that you can make plenty of things on the fly, though not totally freeform
>decent variety of published settings
That said, it's only good for investigation-heavy games. For games without much investigation, I'd stick with Genesys.

>>96031223
Crazy, hadn’t heard of that one

>which did you like the most?
The ones I made.
>What did you like about it over the other games you've played?
I put the things I like in them.

Good thread

>>96030969 (OP)
My favorite is traveler style 2d6. its a nice blend of averages and risk for extremes.
I also like West end games d6 system, primarliy used for thier star wars game, but its very scalable easy to rule on the fly, and gives a great pulp feel
More obscure choice, but I like rangers of shadow deep's d20 system. Its really a small skirmish wargame with campaign elements, but I played it as an rpg and it worked really well. most things being an upposed d20 dice roll quickens things up and the stat blocks hit that sweet spot of simplicity and utility
Warhammer fantasy rpg 2e is also a favorite. d100 system, roll undder your stats. Like its use of career progression instead of being either a class base or a skill based system. I also like the degree of chrunch thats not excessive, but you still got things like hit location tables that makes things feel a bit more raw.
>>96031005
Arent most system universal when you get down to thier system guts? In my experience, its more about what system fits what sort of experience rather than it doing everything. Which imo almost anything can, the question is: how well.
>>96031018
>Need that right group
def the most important part of any rpg
>>96031232
Havent played, but heard good things about gumshoe.

I love The One Ring and its d12+d6 dice pool system. I vastly prefer it to d20 systems these days. Degrees of success are very cool. I like that the mathenatics are much more challenging to sus out at the table due to the varying dice and the Gandalf/Eye effects applied to the 12/11 results on the d12.

>>96031103
>d100 so everything is a percentage, making it easy to understand and gauge how likely an action is to succeed
Are you american?

>>96031300
>Arent most system universal when you get down to thier system guts? In my experience, its more about what system fits what sort of experience rather than it doing everything. Which imo almost anything can, the question is: how well.
Kinda pointless statement. I could travel from Johannesburg (SA) to Stockholm on a bicycle, yet I wouldn't consider it a viable mode of transportation for Intercontinental travel.

>>96031288
I especially liked the part where OP provided his own thoughts on the thread he needed to post.

>>96030969 (OP)
I played a lot of systems over the years, and these days I'm into GURPS. I just enjoy how effortless it is to have cool shit happening in combat as a natural part of how the rules work.
Last session of a particularly high power game (250pts), one of the players jumped on top of an enemy, stole his shotgun, blew the enemy next to him away, then used the shotgun butt to bludgeon the first enemy, and this wasn't a planned "stunt" it just happened as the die rolled. This sort of cinematic play is really common in this campaign. Another memorable moment was one of the PCs parrying an enemy slash, getting a hold of the enemy's arm with the parry, throwing him on the ground, and executing him with a pistol.
What I want to explain is how "natural" it feels. The PC didn't have to plan out those things, they just happen.

>>96031005
Genesys is great.

>>96031103
>d100 so everything is a percentage, making it easy to understand and gauge how likely an action is to succeed.
BRP is nice and all, but I never understood that point. Understanding the probabilities is piss easy with any non dice pool systems, and any adult should be able to create a table for the latter in a few minutes except for special cases like Genesys, and even those can easily be looked up online.
Heck, the exact percentage shouldn't even be a concern for the player in a well designed game.

>>96030969 (OP)
I personally really like dice pools. Although I haven't played one with it yet, I think a game that operates on a pool of coin flips would be interesting.
In terms of favorite overall system, I'm quite fond of GURPS. Although, that's not really so much a system as a toolkit. But that's precisely why I like it. There's a rule for just about everything, and most all of it just makes sense.
But if you don't like something, then you can just tweak it. The system is designed to be modular, and the books give enough guidelines and ideas that you can usually just do your own thing and probably not break the whole game.

>>96030969 (OP)
>If you played more than one game, please select one you preferred the most
Is this the state of your brain after being a DnDrone?
There are different games that I like for different reasons. Why the fuck you think I keep playing and experimenting with different games? Is that because I found that one perfect title that was perfect for everything?

>>96032159
>anon manages to find offense over someone asking what his favorite flavor of ice cream is

>>96032233
>Hey guys what’s your favorite flavour of ice cream?
>Gee I sure love van-
>WAIT HE DIDN’T SHARE HIS OWN FAVORITE FLAVOUR YET!!!
>oh uh okay, what’s your favorite-
>BAD THREAD FUCK OFF FUCK YOU OP

>>96031453
you should tell that to dnd 5e players at large.

But even than, a lot of people try to fit their square peg of a game into a round hole of a different experience

>>96030969 (OP)
Unless the dice system is obviously shit, I've learned that it doesn't matter that much.

What I've learned however, is that supporting materials for play matter a lot for enjoyment. What makes Call of Cthulhu so amazing is that you have dozens of interesting scenarios that have been made over the decades that you can run. I like systems that make it easier to run the game and save precious prep time.

>>96032393
It tends to matter for long-term campaign play where characters get stronger.
If all you're doing is 1-5 sessions or playing in a system where characters never improve beyond their starting point and getting more money it doesn't really matter I agree.

>>96031845
Do you not understand that
>Being able to eyeball probability out of the box
is easier than
>You could spend some time and make a table for it.

Like, yes, it's not hard to figure out probabilities, but, for some people anyway, percentile systems are instantly, intuitively readable.

>may not be a perfect system, but still the best there is

>>96032159
>>96032352
>Oh shit, literally no one is talking about d&d in this thread! I better get in there and complain about d&d!

>>96032495
>>96031845
>>96031103
Personally I just need to know where the 50% cutoff is. Like I know on 3d6 the 50% is on 10, so I just need to get my attack roll or whatever to be over that number (or lower depending on the system)

>>96030969 (OP)
I quite enjoy traveller for its lethality, variety of playstyles, and character creation. I've only played Mongoose 2e and the book is poorly written but with some houserules and the errata it's been very enjoyable.

Call of Cthulhu, but mostly because I am a huge Lovecraftfag. Tho I also do really like the system itself.
Traveller, wfrp, dark heresy and pathfinder 1e also come to mind as games I've really enjoyed.

>>96030969 (OP)
Blades in the dark, because I'm a boardgamefag

>>96030969 (OP)
I don't think I have a favorite. You start playing multiple ttrpgs and part of the fun of them is that they've got different rules. I dunno. The longest lived, most-fun games I've ever had were d6 West End Star Wars, 2nd Edition D&D, Amber Diceless and WtA. I'm old, though. Last new game that really impressed me was Star Trek Adventures because I think the way the mechanics were purpose-built to running "episodes" emulating TNG, Voyager and DS9 are fucking brilliant, especially with the momentum/threat mechanic. I also though the Alien RPG (which I understand is just Mothership?) was really beautifully done. The rules are alright but the presentation? Holy shit that's the best put together ttrpg manual I've ever read.

>>96032510
>How dare you dislike my favourite toy!

>>96032905
Eh. D&D is fun, too. Lots of good ttrpgs in the world, and D&D is also one of them.

>>96032912
D&D is what got me into the hobby. I've since learned other systems that do what I want to do in a TRPG way better. But D&D will always hold a special place in my heart.

>>96032962
My first game was GURPS in 1989. I didn't even know I wasn't playing D&D until like a year later. But yeah, the people who virtue signal on /tg/ about hating D&D, as if that were somehow an important or valid identity politic are the worst.

The fun you'll get out of ttrpgs is 99% your group and 1% or less the system you choose. The most important thing rules are capable of doing is getting your group excited to play them.

>>96032462
There are a lot of ways to handle that granularity with math rocks. The particulars of the math rocks matter less than other procedures of play, and having supporting play aids.

>>96032905
Lol, I'm not the one who randomly brought up d&d in a thread where no one was talking about d&d in order to complain about d&d.

>>96030969 (OP)
Fudge dice and Traveller's 2d6 are great.

>>96033289
>Fudge dice
Hard agree, having a base rating for a skill and using dice to determine if you perform a bit better or worse is kino. Only downside is having to get unusual dice, since using d6s will make normies' brains explode.

>>96031845
>Heck, the exact percentage shouldn't even be a concern for the player in a well designed game.
this
dice pools with varying successes requirement are great because realistically a typical player will never try to calculate the exact precentage and thus will act based on gut feeling

>>96032510
is he wrong though?
t. nta

>>96032495
>percentile systems are instantly, intuitively readable.
Any system using a single dice should be.
I'm just questioning how knowing the exact probabilities is necessary.
Cross referencing a table should only be necessary for the GM when designing something and only if the system doesn't offer metrics at all.

