Low Fantasy RPG?
Argyle King
Legend
As an early opponent of D&D 5th, I'd say it (at least as best I can tell from playing it a few times) seems to be lower than the previous two editions. That being said, I cannot say how it performs beyond level 5 or so; I likewise cannot say how it performs with the full version of the rules.
Now that I have that out of the way, I'll echo GURPS. I'm a big fan of GURPS 4th Edition, and wanting to run low fantasy is a big reason why. As a toolkit system, it can look scary, but the trick is realizing that you're not expected to use every part of the book in the same way you are with something like D&D. You certainly can use every option if you want to, but the idea (I think) behind being a toolkit game is being able to pick and choose what you want to use and get the results you want. For one group the additional rules for bleeding out and losing limbs might be exactly what they want; a different table might not even bother to use hit locations. Both methods are viable ways to play the game.
Another thing I'll point out is that GURPS doesn't have a monster manual in the same way D&D does. This is because -again; as a toolkit system- you're free to define things the way you want. Orcs in my world might look completely different than Orcs in your world, and I have the freedom to build them differently. That being said, there are a lot more pre-made creatures than many people give the system credit for. The Basic Set contains a lot of creatures like horses, dogs, lions, and various other things, and it doesn't take much to reskin a bear into a 'dragon' by giving it some ability to fly and a fiery breath weapon. Other books (none of which are required, but some of which are very nice) also have creatures listed in them. For example, there's an entire book about Zombies. http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/zombies/
There also is the Dungeon Fantasy series which provides both templates that mimic the idea of class and templates for creatures. Though I will say that (in my opinion) Dungeon Fantasy leans at least a little bit toward a more D&Dish style. Though even that can be adjusted, and there's no reason why you cannot still run a low fantasy style game with the materials in DF; I have, and it worked perfectly fine. In particular, if you want to go more of a low fantasy route with Dungeon Fantasy, one of the books provides templates for hirelings and henchmen; simply use that for making PCs. http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/dungeonfantasy/
There are plenty of options. Banestorm is a fantasy setting for GURPS as well, and there are quite a few fan-made resources. There is also a GURPS Fantasy which is helpful, but I'd categorize it more as a DM and setting building book; it deals with the Fantasy genre much in the same way GURPS Horror (which is a fantastic book) deals with the Horror genre. http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/banestorm/
In the end, none of what I mentioned is required at all though. You can run a game with just the basic set if you'd like. That's all that is required. The other suppliments simply add more options and provide a few more pre-worked examples. I know a few people who run games by using mostly GURPS Lite (which is a free pdf) and then just adding a few bits and pieces of the more robust version of the rules found in GURPS Basic Set. http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/lite/
My last piece of advice for GURPS would be that -as the DM- don't worry about building everything with points and knowing exact point totals for every creature. You can build everything point by point if you'd like, but it will likely lead to madness. There's nothing wrong with getting some practice building things to learn the system, but, in the end, it doesn't really matter what exactly Farmer Joe's points total as a character is in most cases. Points aren't necessarily a direct indication of power; in a straight up fight a 100 point warrior will likely kill a 400 point banker. (Though, the banker likely has social advantages which would allow him to hire body guards so as to not be in that situation.)
Now that I have that out of the way, I'll echo GURPS. I'm a big fan of GURPS 4th Edition, and wanting to run low fantasy is a big reason why. As a toolkit system, it can look scary, but the trick is realizing that you're not expected to use every part of the book in the same way you are with something like D&D. You certainly can use every option if you want to, but the idea (I think) behind being a toolkit game is being able to pick and choose what you want to use and get the results you want. For one group the additional rules for bleeding out and losing limbs might be exactly what they want; a different table might not even bother to use hit locations. Both methods are viable ways to play the game.
