Quote from: Teodrik;1007235Standard D20/3.x/Pathfinder. TSR D&D, OSR, 5e, 4e, 13th Age all work out for me relatively well.  But I totally brainlock at 3.x and can't grasp it. "Ohh it is so simple.
Just add relevant modfiers to and d20 and roll over or equal to DC." No its not (fucking liar...) . Conan d20, CoC d20 and Midnight to name a few games that look very solid and appealing.  But I just can't make the commitment.

I completely get what you're saying, though for me it appears as 1st edition AD&D is having that effect on myself. I'm reading the armor/weapon tables - matrices and I'm pretty baffled. Coming from 3rd Edition/d20 system as a base, and looking at my *newly rolled* 1st level Paladin I can see that I don't do very much on the attack side. I have a Strength of 15 (woot!) and in 3e and 5e that would be pretty good (+2 to attack, damage) yet in 1st Edition......yea I can carry some heavier stuff I think. Does this affect damage? If I roll a d20 (and get say an 11) do I add anything from Str 15 at 1st level? At 4th level?

This isn't a judgement call about the system, I'm intrigued by it and I want to learn to play older versions, as it adds perspective (and I enjoy the fact that it's the version they use in Stranger Things) but just sitting down and reading the books doesn't necessarily equate to clarity of learning the system, haha.

Exalted. Falls under "setting is gibberish" to me. I think there's something there, but every time someone tries to explain it to me I just don't get it.

Chageling the Dreaming. So many problems, both in theme, metaphysics, and setting. The entire reincarnation thing is a big flop and should have been edited out in draft stage. The game can't decide on thematic central conflict; is it wonder vs banality? Seelie vs unseelie? Both vs the shadow court? Commoners vs nobles? The whole thing is a sloppy mess, probably the result of too many writers.

Quote from: Batman;1007254I completely get what you're saying, though for me it appears as 1st edition AD&D is having that effect on myself. I'm reading the armor/weapon tables - matrices and I'm pretty baffled. Coming from 3rd Edition/d20 system as a base, and looking at my *newly rolled* 1st level Paladin I can see that I don't do very much on the attack side. I have a Strength of 15 (woot!) and in 3e and 5e that would be pretty good (+2 to attack, damage) yet in 1st Edition......yea I can carry some heavier stuff I think. Does this affect damage? If I roll a d20 (and get say an 11) do I add anything from Str 15 at 1st level? At 4th level?

  That's a no to both. On the broader point, see if you can find some cheap 2nd Edition books. The rules are 90% identical, but the 2E presentation is considerably clearer for most people trying to learn the rules. Once you feel you've got a handle on them, go back to 1st Edition for differences and the older 'feel'. (I personally prefer the tone and feel of 2nd Edition, but that's a matter of taste.)

  Note that I started the game in a group using the 1E Player's Handbook and the 2E DMG, so I may have had the worst of all possible worlds.

No. I can't think of any.

Quote from: Batman;1007254I completely get what you're saying, though for me it appears as 1st edition AD&D is having that effect on myself. I'm reading the armor/weapon tables - matrices and I'm pretty baffled. Coming from 3rd Edition/d20 system as a base, and looking at my *newly rolled* 1st level Paladin I can see that I don't do very much on the attack side. I have a Strength of 15 (woot!) and in 3e and 5e that would be pretty good (+2 to attack, damage) yet in 1st Edition......yea I can carry some heavier stuff I think. Does this affect damage? If I roll a d20 (and get say an 11) do I add anything from Str 15 at 1st level? At 4th level?

This isn't a judgement call about the system, I'm intrigued by it and I want to learn to play older versions, as it adds perspective (and I enjoy the fact that it's the version they use in Stranger Things) but just sitting down and reading the books doesn't necessarily equate to clarity of learning the system, haha.

You should try out either Moldvay Basic/Expert or Mentzer Basic-Expert(red&blue boxes) and treat anything AD&D as a supplement of spells, classes and monsters. Runs a lot smoother and is  more mechanically tight. Thats seems a how a substantial number of people actually played in the old TSR days. Ignoring the more wonky stuff in the AD&D core rules.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1007260Note that I started the game in a group using the 1E Player's Handbook and the 2E DMG, so I may have had the worst of all possible worlds.

Well at least you HAD rules books . I learned playing from the D&D Adventure Game box set which was the last a 2ed AD&D introductionary product for new players. Problem was that it did not have rules for making characters and very few spells. So I had to use Baldurs Gate/Icewind Dale PC games to roll up characters and look in the game manual for spells. Save the character and use cheat codes to level up so I could get the stats for next level. Funny thing is that it worked surprisingly well.

But yeah... 2ed PHB + 1ed DMG and 1ed MM (not so keen on the wordy echology write-ups in 2ed MM) would be my preference for AD&D.

