Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;445672The source of 5' steps is unknown to me, though the same thread with CS' post above I think discusses either Champions or the Rules Cyclopedia for Basic as possible sources.

The origin of the 5' steps, may very well be from using miniatures at the game table.  Ideally one wants most or all of the combat action to be on the table.

For example, magic missile has a range of 150' for a level 1 magic-user in the Mentzer basic D&D box set.  So on a scale of one step representing a 5' length, the range of a magic missile is 30 steps.  On a table with 1" representing one step, 30 steps would be almost the length of a yardstick on a table.

Quote from: Eugene;445687Like some others, I loved the Earthdawn game.  It wasn't perfect, but it had so many great -ideas-.  A great in-game reason for dungeons, the Horrors, magic items that got better as you did rather than the D&D model of dumping old items for new, etc.

Well, as a GM, and a player, I've never been bog on magic items.
The in game rational for dungeons is defintely cool- but more as an over all concept (i.e. you can have an in game rational for dungeons) than the specific execution, imo.

Quote from: ggroy;445696The origin of the 5' steps, may very well be from using miniatures at the game table.  Ideally one wants most or all of the combat action to be on the table.

For example, magic missile has a range of 150' for a level 1 magic-user in the Mentzer basic D&D box set.  So on a scale of one step representing a 5' length, the range of a magic missile is 30 steps.  On a table with 1" representing one step, 30 steps would be almost the length of a yardstick on a table.

I don't think he was referring to the use of a grid ruled in 5' squares, but the actual rule about 5' steps in d20 combat.

Can you people not shut up about D&D for two seconds?

I really don't think it qualifies for the title of the thread, especially not on this site.

Anyway, back on topic, I've always kind of wanted to check out The Dark Eye, ever since I played the Drakensang game on PC.  It was a really nifty CRPG, with a very old-school tabletop feel to it, and an intriguing setting.

I know a couple of our local Germans rail against it as if it were the Devil's own RPG, but it seemed pretty nifty to me.

I've got a copy of the Fanpro translation in PDF, I just haven't gotten around to reading it just yet.

Quote from: KenHR;445729I don't think he was referring to the use of a grid ruled in 5' squares, but the actual rule about 5' steps in d20 combat.

This 5' step rule looks kinda like shifting in 4E D&D.

Quote from: J Arcane;445736Can you people not shut up about D&D for two seconds?

I really don't think it qualifies for the title of the thread, especially not on this site.

Anyway, back on topic, I've always kind of wanted to check out The Dark Eye, ever since I played the Drakensang game on PC.  It was a really nifty CRPG, with a very old-school tabletop feel to it, and an intriguing setting.

I know a couple of our local Germans rail against it as if it were the Devil's own RPG, but it seemed pretty nifty to me.

I've got a copy of the Fanpro translation in PDF, I just haven't gotten around to reading it just yet.

Well, we were talking about Earthdawn, which you can't really discuss without talking about D&D, because it was targeted at D&D players and designed to fix D&D. Really it was.

Quote from: Aos;445747Well, we were talking about Earthdawn, which you can't really discuss without talking about D&D, because it was targeted at D&D players and designed to fix D&D. Really it was.

And what about the latest outburst of rabbinic navelgazing over the historical development of D&D 3.0 design concepts?

What does the history of the 5' step have to do with "underrated fantasy RPGs"?

Quote from: J Arcane;445760And what about the latest outburst of rabbinic navelgazing over the historical development of D&D 3.0 design concepts?

What does the history of the 5' step have to do with "underrated fantasy RPGs"?

I have no idea; I was merely speaking of my own "contribution."

Quote from: J Arcane;445760And what about the latest outburst of rabbinic navelgazing over the historical development of D&D 3.0 design concepts?

What does the history of the 5' step have to do with "underrated fantasy RPGs"?

Conversations drift.  I'm sorry to have contributed to your rising blood pressure, J, but for my part I was only trying to correct someone's misinterpretation of a previous post.

On the original thread topic of Underrated RPGs, I probably should mention mention SenZar. This one used to get a huge amount of hate on RPGnet as worst game ever, but its actually not bad IMHO. I think jrients said on his blog (I'll paraphrase here), 'prior to 3E, the single tightest design on the market for killing things and taking their stuff'. I think I'd agree. Its a very high-powered system where races and classes are all 'metalled up' a bit from regular Tolkien styles, a neat HP/power power equivalence system for spells, interesting coinage and tons of weapon materials. Not bad art, provided you don't mind extra cheesecake.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;445882Not bad art, provided you don't mind extra cheesecake.

I insist on it, actually.

Just back from a convention, so posting a bit late. Lots of love for TFT, SwordBearer and Dragonquest. Also really enjoyed Lace and Steel. I thought it did a good job of capturing the swashbuckler vibe and mixing it with fantasy settings.

I agree that DragonQuest was (is) underrated.  (I still have my copy, and read the section on demons occasionally for inspiration.)

Did anyone else ever play a FRPG called Thieves' Guild (by Gamelords)?  It essentially is an AD&D variant, but I liked some of the ideas it offered for running a 'thieves only' fantasy campaign.  I actually ran a sporadic campaign in the distant past (in the city 'Haven'), and it was surprisingly fun.

Quote from: J Arcane;445736Anyway, back on topic, I've always kind of wanted to check out The Dark Eye, ever since I played the Drakensang game on PC.  It was a really nifty CRPG, with a very old-school tabletop feel to it, and an intriguing setting. (...) I've got a copy of the Fanpro translation in PDF, I just haven't gotten around to reading it just yet.

TDE's main draw has always been the world rather than the ruleset, so I'd strongly recommend getting World of Aventurica. The (English) game's website is sadly now defunct, but can be accessed here.

That apart, I'd recommend this online resource, which contains all the cartography. It's an interactive atlas, so you click on a certain area on the world map. Then a small close up opens, click again, and you got an image of the region. E.g., here's Orkland; or Thorwal, home of the vikings. Speaking of whom, heading over to this part of the same address, you got a drop down list of Aventuria character names. Click "Thorwalsche Namen" on the drop down list, and you can download a generated PDF.

And oh, from my (Euro-centric) point of view it's a tad ironic to complain about others speaking about D&D in this thread, only to mention the game that famously outstripped D&D in commercial success around my parts of the world.

I'd put in a vote for Lords of Creation, and also Mercenaries, Spies & Private Eyes.

LoC was designed by Tom Moldvay of basic D&D fame, and is a joyous, over the top, slightly crazy game, backed up by a great series of equally crazy and OTT Moldvay modules. Old school, in a fantastic way.

MSPE was designed by Michael Stackpole, and is rather more serious in tone and content than LoC, but is none the less a brilliantly written book with lots of extremely useful information on running games in the genres it covers.

Both are games I'm pleased to have in my collection, and would never part with.