>>96033035
We were talking about shoehorning a setting into an unfitting system. Riddle me this: What system is famous for having terrible hacks and ports?

>>96033493
>>96033924
O B S E S S E D

>>96033911
It's nice to be able to eyeball how well you'll be able to do something. I don't know what to tell you, people are saying "I like this kind of system because it is easy for me to instantly read," and you're basically going "why do you need to be able to instantly read it?" Because I like it, because it makes sense to me, because it's immediately obvious how good my character is at something.

I really like the mechanics of Modiphius, where you combine two stats and roll for success under that combined number. It's simple and elegant and really versatile.

>>96032912
No it isn't.

>>96031300
No, most systems aren't universal. Obviously.

>>96031779
I hate funky dice. Just give me regular dice!

>>96034181
Funky dice is great actually.

Actually awful, to be sure.

>>96033377
I like how you can just add or subtract more Fudge dice to a roll to make it swingier or consistent as the GM pleases, without changing your actual effective skill level. You can accomplish the same effect with other dice, sure, but it requires just a bit more math.

>>96031698
I simply wanted the opinions of others. If you want to know my thoughts, FFG's Star Wars TTRPGs and their success / failure system with custom d6s was really interesting and I really wanted to like it but there's gaps that could use some reworking and custom dice are always a problem for new groups trying a system as there's never enough dice to go around. Dark Heresy felt like everything I wanted to like about Call of Cthulhu's d100 but it actually felt like I was doing something.

>>96031767
One of these days I'll have to pull my group into trying GURPS. I've heard a lot about it and most of it has been very high praise.

>>96032510
I literally didnt complain about dnd. I used it as an example of people using systems for genres outside of their original.
>>96034096
oh rly?
traveler - >sword of cepheus
Warhammer fantasy rpg -> dark heresy
star wars d6 -> mini d6
call of cthulu -> that medieval call of cthulu

Literally every larger rpg I can think of has conversions for different settins.

>>96032994
>The fun you'll get out of ttrpgs is 99% your group and 1% or less the system you choose.
I beg to differ because as a GURPS and 3.5efag the simulationist (in the case of the latter, "simulationist") aspect is very important. PbtA games especially feel like ass to play with all the muh power of love and friendship mechanics
>>96031348
I did like that one too, the introductory adventures just SUCK though

>>96032882
That Alien RPG rulebook is killer, 100%. I haven't played a lot of AD&D, but my friends think I'm a freak because I actually kinda liked THAC0. I get that it's a huge cumbersome table but it just clicks with me idk.

I haven't tried that STA one, but the system being designed in that manner I could see both being cool to experience, and feel really focused in a way that the game nudges progression over meandering.

>>96033018
Very much this, and part of why I mentioned systems in the OP. Granularity can be such a fine line; I want to love Battle/Robotech but I just can't jive with the heat management systems in pen and paper gameplay. Maybe doing digital games or having better peripherals would help but man it's cumbersome otherwise.

>>96032994
>The fun you'll get out of ttrpgs is 99% your group and 1% or less the system you choose.
Try playing Monopoly on a weekly basis.

>>96034489
So you confused "can be converted to some setting" for "universal"?

>>96034692
Well I'd say in that case the fun you'll get is gonna have to be 100% the group because the game'll provide a net negative in that department. Not sure what point you were trying to make.

>>96034589
THAC0 wasn't hard at all. Wanna know a secret? THAC0 isn't from AD&D. It's a short-hand for the to-hit tables that were part of D&D since 1974. THAC0 first started being used in 1979. It just wasn't until 2nd edition that it got published as an official rule. However, by then, absolutely everyone and their mom had already memorized the to-hit tables and was already using THAC0 unofficially.

>>96032994
>The fun you'll get out of ttrpgs is 99% your group and 1% or less the system you choose
???
You know you can play different games with the same group, right?
And thus you'll have different amounts of fun and thus you can very easily compare which game is better or worse?
So no, the fun isn't 99% the group, because there have been clear cases where the system makes the game not fun even tho I was playing with the exact same group of people.
If it was 99% the group, you could play FATAL and still like it simply because you played with friends.

>>96034854
>you could play FATAL and still like it simply because you played with friends.
Know what? You could.

Incorrect. No right-thinking civilized man may play fatal and honestly claim to have enjoyed it, no matter the quality of his company or the strength of the alcoholic beverages imbibed during the endeavor.

>>96034924
You would enjoy it the way people enjoy the room. It isn't based on the merits of the thing.

Then it isn't enjoyment of the thing.

>>96034846
you wouldn't be playing it, just laughing at the rulebook, which isn't playing it.

>>96034924
It's true though, and everyone who has played a large variety of ttrpgs knows it. The rules? Don't really matter that much. What you put into the game and what you feel towards it will have a much bigger impact on your experience. Most ttrpgs are totally and utterly interchangeable, except in how you and your players feel about them.

I'm not saying every game will always play exactly the same. I am saying that the enjoyment you get out of any given game will have more to do with your group than the game. Specifically, it'll depend on the enthusiasm that your group brings to the game. Your D&D game won't be the same as your VtM. But which is better? Will have absolutely nothing to do with whether D&D or VtM is the "better" game.

Either you already know this fact or go out and play some ttrpgs.

huh, dunno why post was linked there

It certainly isn't true, and all intelligent readers and players of games will know it. The rules matter, and quite a lot.

>>96034974
Cool man.

You don't have to continue replying after realizing you've lost the argument.

>>96034987
I haven't lost a thing, anon.

>>96034958
>I am saying that the enjoyment you get out of any given game will have more to do with your group than the game.
Maybe for you it's 95/5, but for me it's 67/33. A shit system will always tank my enjoyment of a game.

You certainly have.

>>96035001
You can't think of a single, terrible garbage RPG, that you and your friends have ever had fun playing with? You've never played the TMNT game, virtually any superheroes game, any of the licensed games like Bubblegum Crisis or the WoW D&D, or the Diablo D&D, or the Tank Girl rpg? You've never played any of these stupid one-offs from /tg/ like Everyone is Tim (or whatever it's called) or Sword Lesbians or something?

There's a hell of a lot of fun to be had in terrible games, anon.

>>96034853
>Not sure what point you were trying to make.
You're not very bright, are you?

>>96035029
The hypothetical supported my point, anon.

Most superhero games are obviously good, of course.

>>96035026
I have had campaigns dragged down to complete unenjoyability by bad systems many, many times.

>>96035078
The thing is? You haven't. That was about how you and your group responded to it.

>>96035026
Bad systems are always less fun than good systems. This is absolute fact and cannot be contradicted by any means.

>>96035116
Except by playing them.

>>96035106
And the way they responded to it is a result of the game being bad. Thus, the game being bad caused them to have less fun. QED.

>>96035122
Incorrect.

>>96035128
Nah. Whatever game that was? Thousands before and after you had plenty of fun with it.

>>96035143
Incorrect.

>>96035106
Yes I have you projecting retard.

>>96035178
Name one so bad that no one else in history has ever had fun with it because the problem is objectively the game and not how your group handled it.

>>96030969 (OP)
Prowlers and Paragons - it can handle any conceivable situation with no difficulty, and it is impossible for any player character to make any other player character irrelevant, regardless of concept. In short, it solves all of the design problems of pre-90s theory, with no trade-offs or compromises.

>>96035195
>Name one so bad
5E.
>no one else
Don't care about them.

>>96035286
It's alright that you failed to name one, anon. Anyone would. Because the truth is? The fun of games is in their playing. The rules aren't that important.

>>96035317
For you, because you don't care about them. I do.

>>96035336
For anyone. That's why you can't satisfy my question here >>96035195

No one can. It's an impossible task.

>>96035346
Your question is retarded. There will always be at least one person who finds fun in any given game. That is literally meaningless.

I was wondering if anyone had experience with any of Tales From Myriad, Cloudbreaker Alliance, or Fabula Ultima?
I'm getting sick of DnD5e, and I haven't heard good things about PF2e. I want to try out other systems that're different. And as much as I'd also like to try CoC or Lancer, I know there's no way I could get my group to play them.

>>96035430
>That is literally meaningless.
It's literally the entire point. You cannot answer it. No one can. For a really incredibly simple reason: the fun of the game isn't about the rules.