Another thing I'll point out is that GURPS doesn't have a monster manual in the same way D&D does. This is because -again; as a toolkit system- you're free to define things the way you want. Orcs in my world might look completely different than Orcs in your world, and I have the freedom to build them differently. That being said, there are a lot more pre-made creatures than many people give the system credit for. The Basic Set contains a lot of creatures like horses, dogs, lions, and various other things, and it doesn't take much to reskin a bear into a 'dragon' by giving it some ability to fly and a fiery breath weapon. Other books (none of which are required, but some of which are very nice) also have creatures listed in them. For example, there's an entire book about Zombies. http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/zombies/
There also is the Dungeon Fantasy series which provides both templates that mimic the idea of class and templates for creatures. Though I will say that (in my opinion) Dungeon Fantasy leans at least a little bit toward a more D&Dish style. Though even that can be adjusted, and there's no reason why you cannot still run a low fantasy style game with the materials in DF; I have, and it worked perfectly fine. In particular, if you want to go more of a low fantasy route with Dungeon Fantasy, one of the books provides templates for hirelings and henchmen; simply use that for making PCs. http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/dungeonfantasy/
There are plenty of options. Banestorm is a fantasy setting for GURPS as well, and there are quite a few fan-made resources. There is also a GURPS Fantasy which is helpful, but I'd categorize it more as a DM and setting building book; it deals with the Fantasy genre much in the same way GURPS Horror (which is a fantastic book) deals with the Horror genre. http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/banestorm/
In the end, none of what I mentioned is required at all though. You can run a game with just the basic set if you'd like. That's all that is required. The other suppliments simply add more options and provide a few more pre-worked examples. I know a few people who run games by using mostly GURPS Lite (which is a free pdf) and then just adding a few bits and pieces of the more robust version of the rules found in GURPS Basic Set. http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/lite/
My last piece of advice for GURPS would be that -as the DM- don't worry about building everything with points and knowing exact point totals for every creature. You can build everything point by point if you'd like, but it will likely lead to madness. There's nothing wrong with getting some practice building things to learn the system, but, in the end, it doesn't really matter what exactly Farmer Joe's points total as a character is in most cases. Points aren't necessarily a direct indication of power; in a straight up fight a 100 point warrior will likely kill a 400 point banker. (Though, the banker likely has social advantages which would allow him to hire body guards so as to not be in that situation.)
gamerprinter
Mapper/Publisher
TrippyHippy
Hero
It’s probably quite important to define what is ‘low fantasy’ - insofar that a classic ‘High Fantasy’ is Middle Earth, as it is an entirely fictional world, although the magic levels are generally quite low by comparison to other settings (in The One Ring, for example, you cannot play a Wizard character for canon reasons). Low fantasy in nominally supposed to be that which is set in ‘real world’ settings - whatever that is - but it is quite a loose term.
For me, in any case, the king of gritty low fantasy has always been RuneQuest. It has more elegance and style than GURPS and other generic systems, in my view, and greater emphasis on creativity in both the combat and magic systems provided. The setting material is starting to build up in support of the new edition too - with Mythic Britain being a highly anticipated supplement.
I like the new edition of D&D, but I do view it as a genre unto itself, but RuneQuest is more protean - especially for simulating historical or sword and sorcery literature.
For me, in any case, the king of gritty low fantasy has always been RuneQuest. It has more elegance and style than GURPS and other generic systems, in my view, and greater emphasis on creativity in both the combat and magic systems provided. The setting material is starting to build up in support of the new edition too - with Mythic Britain being a highly anticipated supplement.
I like the new edition of D&D, but I do view it as a genre unto itself, but RuneQuest is more protean - especially for simulating historical or sword and sorcery literature.
Last edited:
Mantriel
Explorer
Yeah I should have specified what I mean under Low Fantasy, I'm not meaning a dark world (like Howard or Glen Cook or whatever), but something semi-realistic. PCs can't fly, or/and don't have demigod abilities like in Dragonball, but rather are like "normal" humans, in a fantasy setting (for example like Ars Magica).