Quote from: Moracai;1007176Fate and Apocalypse World. Aspects and stupid mechanics that force the GM to do something do not do anything for me.

This is why I like really like Fudge/Fate games.

If it helps, just think of Aspects as situational modifiers for skills, and attributes checks. The players have a pool of resources known as Fate Points which they can spend to apply new situational modifiers (Named conveniently, Aspects), ...for just about any situation. The GM begins the game describing the situational aspects already in play that will affect random dice rolls.

The players can use their Fate Points to heroically and dramatically escape certain death, or otherwise spin a situation or encounter into their favor, and the GM can also, at any point in time create new Aspects and apply new challenges including random encounters, escalating or deescalating conflicts, or to introduce a new plot twist. Each time the GM spins the game about thusly, he has to give away new Fate Point to one or more players, who can then use such points to alter play. This mainatins balance for the game as a whole.

This is actually a very nice mechanic for speeding up gameplay, for maintaining pacing, and so that players can get the game moving if it stalls or drags on. Fudge/Fate games are high-octane games characterized by heroism, drama, with speedy combat and conflict resolution, and features multiple plot twists. It has alot going for it as a really fun RPG if you happen to like games featuring many cliffhangers, and high adventure.

Quote from: GameDaddy;1007288Fudge/Fate games are high-octane games characterized by heroism, drama, with speedy combat and conflict resolution, and features multiple plot twists. It has alot going for it as a really fun RPG if you happen to like games featuring many cliffhangers, and high adventure.

This sounds great as an idea, but are there any write-ups, actual play podcasts/vids, etc that show those new to it how to achieve that kind of play?  I tried to grok it with SOTC but never played.

The Internet Provides:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=537ltZR7K28

I have one game on my shelf, I just haven't played. Caeron 3000

Published by Thomas Scott in 2003 this is a Sci-Fantasy game that I really tried to like, but just couldn't. It's a d20 game with Humans, and seven other playable alien races. In addition to all the stats and math you have for d20, they added even more numbers wanking, Like, for example Skill Affinity, which means that rate you advance your skill ranks are modified by what race you are. You also have skills caps based on race There are also secondary attributes Health, Stamina, and Mana. There's Cybernetics, which is not integrated as part of skills, but has its own separate rules mechanics, and ditto that for Psionics as well. Then we have Spells, on top of everything else. In game players in addition to taking various types of damage in conflicts may have to make morale checks, and if they fail, the GM or other players get to control what the player does. I'm almost 100% against such meta-gaming mechanics, and only with great reluctance allow fear spells and other similar effects into my fantasy games because of the high probability that such mechanics will get abused by the players. There's Attribute checks, skills checks, ability checks, and observation checks. This is a book with 168 pages, but only about twenty or so are directly applicable to the game setting as background or to help with adventure generation, ...the rest is pure mechanics.

Quote from: flyingmice;1007277No. I can't think of any.

I'll have to think of something, cartoon housewives with a scoring system where you win based on innuendo and lose on coming out and actually saying things.  Gossip Queens.  The game uses a mixing spoon, a spatula, and a toilet brush as randomizers much like drawing lots to see who gets which task.  

More seriously KABAL and MISSION never made sense to me nor did Man Myth and Magic.  The rules were just a mess and we figured out Timeship.  Good grief, who thought Timeship was a good idea?  Lee Gold's Lands of Adventure, calculate the leverage force of your weapon based on its length and your one handed load.  Okay actually that's one I want a copy of, so sue me, Gold had some interesting ideas on magic and miracles and the mythic Greece and King Arthur settings weren't bad.

I don't hate Shadowrun or anything, but I never "Got" it. Wasn't the whole point of Cyberpunk as a genre that it's a more "Realistic" view of the future? So then you add elves and magic to it?

I don't think I will ever get Champions/Hero as the system is just way too complicated for my tastes. Maybe you had to grow up with it or something. Not sure I really get RIFTS either.

I also don't get how fans of both Fate or Apocalypse World are sold on the idea that they are most innovative games ever, when most of the ideas within have been around for donkey's years. Having said that, I've no issue with actually playing them.

Other Suns: There are some really odd maths needed during chargen. Its also a bit obtuse in chargen.

Avalon Hills Standard Edition RuneQuest: freaking hell the rules are organized in the worst way possible.

Gurps: Something about the organization of this one too keeps adding an extra barrier to getting into it.

d20m Gamma World: Where to begin with this train wreck. Incomplete rules, literally broken rules, obtuse rules, abusable rules, etc ad nausium.

Probably others.

Eoris Essence. Beautiful game, robust rule set. Setting is the worst philosophical gibberish I've ever read. It's almost like it was written by someone who'd read Philosophy 101 for Dummies while free basing acid and then wrote the setting mythology based on the resulting trip.

Anything by White Wolf or Palladium, Fate.
I find the mechanics lacking and the settings boring.