I know, right, what the heck! There's too many. And those that people suggest here, I look into, and don't work for me. Why would I "try them" anyway if I can tell from the mechanics, theme, jist, etc. that I won't like them?
Because you might like them.
OK, I hope this isn't insulting but my mother likes to frequently remind me of the time I was about 18 months old and I refused to eat ice cream until my dad literally shoved his cone into my face. Then he had to get a new cone for himself because I ended up liking it too much to give it back. We have a large photo of me with ice cream all over my face because of that incident.
Plus, well, are you playing with friends or with strangers? If you're playing with friends, then even if you're not fond of the theme you may still enjoy the interactions. I do
not like the Forgotten Realms. At all. I wish they'd stay forgotten. I consider it the dullest and dumbest of all the D&D settings. I'm currently in an FR game that I love because the characters are great, the GM has a great story going on, and I have fun RPing with my friends.
Maybe reading a game's rules leaves you cold. That doesn't mean you won't actually like playing it.
Well, not "perfect" certainly, but what I enjoy, yes. There are elements of AD&D that d20 systems have simplified, sort of borrowing from B/X, like ability modifiers, which I prefer to AD&D's ability tables. There are sacred cows for AD&D (or D&D in general) which I would kill off in my ideal system, like ability scores and CON mod to HP at every level. Some stuff from 2E is definite improvements from 1E, like initiative.
1. Tolkien-like. (I don't mind a couple "extra" races, but not the cantina scene many players seem to like where you can have any race at all practically.)
2. Limited player options as far as features, powers, etc. are concerned.
3. THAC0 (lol just kidding! I am fine with Ascending AC... I just couldn't resist throwing that in due to prior discussions in the thread.)
4. Class disparity. MUs begin weak, end strong, for example. You don't need balance everywhere--in fact, it is best if everything has a cost vs. gain weights. (One reason why I like item attunement in 5E, I just think too many basic things require attunement...).
It's weird, because there are tons of games I can think of that fit these requirements exactly. To me, it just seems like you're OK with AD&D being, I dunno, 75% perfect but not OK with other games being 90% perfect. You've "looked into" these games, but have you
played them?
Like, you mention Savage Worlds, since that's actually the only game on your list above I've read and played. You can pick and choose what races to allow since none of them are standard. There are all sorts of costs you can add to casting spells. It technically doesn't have limited options since it's a generic system, but PCs are going to be spending most of their points on improving skills or stats; they're not going to be buying a ton of abilities and certainly aren't going to have tons of magic. Heck, even a dedicated caster may only end up with a dozen or so spells.
Obviously, neither I nor anyone else can
force you to play, but if you're not willing to take a no-thank-you bite of another system, then, well, you
will have to fall back on your other hobbies.