In the end, you and your friends are sitting around a table playing make believe. Whether that goes well or not was always gonna hinge on you and your friends, a hell of a lot more than it did on the rules you agreed to. Good rules can facilitate it. Bad rules can get in the way of it. But you were always gonna be the ones who carried it, or not.

>>96035442
>the fun of the game isn't about the rules.
For you. Stop projecting it on other people.

>>96035432
>Fabula Ultima
Haven't played it. But I trust the publisher a lot. The games of theirs I have played are pretty damn good.

>>96035453
Then answer the question and prove me wrong.

>>96035475
Your loaded question is irrelevant.

>>96035495
Prove it. Demonstrate it. Demonstrate that the rules are objectively what makes games fun or not, by pointing to one game that no one has had fun with because the rules make it objectively not fun.

It's not the question that's loaded, anon. It's that you've got a lurking premise in your assumptions that is asinine.

>>96035500
No. Your scenario is retarded and you're a piece of shit trying to shift blame from low quality rules.

>>96035551
Prove it. Demonstrate the nature of ttrpg rules as being objectively good or bad. We'll all wait, anon. You'll have literally revolutionized entire fields of philosophy and psychology, when you finally make your brilliant and glorious post.

>>96035575
No.

>>96035583
I'm shocked!

>>96035551
>>96035575
>>96035583
>>96035596
Not that anon, but could you two go get a fucking room already, and quit shitting up this thread? Love and kthx.

>>96035346
Name one movie so bad that no one in history enjoyed it. Oh, you can't? Guess all movies are about the viewer and quality doesn't matter. There's no such thing as a good or bad movie.

>>96035468
What other games have they published? I flicked through it and mostly wasn't quite my taste, but it had a lot of interesting stuff and I've heard it hangs together, so I'd be interested in more from them.

>>96036283
Star Trek Adventures is the one I've played recently that I thought was incredibly good.

>>96036275
Correct: value isn't objective. And enjoyment is about the participants rather than the thing.

>>96036306
You are retarded and believe that shit is good food because somebody probably enjoys eating shit.

As a general rule I like roll under way more than target number. I can see how you'd want to divide competency in tasks even if someone knows about it, but in practice adding 2 or 4 to the target number isn't a real solution for me. Despite that weakness, leaving the result to whatever the player has is more dynamic and makes for a better experience.

>>96035026
>>96034958
I think you just haven't played any good RPGs if you can't tell the difference between a good one or a bad one. You can absolutely tell when a system is actively hindering your fun, both as a player and as a GM.

>>96036314
It is a measurable fact that presentation will affect how food tastes to you. You will actually judge a beautifully plated meal as tasting better than if it were presented poorly. The favorite example of this is a somolier took the same cheap table wine and put it into a cheap bottle and an expensive bottle, then served it. Every single taster could expound at length about why the exact same wine, out of the more expensive bottle, tasted better.

>>96036484
IIRC this did not actually use somoliers as the test subjects. Additionally, shit is still shit.

You are just saying there's literally nothing of objective value in any art whatsoever. You think you are being cool and based and accepting and postmodern, but actually you are denigrating the entire field, because you are saying there is no point, no craft, no value. Every bit of effort that anybody put into making any RPG, supplement, adventure, or GM advice was actually totally useless because there's nothing in the game at all. It's an epiphenomenon.

Dumb, too.

>>96036498
>IIRC this did not actually use somoliers as the test subjects.
It was fifty somoliers in training.
>You are just saying there's literally nothing of objective value in any art whatsoever.
No, what I'm saying is: the rules of the ttrpg contribute significantly less to the enjoyment you and your group will get from a ttrpg, than the enthusiasm and creativity you and your group bring to the ttrpg. Because ttrpgs aren't really all that different, and all boil down to "rules for governing us playing make believe around a table together." And how well that goes is 99% you and your group, and 1% the rules.

>>96036505
The reason everyone gets mad at you when you post this stupid gibberish, is that it's stupid gibberish.

Imagine you sit down to play a session of D&D, but the GM has a cool new homebrew system for combat. Rather than having a dungeon crawl, everyone just rolls a d20, and depending on the result, you get loot from the dungeon, lose resources, and/or die. You think this is 99% the same experience as normal D&D?

>>96036581
Nah. The reason the two of you get mad is because you've somehow convinced yourself that identifying things you like is a reflection on your personal worth. It's why one of the two of you felt the need to bring up d&d and how bad it is outa nowhere. It's the same thing as 14 year old girls deciding if you like the cool kid music. And your ego is hurt by getting called out on something so small and sad. But you're not a 14 year old girl, so deal with it.

>Imagine you sit down to play a session of D&D, but the GM has a cool new homebrew system for combat. Rather than having a dungeon crawl, everyone just rolls a d20, and depending on the result, you get loot from the dungeon, lose resources, and/or die. You think this is 99% the same experience as normal D&D?
Wow what a tricky web of words you weave. The enjoyment you can get out of it is about you and your group, and you can get the same amount regardless of the rules, and the rules you ise are therfore interchangeable. Not "therefore the rules are the same."

>>96036617
>Nah. The reason the two of you get mad is because you've somehow convinced yourself that identifying things you like is a reflection on your personal worth. It's why one of the two of you felt the need to bring up d&d and how bad it is outa nowhere. It's the same thing as 14 year old girls deciding if you like the cool kid music. And your ego is hurt by getting called out on something so small and sad. But you're not a 14 year old girl, so deal with it.
No, it's because you are deeply, deeply stupid. My ego is unaffected by your insults, because you are too stupid to care about the opinions of.

>Wow what a tricky web of words you weave. The enjoyment you can get out of it is about you and your group, and you can get the same amount regardless of the rules, and the rules you ise are therfore interchangeable. Not "therefore the rules are the same."
You really think that the average group would get the same enjoyment from this hypothetical system? A random group? Your dishonest attempt at framing is obnoxious, dude. You literally said no film is bad because somebody enjoyed it.

>>96036646
>No, it's because you are deeply, deeply stupid. My ego is unaffected by your insults, because you are too stupid to care about the opinions of.
That's why you can't go 2 sentences without sperging into "nuh uh ur dum!"

>You literally said no film is bad because somebody enjoyed it.
I literally didn't. I said the enjoyment is about person watching it.

>>96036505
>the rules of the ttrpg contribute significantly less to the enjoyment you and your group will get from a ttrpg
And you're wrong because it's about half. Saying system doesn't matter is cope from retards.

>>96036659
>That's why you can't go 2 sentences without sperging into "nuh uh ur dum!"
You spent the entire paragraph calling me a fourteen year old girl.

>>96036669
I know in your head you think you're only pretending to be retarded, but you are in fact just retarded.

>>96036617
>and you can get the same amount regardless of the rules
Wrong.

>>96036671
Lol all this rage because you wanted to quibble about the percentile?

>>96036680
See:
>>96036676
>I know in your head you think you're only pretending to be retarded, but you are in fact just retarded.

>>96036676
True. Stop acting like one?

>>96036689
You are a retard so I don't care if you think I'm "acting like a fourteen year old girl" (translation: calling you a dumb fuck because you post dumb shit). Maybe if you were capable of formulating a thought beyond "heh, 50% = 99% actually" I would care what you think of me.

>>96036680
It's not quibbling. You're telling me what I feel and you're wrong. Bad systems wreck my enjoyment of a campaign no matter who I'm playing with. You can deal with that fact.

What a retarded argument.
Obviously playing with people you hate is gonna be a bad experience no matter the system, no system can make up for a bad session. And obviously different systems push play in different directions that you might prefer more or less and do it better or worse. It's not one or the other, why are you extrapolating it into that? You don't have to pick between playing with people you like OR playing a system you like.

I think that a lot of people have fun without a system, and they can go do improv theatre and have a better time. But even people close to that can play Dread and enjoy a mechanic that prompts new events and makes you interact with the story in a particular way.

There is no debate to be had. This is retarded.
Now answer, what system do you prefer? why? interact with people who share some but not all of your views and see if you can get a new perspective about something you like,

>>96034589
>it's a huge cumbersome table
Is it though? I don't know if I remember correctly, but isn't it just a matter of subtracting the enemy's armor class from your THAC0 and you immediately get the number you need to roll?