I have just checked Runequest 6 and I'm quite impressed (thank you for the suggestion), the system seems really solid. I have to dig deeper to see if I could use it though (since it seems to be a quite celtic/roman style game).
I am quite intimidated by GURPS, and I don't really see the "good points" yet in it. I usually don't play Sci-Fi (if I do, I usually don't DM/GM, and it is Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5, Warhammer 40k or some such brand, where the system is not really relevant but the campaign setting is the main focus).
I flipped through Rolemaster (SS and FRP) and I see there is a ton of harvestable stuff in it. (It is basically the best parts of D&D3 for me, but with an AD&D flavour).
-
I think D&D5 will have the same problem for me as 3, 3.5 and Pathfinder did. I really don't like the high fantasy, grid based, tactical min/maxing style they offered, and I think D&D5 (although it will be modular in design), still looks like a power-gaming, "feat obsessed", prestige class heavy system (mainly focused on high fantasy, grid based, tactical min/maxing), I sure hope I'm wrong, but my favourite 2 WotC RPG authors already have left the ship (Monte Cook and James Wyatt), so I'm quite sure this game won't be my cup of tee. Sadly. But I guess I have to wait for the DMG to decide.
-
I checked Fate, although it looks fun, I think I still prefer rules heavy games. Dunno why.
-
Thank you guys!
I have just checked Runequest 6 and I'm quite impressed (thank you for the suggestion), the system seems really solid. I have to dig deeper to see if I could use it though (since it seems to be a quite celtic/roman style game).
I am quite intimidated by GURPS, and I don't really see the "good points" yet in it. I usually don't play Sci-Fi (if I do, I usually don't DM/GM, and it is Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5, Warhammer 40k or some such brand, where the system is not really relevant but the campaign setting is the main focus).
I flipped through Rolemaster (SS and FRP) and I see there is a ton of harvestable stuff in it. (It is basically the best parts of D&D3 for me, but with an AD&D flavour).
-
I think D&D5 will have the same problem for me as 3, 3.5 and Pathfinder did. I really don't like the high fantasy, grid based, tactical min/maxing style they offered, and I think D&D5 (although it will be modular in design), still looks like a power-gaming, "feat obsessed", prestige class heavy system (mainly focused on high fantasy, grid based, tactical min/maxing), I sure hope I'm wrong, but my favourite 2 WotC RPG authors already have left the ship (Monte Cook and James Wyatt), so I'm quite sure this game won't be my cup of tee. Sadly. But I guess I have to wait for the DMG to decide.
-
I checked Fate, although it looks fun, I think I still prefer rules heavy games. Dunno why.
-
Thank you guys!
I guess that explains your choice of Rolemaster, then! (a game system I consider unplayable - although that didn't stop me from buying quite a few books for the system...)
Mantriel
Explorer
TrippyHippy
Hero
Happy to make the recommendation of RuneQuest 6, and you’ll note that the ‘Essential Rules’ (an abbreviated 200 page version of the full game) is basically available for free on Drivethru (pay what you want).
It is worth noting, however, that 5E has quite definitely moved away from grid-based combat in the default game. It will always be a Class/Level system though - which generally progresses towards power gaming of a degree in one way or another.
RuneQuest, on the other hand, tends to have a much more significant drive towards authentic simulation at its heart. It was originally designed for the Glorantha setting - a very detailed setting with a bronze age sensibility. It is pretty much adaptable to anything though… and was Jonathon Tweet’s major influence before he made 3rd Edition apparently.
Shadows Of Esteren - it is an ENnies award winner - dark horror fantasy
Iron Kingdoms - another ENines winner -
Iron Kingdoms - another ENines winner -
Last edited:
Mantriel
Explorer
I have known Iron kingdoms (I'm a Monte Cook and Mike Mearls fan), but "Steampunkish" fantasy isn't my style.
But Shadows of Esteren looks to be amazing. Thank you for the suggestion!
How come I've never heard of it. Well, I guess I'm not reading the right blogs.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