>>96030969 (OP)
I ended up really enjoying the Legend of The Five Rings, 4th edition specifically, D10 roll and keep system.
Basically you combined your skill ranks with your attribute rank and rolled that many dice then picked a number of dice equal to the attribute rank to keep and add together (written as XkY with X being the attribute + skill and Y being just the attribute, k of course being short for keep) to meet or beat a target number (target number usually shortened to TN), higher numbers being better of course and a 10 on the D10 being an explosion that you roll again and add to that 10 so you could get lucky sometimes on particularly high TN challenges.
This could be further modified in certain circumstances based on your character's school, for example the Monkey Clan, a minor clan of samurai who were a dev pet partly due to wins and losses in the TCG being the main thing directing the metaplot of the franchise and people picking a meme guy to get more and more story originally, has the Toku Bushi school which at the first level of it provides an ability that adds 1k1 if you're outnumbered or if the TN was 25 or greater, which would take the average starting Monkey Clan Samurai's roll for using his sword to hit some faggot from 6k3 to 7k4. Though some schools instead provided other types bonuses of course.
Each pair of Attributes (Stamina and Willpower, Strength and Perception, Reflexes and Awareness, Agility and Intelligence) formed one of the elemental rings with the Ring Rank being the lower number of the pair, alongside Void which was its own thing to increase, that would be used for other calculations while Void provided Void Points that are the hero point kind of thing.
You leveled up by increasing your Insight (determined by Rings added together multiplied by 10 and then adding skill ranks) until reaching a certain threshold to increase your Insight Rank and gain a new rank in your school to get new techniques.

>>96037694
You also get a starting Honor Rank (which serves as a ranking of your character's adherence to the virtues of Bushido, providing bonuses to some schools) based on your school, changing based on in game actions and a starting Status Rank based on your family/position (normally 1) changing based on story developments or new positions gained, there is also glory to represent how well known your character has become (higher the glory the lower the TN for someone to recognize you based on name).
Combat is mostly straightforward and, depending on the Wound scaling the GM is going with, can be quick and deadly. You roll an attack based on a combat skill and have to beat the TN of the target's defenses, but you can take Raises (1 raise = +5 to TN) to do things like increase damage, target certain body parts, disarm, make an extra follow up attack, do a feint, ect. to make it harder but more rewarding to land the attack. As you get more wounds you drop thru wound levels and gain further +TNs for all rolls.
There are a few subsystems like the shugenja magic system (based on praying to spirits for effects), kiho (mystical monk kungfu shit), maho (evil blood magic), and kata (samurai equivalent of mystical monk kungfu shit but with weapons) to give gameplay a bit more depth thru options, though for the social focused types you do have to rely mostly on skills (which do all give special abilities as they level up), a bit of magic, and school techniques which can be a pain since the game is made in a way where you can end up doing social only sessions.
Character building and leveling up is a basic start with X amount of XP and spend XP to gain skill ranks, attribute ranks, kata/kiho, and (mostly during creation unless allowed by the GM later) advantages, with disadvantages giving bonus XP during creation and if the GM decides to give them to you and let you have the XP for them.
I ended up playing many games of it over a period of 6 or so years and really enjoyed it.

Hear me out
>in terms of what can have the most negative effect on your game
group > adventure/scenario > system
a system can be bad, but it's easy to sidestep the issues, dismiss retarded rules and come up with bite-sized on-the-spot homebrews
a badly written or thought out adventure can be a bummer and is much harder to fix, especially on the fly
however nothing can ruin a game like "that guy" of a GM or player
>in terms of having a positive effect on your game
adventure/scenario > system > group
I literally never seen a player that could single-handedly make a game much more enjoyable
a fun and well designed system is fun to engage with what more can I say
but most importantly a well designed adventure is what makes the game fun
PS
for open-world games adventure/scenario and system are combined into system

>>96037523
it's not -that- hard to figure out, at least not for most of us now that we're older. I think it's mostly just that it's several layers removed from modern D&D systems, small number good, and many people's first exposure to THAC0 being like ~9-13, stumbling upon an older sibling's or dad's books and being bombarded with pic related and not having any context for what any of it means.

What are anons' opinions here about Advanced Fighting Fantasy? I'm reading through the rulebook and it seems neat.

>>96038343
>new
anon update your copypasta aff was ancient a decade ago

Oh shit, that's hard. I have been playing A LOT.
I REALLY enjoy how japanese do things. Nechronica and Princess wing are absolutely genius in simplicity and engagement. Both games are great at naturally making the paryt think in 'teamwork'. Tenra Bansho's dice pool is pretty unremarkable but the game shines with It's meta mechanics. It actively rewards you for roleplaying in even the cringiest oneliners as long as they're in-character. It actively made my players more engaged in roleplaying.

For the western stuff. I love the ideas of Legends of Wulin but fuck me, I can barely get learn anything from the mess that are the books, much less explain anything to my players.
For all the crunch, Trudvang Chronicles is adored at my table. Rolling under the difficulty you set for yourself according to the sum of points you have makes for a really tense risk/reward mechanic.

>>96038410
>>new
I never said it was new, I just recently studied it in a bit more detail and it sparked my interest.

>>96030969 (OP)
>>96030969 (OP)
Homebrewed Year Zero Engine with player-facing rolls, no colored dice, and consequences of the pushed roll evaluated depending on how many banes compared to the number of the dice rolled you've got.

- Player-facing rolls are the must for fasted pace.
- Noticing results instead of making calculation make rolls more dramatic.
- Choosing to push the roll and then to get a success at a cost or critical failure is better than just getting partial success in systems like BitD.
- 1-12 dice is enough gradual to consider difference between skills and gear but not making entering the territory of bean counting where you always need to upgrade your gear and character like in a video game.
- Throwing dice this way is FUN and never gets old.

>>96031300
>Aren't most systems universal?

No. Most systems are designed with one type of play style in mind and falter pretty hard when going outside that play style. The crux of a system being universal is how well its primary conflict resolution mechanic translates to a wide variety of situations. That's all a system fundamentally is, a conflict resolution device. Be rolling over a TN on a d20, rolling under a TN on d100, rolling over in 3d6, etc. it's all about making X check to accomplish Y task.
The result is frequently bloat for increased difficulty or flailing about like a sperg for rolling under a lower number check. In a combat focused game, having these values in a d20 based system works fine, but it's dog shit for social heavy stuff. Roll under is shit for combat but good for social and investigation stuff.
Genesys only has five levels of difficulty and that's about all you need really. The check for a given task in a like scenario is fairly static. The same could be said for d100 systems (static values) but it frequently translates to a person who is even competent at a given task failing 50% of the time instead of 70% of the time, which is dog shit odds and why Warhammer is known as a miss simulator.

>>96034181
Gotta step away from sacred cows to fix ingrained problems, anon.

>>96034181
And that is your opinion. Personally I fucking adore funky dice.

>>96040126
>In a combat focused game, having these values in a d20 based system works fine, but it's dog shit for social heavy stuff. Roll under is shit for combat but good for social and investigation stuff.
wat? why?
there isn't any fundamental difference between the two

Which system would be best to run for my six year old to get him started? I have OSE and Cairn; I'm thinking Cairn would probably be easier, but OSE has a bit more to play around with.

>>96042550
>Which system would be best to run for my six year old to get him started?
to get him started to hate you later?
get the fuck out with that "be me" parenting
a six year old does not even have an attention span to play a proper session of any ttrpg
not even to mention....

wait

this is bait isn't it?
I fell for the fucking bait
fuck you anon, you almost had me call in child protection services on you

>>96042791
He's the one that is asking me to do it, I'm not forcing him to play anything...not all six year olds are dribbling simpletons.

>>96042550
Do you think he'd rather play a fantasy game or a sci-fi game?

>>96041525
>There isn't a fundamental difference between the two

There are a lot modifiers to manipulate your roll in d20 system and the TN is pretty variable as is.

d100 TN is static most of the time (rolling vs your skill) and, in comparison, very little modifiers are applied.

You need to hit a goblin with an AC of 10 and your fighter has +2 proficiency, +4 stat adjustment, +2 magic weapon, +2 from cleric adding guiding bolt, this means anything other than a 1 will have you braining the little shit. His buddy has a shield, so anything 2 or higher has you braining that little shit.
BRP in a fantasy setting, your fighter has a melee skill of 75. You got a roll a 75 or less to hit anything, no matter how big or small, no matter how armored or unarmored. It doesn't matter, all situations are functionally identical regardless of the foe in question. Unique or situational modifiers do pop up but they are much more rare and have a typical modifier of +/- 5 so they don't alter stuff much. You notice it but barely because 9 sides out of 10 that modifier might as well not exist.

>>96043268
I'm quite sure I've applied more modifiers in Dark Heresy than I did playing D&D 3.5, and saying +/- 5 sounds like a lack of exposure from my view since I can only find +/- 10/20/30 modifiers in abundance.
Warhammer line, CoC, and Mythras. The latter do of course offer both of either doing some mental arithmeticians in going + double skill value / - half and quarter of skill if one doesn't wish the easy groups of +20/-20.

I just hate AC though, not having "active" defense, reaction to dodge/parry/other makes combat boring to me, and in attacking I needn't ask nor suffer to be asked if that strike is a hit, even if I've said the AC values previous. That is thrown out with the above games: "I succeed with X amount of success levels dealing Y damage" and offering the enemy to resist should the enemy still have action points to spend.

>>96030969 (OP)
Pendragon's "Price is right" is a personal favorite for a D20 game. A starting knight has a Sword skill of 15, rolling 16–19 is a failure, 20 a fumble, 1–14 a success and 15 a critical. Combat is also resolved simultaneous, example of a fellow sparring knight of same skill.
Knight 1 rolls a 1, knight 2 rolls a 8: Both succeed, as Knight 2 rolled closer to his skill value he deals damage while Knight 1 benefits from his shield adding more damage reduction. 4D6 dealing 20 damage reduced by Knight 1s' 10+5 DR, 0 damage, good thing he got his shield up.
Round 2 the fortunes turn K1 rolls 15 opposed by K2's 16, critical vs failure. 8D6, 30 damage reduced by 10 as K2 didn't even get his shield up to divert the strike suffering a major wound. K2 rolls D20 comparing against his current HP to remain conscious, DEX to remain standing and ticks that he'll need surgery.
The game plucks from the BRP branch and uses Passions as well, and excellently so for the driving motivations and obsessions.
A supreme system for running romanticized Arthurian knights

>>96043268
>muh modifiers
yeah ok I get what you are saying
it's not about the dice engine though (as in d20 roll over vs d100 roll under)
because modifiers are not part of a dice engine

>>96043268
>Unique or situational modifiers do pop up but they are much more rare and have a typical modifier of +/- 5 so they don't alter stuff much.
I don't find this true at all. The d100 Warhammer games are all about stacking modifiers. CoC gives you pretty giant modifiers for surprise and having your gun drawn, if I recall correctly, making intelligent strategy very important. You can say that they are usually unforgiving in combat and don't really line up with a modern d&d run up and hit them till there dead mentality, but that makes combat in d100 systems a lot more interesting than in d20 based systems, in my opinion.

>>96044973
I get what you are saying and that is a good way of forcing the player to be creative
I still feel the same way as that anon
because in BRP based systems having a 80% skill is pretty high up
but that still gives you a whopping 20% chance to miss a bitch basic dummy
imaging a a sword expert not hitting a man sized target every 5th time!
it's fucking nonsensical

>>96045049
It's an 80 percent chance to hit someone who is also moving and fighting back against you. I'd say missing 1 out of 5 in a combat situation isn't insane.

>>96034577
>I did like that one too, the introductory adventures just SUCK though
Free League agrees, there is an all new starter set with new adventures coming out this month.

>>96045112
Cool, now I will own two starter sets for the game

>>96045070
>It's an 80 percent chance to hit someone who is also moving and fighting back against you
isn't that just cope though?
since those 80% don't account for your adversary's skill for avoiding blows in a fight
it's 80% against a master duelist and 80% against a clumsy bookworm who trips over his own feet

don't get me wrong this fault is not unique to BRP at the slightest
but varying difficulty to hit is something I want to see more in ttrpgs

>>96045112
what's wrong with the old shire starter set again?
the old one seems more appealing to me visually and I was thinking on getting it

>>96045192
A lot of these systems will have a second roll ("Dodge" or "Block" or "Parry") which the defender gets to make, and if they succeed, they don't get hit.

>>96045654
I know anon
it only reinforces my complaint though innit?
dedicate half of your life to be an expert in swordfighting only to miss every 5th thrust at some nerd who isn't even trying to dodge, block or parry your attack

simply nonsensical

we can take jabs at d&d all day long but at least an expert duelist will not miss as frequently at a target that is borderline a training dummy
because your opponent's ability is included in the TN for your roll

>>96045049
In dark heresy etc a normal roll at +0 is a difficult one. A dummy would probably be +30 or more likely wouldn’t need a roll at all. An enemy can dodge, parry, or have other talents to make them hard to hit. A master swordsman can parry then counterattack. You don’t play games.

>>96032233
>>96032305
>What's your favourite ice-cream?
>I like many flavours and each with different topping, and there are always new to tr...
>No, no, what's your SINGLE favourite flavour?
None. If I had one, I wouldn't be searchng for it, now would I?
Oh, right, I forgot: if you don't have a question-answer flow, it means you are arguing and upset. It's absolutely impossible for the question to be asked in a way that makes it impossible to answer, after all.

>>96045786
These systems are used to represent settings where the difference between a top-level fighter and a low-skill fighter are much lower, much more based on equipment, and much more realistic than something like D&D, where a L20 Fighter can 1v20 a pile of peasants with ease. Real fights often involve the attempted exchange of multiple blows because the other person is not retarded and "don't get hit by the sword" is literally the most obvious thing in the world.

For example, this video portrays a fairly realistic medieval fight between one trained, armored warrior and several low-skill nobodies: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVLJ4NUQz6I . At 1:47, he attempts to hit one of the peasants with his spear, but it fails to connect.

>>96030969 (OP)
As a GM that wants to obtain system mastery whenever I look at a TTRPG I analyze if it's worth reading a textbook. If the setting is baked, the engine is too jank and license is closed; I tend to avoid it. A lot of OSR AI slop out there nowadays

Most systems are all very similar to one another if you understand their engine origins. The big three engines are BRP(1d100), F20 and GURPs(3d6)-- if you master those you will grasp nearly every TTRPG very easily and are just reading marginal rules and tables at that point

As for my pet mechanic I enjoy:
popcorn initiative
degrees of success
exploding dice

Big crits are always exciting at the table

>>96031005
I'm adding to this
Been playing Star Wars GENESYS for a few years now and it's been a blast. So good that many members of my group now consider it the best system to run anything. One guy started a Fallout game, another is planning a JoJo's one. Being a generalist system with a medium amount of crunch, fun dice and easily applied templates puts it perfectly between purely narrative rules-lite stuff and GURPS types.

>>96045813
>>96045843
rules as designed and written have the same percentage to hit disregarding enemy skill
yes or no?
also
>this video
yeah dude I can believe dequiem videos are not staged in an armored vs armored situation, but it's clear there was no intention of actually hurting his unarmored buddies here
besides the supposed "low-skill nobodies" are actually just as experienced fighters who just happen to play a role of brigands for this specific video
try going against an experienced fencer, not even an expert just someone at about advance level, as a novice and see how many thrust he will miss against you (not feints, thrusts that are meant to hit)

>>96045930
samefag here
upsy doopsy
this is what I meant naturally
>rules as designed and written have the same percentage to hit initial attack roll disregarding enemy skill
>yes or no?

>>96035432
PF2E is very good, especially for GMs. Hands down the best F20 game with the best software & web support-- which matters a lot. No D&D Beyond garbage or having to skim unsearchable pirated PDFs

5E drones love to make up random shit about it for obvious reasons

>>96045930
>rules as designed and written have the same percentage to hit disregarding enemy skill
>yes or no?
No? That's what rolling block/dodge/parry is for.

>>96045202
It is not very good portrayal of what rest of the game that is very much about dangerous wilderness travel and exploring dangerous ruins and woods is like. I don't think the Shire adventures even use the Shadow mechanic.

>>96045973
so you gonna just run away from >>96045939?

>>96046271
A highly skilled warrior in D&D has the same probability of rolling a 16 if he's fighting a peasant or a golem, the question is whether he actually hits at the end of the process.

Pic related

>>96046284
a highly skilled warrior in DnD will have different TN to roll depending if he is fighting a peasant or a golem

PS
I know why you are dodging (relevant, kek) the question
It's because the answer is
>yes, in BRP the initial attacking roll has the same chance to miss disregarding any enemy attributes
ergo
>an expert swordsman will have the same chance to miss the initial attack on a weak aging peasant and on an expert duelist
ergo
>an expert swordsman with a "whopping" 80% in skill will miss an weak aging peasant 1 in 5 attacks
which is just
non-
sensical

I understand why it's there
and yes, no system is perfect
but for me personally this ridiculous and unrealistic attack resolution is a major turnoff for BRP based systems

>>96046751
>a highly skilled warrior in DnD will have different TN to roll depending if he is fighting a peasant or a golem
Yes, and the highly skilled warrior in BRP will have a different chance to hit based on the target's Dodge. The fact that you don't understand how math works doesn't change this.

>>96046751
>>96046886
Here, maybe this will help:

Imagine if in D&D, rather than roll 1d20 against a static AC, you rolled 1d20+score, and the defender also rolled 1d20+score, and you had to defeat his roll with yours. If you rolled a nat 1, you will miss, but obviously the target's defensive abilities matter.

>>96046751
In any game these things are abstractions rather than perfect simulation. There are enough systems to make a “master swordsman” have an enormous advantage over a commoner. I would suggest the talents in 40k rpgs more than make up for what you’re talking about. For example hard target. But it’s clear you’re being disingenuous or are highly autistic.

>>96046886
silly goose anon :3
what you are hopefully pretending to not understand is that
since the _initial roll_ math is the same for both cases
>expert swordsman with 80% skill rolls attack against a master duelist
>expert swordsman with 80% skill rolls attack against a weakling aging peasant
the expert swords man has _at least_ a 20% chance to miss a weakling aging peasant, which is barely more than a human sized target dummy

this is my gripe, it's non..sensical
unrealistic and disgusting

>>96047093
In D&D, a 1 always misses, therefore the expert swordsman who can 1v1 an ancient dragon and win, misses 5% of the time against a retarded peasant without legs. This stuff is meant to represent the chance component of real fights. If there is no chance component, like an unmoving target dummy or a paralyzed foe, then there's no roll.

>>96047093
>Only initial math ever matters
You are a retard
>Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience

>>96047055
>But it’s clear you’re being disingenuous or are highly autistic.
just because you chose to pretend to not see what my real gripe with BRP based systems doesn't mean neither
>In any game these things are abstractions rather than perfect simulation.
exactly, and I'm ok with that
the way this is abstracted in BRP specifically though [I find it to be] is kinda icky and immersion-breaking though
yet you have a perfect examples of butt-blasted BRP anons in this very thread jumping hoops while whiteknighting BRP into absurdity
because otherwise it undermines their favorite system as "simulationist" crunch instead of actually just another idea of highlevel abstractions with more manual steps

like fr what I'm saying is MATHEMATICALLY correct, yet they persist to insist upon themselvs

>>96047121
fuck off brainlet
I never claimed that

>>96046751
Here's the thing that youre missing, and it's up to bad game mastering more than anything else: in a percentile game, your skill is meant to represent your best effort *at a challenging task* so it assumes you're 80 percent long sword warrior isn't going to be hitting a static target but something that offers some kind of resistance. Yes, if someone else, even the barely trained, is flailing a sword and moving around, they aren't going to hit every single time. If the opponent offers no resistance, you shouldn't have to roll at all/should be rolling with a bonus, because it's not a challenge. But, again, most of the systems have options one can take during combat that would increase their chance to hit. Also, it's a fucking game, you sound like a baby who's mad he can't just auto-win ever encounter.

>>96047180
>like fr what I'm saying is MATHEMATICALLY correct, yet they persist to insist upon themselvs
It's not "mathematically" correct. You can't just arbitrarily say the parts of the dice roll we care about stop after one roll but before the action's success/failure is resolved. That's like saying "in PbtA, it's impossible to succeed at any roll after you finish rolling the first dice, you need the second dice to succeed at the roll." It's just stupid.

>>96047112
exactly what I'm saying
I can live with 5%, 20-25% for someone who is considered an "expert" on the other hand is definitely over the line

>>96047211
He’s just trolling, ignore him

>>96046375
Unfortunately, a lot of the current year RPGs are falling into culture war garbage.

>>96047211
go back to fucking grade school I have no temper nor obligation to deal with the likes of you

if you have two independent tests "to hit" (1) and "to avoid dodge" (2) with probability p1 and p2
the resulting probability of 1 and 2 = p1*p2 which IS LOWER than p1
which means that probability of not hitting = 1 - p1*p2 IS HIGHER than
probability of not scoring a hit (i.e. not 1) = 1 - p1
which means that it's correct to say that the chances of missing any target with a skill of 80% are AT LEAST 20%
you fucking imbecile

that's the gripe you fucking retard

>>96047193
>I never claimed that

>>96047284
>it's correct to say that the chances of missing any target with a skill of 80% are AT LEAST 20%
Having your attack parried or dodged is apparently not missing?

>>96047284
I have a degree in actuarial science, you only rearranged your opinion to be "actually, 5% is fine but 20% is no good" after my post.

Many of these systems let your score go above 80%, including BRP AFAICT.

>>96047308
yes, and if you don't see the difference in
>Only initial math ever matters
and
>we can rely only on initial math to have a number that is not going to be greater than the final chance to miss (i.e. it's going to show us what is the _at least_ chance to miss)
god help you and please stop replying

>>96047284
Not the anons that were arguing with you, so I wont bother to correct you for a millionth time about using certain advantages available in each d100 based system, or the fact that you roll only when facing a chance of failure, so a knight pillaging a village with peasants in shock just getting slaughtered for example wont have to roll above his 80 sword skill to hit them.
You keep mentioning dnd, where the base ac of everyone, even a peasant is 10. If you go full autistic under the same situtation as given above and force a roll just like you re doing in brp what level does your fighter need to be to automatically succeed? Isnt level 1 described to be a veteran and already above the run of the mill?
So a level 4-5 character that is supposed to be an expert character should under the system's math autosucceed right? Well he doesnt because he doesnt have a +10 to hit does he?
Now stop being autistic. Yes, under a stressfull situation a person may fail to succeed in a skill because they are not a true master aka with skill over 100

>>96047341
>I have a degree in actuarial science
good for you
I trust that you shouldn't have any issues with the math I presented than
>rearranged your opinion to be "actually, 5% is fine but 20% is no good"
I didn't rearrange anything
if you'd bother to read what you were replying to it would have been clear that I stated from the start "20% is too much"
>let your score go above 80%
so?
it doesn't change the fact that the example I'm using, 80%, is considered to be an expert

>>96047284
Let’s check this claim of 20%
For a master swordsman I imagine they have 50+ WS for the sake of this we’ll say 55. They rolled higher than average wtih a 35 base and bought 4 advancements.

>+10 for single attack
>+10 for aiming
So even with a very high WS we actually have a 75% chance. But then let’s take the blademaster talent which gives a re-roll once per round. With some quick math the chance to miss is now just 6.25%. And that’s just a single talent to help hit. This is almost identical to the 5% in D&D if they have +9 and are attacking an unarmored peasant with AC 10.

>>96047449
>wont have to roll
this isn't an argument
where is the line of you not having to roll?
you will make one step beyond it, I will make one step away from it
now in my situation of having to roll which is just two steps away from not having to roll at all
an expert swordsman will still have at least an 80% chance of missing
highlighted by the fact that just two steps away he would hit 100% of the time as not requiring a roll

yes, that's my entire problem with BRP to hit resolution

>>96047504
>it's not as bad with crutches
that's the gripe dammit
the system needs crutches like that to start making sense

>>96047563
>You need all the rules in order for the system to work! If you randomly take out rules, it doesn't work!

>>96047563
>Crutches
Talents aren’t a crutch. They are a core mechanic. I’ve refuted your 20% claim. The other option is to use an all out attack action if you’re confident the peasant poses no threat to retaliate giving +30 to hit. This is a full action so in this made up scenario you might as well aim for a full action first too giving a total of +50 to hit. Even ignoring blademaster that takes the chance to hit base over 100 but there’s always a 5% chance to miss so it is identical to D&D. Then of course with blademaster it’s 0.25% which is even better than in D&D.

>>96044895
The modifiers are a core component to the engine so shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

>>96047608
>>96051588
if talents are such a core mechanic
how come they aren't even on the character sheet?
LMAO
checkmate

skill roll is a core mechanic, opposing rolls are core mechanic
talent modifiers are not a core mechanic in BRP

you've just have been had by Ace Ventura

>>96053113
I know this is a joke. To be clear I was talking about Dark Heresy

>>96053348
>To be clear I was talking about Dark Heresy
brp-based systems trying to address the notorious low success chance is a testament in favor of what I'm talking about

>>96047284
A combat round is supposed to be, like, 5 seconds.
You really think it's THAT unrealistic for an untrained guy to have a 20% chance of dodging an expert fighter's attacks for about 5 seconds?

>>96053670
1. Dark Heresy isn't based on BRP
2. What you are "talking about" is ignoring all the actual mechanics of the game to complain that one particular number isn't high, even if (taken holistically) this is literally meaningless.

Normie opinion incoming, but my favourites so far have been DnD 5e and Call of Cthulhu. My group had a lot of fun with both.

>>96032882
I'm really tempted to check out that Star Wars game now. I have a player who's a big star wars nerd, and I think he would love it.

That Alien rpg looks sick too!

>>96045822
>starts insulting people over nothing
>pretend to be reasonable and calm when called out
Everyone knows you're angry for no reason anon, just take the l and stop malding, fr fr

>>96047239
Then I simply won't play them or if they're actually okay I'll just pirate them.

>>96053802
that's before actual dodging is even taken into account
>>96053848
> Dark Heresy isn't based on BRP
ok then
why the fuck are you bringing it up in a discussion about BRP?
are you mentally deficient?

>>96055236
anon, every d100 system handles it differently but all provide a bonus in a situation where the enemy is not capable of harming you because he is a useless peasant or whatever.
It has been explained to you a million times before.
And no, modifiers are part of of the system fixing it's math the same way they are part of dnd.
You are either the most retreaded person on tg or plain trolling.
I will explain it to you one final time.
You don't have an 80 percent to hit an unarmed peasant over 5 seconds. You have an 80 percent to hit a combatant armed and dangerous even if untrained, frail or whatever so you have 5 seconds and 80 percent to hit them without overextending yourself and getting hit in return.

The system is built around modifiers to get the desired outcome.
Now stop being a disingenuous faggot and admit that you have never read more than a single line of any d100 system

>>96030969 (OP)
I like the dnd 3.x system as the perfect d20 setting. d6 systems, I never particularly liked. And I really like some d100 systems like CoC and Delta Green. These systems flow very well.

>>96031210
>but CoC felt like the whole thing was designed for the players to fail
It is. If you get into combat, there’s a very high chance that you fucked up. As for skills, they are actually a bit biased towards the players as they can math out how likely they are to succeed.

d100 fans are really going to bat for their system when they don't need to.
Why is d100 good? It's easy to understand, it's fast, and the TN tracking is done by players and not the GM lightening the load a bit.
d100 is good for the same reason Savage Worlds is good, PbtA is good, and FATE is good. The checks are fast so you move shit along and aren't dealing with the system much because MOST systems are dog shit and the less you interact with them the better the game.
Genesys gets special mention for NOT having a dog shit system that encourages and rewards direct interaction with it AND checks are still fast to resolve once people understand the dice pool.

Good luck finding someone to play it with though.

>>96030969 (OP)
>>96031005
Seconding Genesys. The triple result axis of success/failure, advantage/threat, and triumph/despair is a revolution in RPG narrative mechanics and does so much for the playability of the game by even unimaginative normies.

>>96030969 (OP)
I've moved away from crunchier rpgs the more I've played with my group. Rules-heavy combat bogs down pacing way too much and they like investigation/social roleplay more than combat anyway; the last few years we've been playing a lot of Blades in the Dark hacks, CAIN, and Call of Cthulhu.
I've tried to play Lancer, Warhammer Fantasy, non-5e D&D, and GURPS with them, but none of them stuck. Lancer specifically I think I was having problems with because I found it difficult to weave excuses for mech combat into the story. Skill issue, maybe.
I want to give Spire a shot but haven't been able to find the time.
A short indie rpg called Rotate Bird has become a bit of a meme in our group and we do one-shots with it occasionally.

>>96030969 (OP)
I don't think I can list just one RPG as my favorite, but my top picks would be Pendragon, D&D 4e, BFRPG, Battle Century G Remastered, FFG Star Wars, Star Trek Adventures, and DCC RPG

>>96034607
Right. Traveller and Battletech both boil down to "roll 2d6", but neither are exactly light systems.

>>96055397
I really love the integration of 3.x's mechanical assumptions into Eberron. Those mesh in such a tight way that's genuinely one of the most enjoyable ways to play D&D.

>>96055374
I'm talking BRP so get your head out of DH and go read the core
>useless peasant or whatever.
told you that's not an argument
whatever the high bar you consider as still useless bump it up by just one step
now you don't have a mechanical difference with a regular enemy in terms of making an attack roll
but you're still trying to hit someone almost useless
>you have 5 seconds and 80 percent to hit them without overextending yourself and getting hit in return
that would have been a good rationalization but
a) it's not in BRP rules
b) see a
there is nothing about "hitting without overextending and getting hit in return" in the rules
it's just about rolling [the 1st stage] to land an attack
that's it
getting hit in return is your opponents attack roll and has nothing to do with your roll

overall I'm pretty tired of you
not only you rushed in with a non-related ruleset now you are literally making shit up to justify yourself
stop being a disingenuous faggot yourself or gtfo

>>96056307
>not only you rushed in with a non-related ruleset now you are literally making shit up to justify yourself
>stop being a disingenuous faggot yourself or gtfo
You literally are just making up rules for BRP, the de facto cap skill level is 95, since 96-100 always fails.

>buh, 80% skill person fails 20% of the time!!

Yes, that's what 80% skill means. If you want them to fail less of the time, their skill should be higher than 80%.

>96056390
you don't even deserve a (you) for such low effort

>>96057726
A 5e 4th level fighter with a 16 in their relevant stat has a 20% chance to miss a random peasant, are you going to complain about that too?

>>96055236
> why the fuck are you bringing it up in a discussion about BRP?
You were complaining about d100 systems. I don’t know BRP but knew DH so I explained why you were clearly wrong. Now you’ve moved the goal posts.

>>96031767
>this wasn't a planned "stunt" it just happened as the die rolled
Do you mean
>He came up with the idea, then rolled for it
Or
>He rolled to disarm, but succeeded so well that he could perform a lot of follow-up actions and came up with that
?
What’s the resolution process, for something like that?

>>96057886
yes, you are correct, a pretty ok (5 lvl) dnd fighter has a fairly good chance of missing a commoner
however that is not the issue

I understand no one is going to read the entire chain of replies so if you are new here is the point
- in BRB-based systems an attack will trigger 2 rolls
- an initial attack roll which is basically a skill check vs weapon skill
- enemy response such as dodge, parry or whatever

the issues is that in while in DnD the TN for the roll includes the target's efforts to not get hit
in BRP-based systems the initial roll doesn't
and since having even 75% is somewhat a high level (IMO much higher power level compared to dnd 5th lvl) this leads to nonsensical situations where an expert swordsman/marksman has a fairly high chance of missing even before you account for target's efforts to not get hit

tldr;
yeah sure a 5 lvl fighter will have a 20% to miss a commoner, but a much higher power level BRP char will have a 20% chance to miss a commoner BEFORE we even take into account the commoner attempting to avoid getting hit

>>96058617
no, my first post in this chain of replies is about BRP
and it's been specifically about BRP-based systems ever since

>>96062409
>and since having even 75% is somewhat a high level (IMO much higher power level compared to dnd 5th lvl)
Okay, so you just have truly ridiculous norming. A 75% to attack BRP character is absolutely not the same as a fucking 5th level Fighter, who is at the near-absolute limit of human ability IRL, if not beyond it.

>>96030969 (OP)
I am a fan of Worlds/Stars without Number, ACKS, SAKE, and DC20

>>96062411
I said very clearly in my first post I was talking about Dark Heresy. >>96045813
Your fault for continuing to reply. Doesn't seem like you know much about BRP if you got the two confused based on my posts. Or more like you're just pretending not to be talking about warhammer d100 games because you got schooled.

>>96062599
>get into an argument about X
>"well in Y it works as.."
>naturally other parties assumed you know your shit and would only bring up Y if it's directly relevant to X
>"ha-ha it's your faults for not expecting your opponent to be retarded from the start and not knowing every fucking system"
yeah fuck off

>>96062425
disregarding that you are trying to siderail into a pointless discussion on a minor detail ignoring the main point
>a fucking 5th level Fighter, who is at the near-absolute limit of human ability IRL
picrel

>>96062703
>fuck off
When one side of the argument resorts to name calling and moving goal posts you know they've lost. You're grasping at straws and you know it.

>>96062409
my person of african american descent 75% in a skill is around level 2-3. You arent supposed to start below 60-65 in a combat based profession at the start of the game with a 75 being absolutely doable in starting characters.
An 80 percent is very much where a 5th level character in dnd is.
You just have a shit understanding of BRP and other d100 systems because you ve never played them of course

>>96062928
>what is reading comprehension
you are not addressing the main argument

>96062761
>implying calling out == namecalling

personally, I have been recently looking into and experimenting Various space/Sci-fi Systems, trying to find one thats a good fit for my own personal Homebrew Setting.
as of yet I have yet to find one that I consider a good enough fit for my lore/style to use more than just a few times to try out.

though I was looking into one I Just Discovered the Other day Called 'Cepheus Universal' and while I haven't used it yet, I do like the looks of what I have skimmed over.

anyone got much experience with running or using it?

>>96034323
>I like how you can just add or subtract more Fudge dice to a roll to make it swingier or consistent as the GM pleases
Wait, could you quickly brief me on how that work?
Like, if you add dice, you get multiple minuses and pluses, what do you do? You add them all together and subtract the plus to the minus? Or do you only keep + or - depending on which is more numerous?

>>96063213
it's traveller with the serial numbers filed off. Meaning that it's based on the oldest, most popular and influential sci-fi rpg.
I think you ll be fine.

>>96063104
Yeah. The system differentiates the players ability to perform an attack successfully and the opponents defense.
Have you ever tried any martial arts, sports etc?
There are techniques in all those just like a swordstrike in BRP.
If you are unopposed will you succeed perfectly every time at nailing the technique?
No person does. Even the best footballers will miss once in a while even in practice.That's why high numbers of a skill signify great proficiency but dont guarantee automatic success at using a skill.
You know, just like in real life.
If you weren't a brainlet you would have understood that by now

>>96062711
>disregarding that you are trying to siderail into a pointless discussion on a minor detail ignoring the main point
It's not ignoring the main point, your entire argument hinges on the idea that 75% weapon skill BRP character > 5th level Fighter. If 75% weapon skill BRP character is equivalent to (say) 1st level Fighter, then your whining is retarded.

>picrel
https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/587/roleplaying-games/dd-calibrating-your-expectations-2

>>96063478
>entire argument hinges on the idea that 75% weapon skill BRP character > 5th level Fighter.
it doesn't
please work on your reading comprehension

>if 75% weapon skill BRP character is equivalent to (say) 1st level Fighter, then your whining is retarded.
yeah well that would mean there isn't much room for improvement and difference between a character who is just starting out and a world-class best of the best
afaik skills are <= 100% in BRP core rules, and skills >100% are optional
just like with any other poorly designed abstraction, tune one thing, another thing falls apart

>link
>wow! are abstractions fail to represent real world accurately!
it's more of a testament how dnd skill check system is retarded (more news at 11 !!!)
the DnD rulebooks are very clear on what is the powerlevel of this or that character level
no matter the hoops you are going to jump through

>>96064146
>difference between a character who is just starting out and a world-class best of the best is little to none
fixed, accidentally del part right before posting

>>96063112
>Doesn’t even quote me properly to try and get me to go away
Absolutely pathetic

Id love to find a system like kingdom death that let's me play with the group instead of just being forever GM and having to make 40 silly voices every night. I wouldn't care if it was an AI or fucking dwarf fortress at this point, I just want to play for once. Whenever someone else attempts, it's usually a mess to coordinate and the GM gets bored running the game almost immediately. Any suggestions would be great.

>>96067870
Unfortunately it sounds like you need to find a better group or at least expand your social circle a bit and get to know more nerds (ones who are willing to run games). It is very hard to convert the lazy players to solid GMs.

>>96058638
How it went in game:
>Maneuver 1: All-Out attack double + rapid strike. So the player knew he had 3 attacks. He attacked the enemy, with the first strike being a disarm. He succeeded so well in that disarm that rather than just making the enemy drop the weapon, he grabbed it. Then, since he now had a weapon, he used his second attack to shoot the other enemy point blank. And, now that there was only one unarmed enemy, and he was behind that enemy, he could use his last attack to smack the enemy in the back of the head with the butt of the shotgun
So it wasn't planned, as he was doing his attacks, it slowly became a cool cinematic moment.
Same for the second example.
In gurps, you have active defenses, and there's an option in the martial arts book to grab the enemy instead of just deflecting with a parry. It's difficult but the player succeeded, and then since he had a grapple formed when his turn started, he did a takedown, which allowed him to put the enemy on the ground, with his back to him, and with his second attack (in this case it was dual strike because unarmed + gun counts as dual wield) he shot the enemy in the back of the head.
The player wasn't trying to be john wick or tacticool, but it all ended up being really cool.

I kind of want to get genesys to add to my collection, but the dice are ridiculously hard to find. Anyone know a good substitute or where to find them for reasonable prices?

>>96069046
Might not be the answer you want, but the app is free.
The Edge of the Empire starter set is also back in print.

>>96069046
Etsy or blank dice with stickers are pretty much your only options. I made the sticker dice and they look like shit. I didn't even finish the first one. I've only played Genesys online which was fun, we just used the discord dicebot. The app is also free and "works out" the symbols for you.

The star wars dice work just as well but have different symbols. But they mean the same thing. You could use those too.

>>96069089
Thanks, but I am not really a fan of dice apps when I am playing in person. The star wars dice are the same as the genesys ones, right? Those seem to be quite a bit cheaper.

My best-realized campaign in the Year Zero engine. It's become overused now but that's because they know they have a good core. If you had the platonic ideal group, a levels 1-20 AD&D campaign would be the best RPG, in the same way that Campaign for North Africa is the ultimate hex and chit wargame.

>>96067946
If finding another friend group was easier then finding a system for us to play, id agree. Sadly, I kind of love these simple folk. But we did have a blast with kingdom death, and would just love a way for me to have to not run everything all the time. Im just not savvy enough to resin the KD system to fit different narratives

>>96067870
have you heard of our lord and saver solo play?

>>96069235
They aren't exactly the same, I actually think the genesys ones are slightly more readable, but they convey the same information. The star wars sets come with an extra die (the white force die) that I don't think genesys uses.

I keep playing Pathfinder 1e with my player group, despite so many other Pathfinder players moving onto 2e. It's comfy.

Also used to play Palladium/Rifts when I was younger. Might wanna try it again sometime.

>>96069235
They have star wars themed symbols, but work the same. You'll also get a force die, which has been omitted in Genesys (my group still uses them for determining story points) and some story point tokens.
Like with Genesys dice you'll still need three sets.

>>96070581
Took the bait and searched, but googles new AI slop shit literally has no idea what im asking. Is it a system or just the genre your talking about?

Pic related just works for me on every level, and if I need to adjudicate a fresh rule, it's simply as hell to make up on the fly.

>>96070742
>three sets
Jesus! No wonder the game has unfortunately died.

>>96069046
If you want to use the Star Wars dice, pick up any of the starter sets, they come with a set and it is just a few dollars more and come with quickstart guides, tokens and an adventures

>>96067946
I have taught all 4 my players to GM, because it mostly fear of incompetence and commitment. I would teach them through co-GM'ing, talking about the rules/setting and letting them run one-shots with no major commitments. Two of them are now launching their own campaigns that I can play in
It makes you a better player when you understand what goes on behind the screen. I encourage all GMs to teach players to avoid being a Forever GM

>>96030969 (OP)
What’s the most under-appreciated system in your opinion and why?

>>96080030
How about you make your own thread?

>>96067870
>silly voices
I never do. I leave that stuff to the thespians.
t. foreverdm

>>96042550
Keep the rules GM-facing, unless you want to use the opportunity to teach him some simple maths.
Same for the character building: give him a few options, then ask him what he wants to be.
Basically you tell a story and he tells you what he does.
Otherwise:
>roll 1D6
>add your level in the skill (1-3)
>subtract the difficulty (1-3)
>Succeed on a total of 3
>You have 6 point total to put in character creation, spread between 5 abilities and a bunch of skills
There you go, here is a system that's perfect if you want to teach a kid some maths.
>PS: managing equipment is more intuitive than thinking in terms of skills, I think. "Choose between the sword and shield or the spell book" is easier than "do you want to be a warrior or a magician?"

>>96070581
Solo play is terrible.

>>96075078
Solo play is solo roleplaying. As in playing a TTRPG solo. There are multiple ways to go about it, including just picking a regular game and playing on your own with the use of various oracles and generators or picking a game designed specifically to be played alone (or at least without a GM).

>>96075078
There is an entire general about it you moron. >>96062495 I swear AI is making you all fucking retarded.