D&D General Besides Nimble, are there other stripped down versions of 5e...

[Scurvy_Platypus]

It might be helpful for you to define "stripped down". Lots of folks think that simply cutting it from level 20 down to 10 (or whatever their pet level limit is) is "stripped down"; I personally wouldn't however.

Nimble gets bandied about a bunch but it's actually two different things, at least as I'm aware. Nimble (or Nimble 1e) is a set of hack to apply to 5e to speed things up

Nimble 2e actually has its own specific rules and as such, it's moving into an alternate (albeit very close) ruleset that's simplified.

And then of course you'll have everything offering up their favorite alternate 5e ruleset, which will be claimed to be simplified but... I think that's going to be quite subjective without specific examples showing in what fashion the rule(s) were "simplified".

The "no subclasses" suggestion for example... is that actually simplified? And, if it does count, are people really going to be fine with single-class types, ala 3.x?

Depending on what exactly you're looking to achieve (simplicity from less options vs simplicity from altered rules vs something else) Nimble 2e might be a good base to start from, followed up conscious selections of rules from something like the Black Flag SRD. I say "conscious selections" as I think you want to be like a conscious consumer... not necessarily rejecting everything outright, rather having a clear idea of exactly what it is you're willing to have and not have.

 

[zakael19]

Glad to see folks excited about Moldvay! If anyone has any questions about it feel free to hit me up here.

I’ll be honest, I didn’t get a super good grasp on how the Ranks work when taking into account positioning and abilities that move you around zones. Eg: if I use the elvish teleport ability, what does it mean if I move within the “area?” Or the dragon solo who can easily pop between zones?

 

[jdrakeh]

It might be helpful for you to define "stripped down". Lots of folks think that simply cutting it from level 20 down to 10 (or whatever their pet level limit is) is "stripped down"; I personally wouldn't however.

Complete in 50 pages or less, I suppose. I think I found a system that is really stripped down 5e.

 

[mearls]

I’ll be honest, I didn’t get a super good grasp on how the Ranks work when taking into account positioning and abilities that move you around zones. Eg: if I use the elvish teleport ability, what does it mean if I move within the “area?” Or the dragon solo who can easily pop between zones?

I think the way I wrote it needs some work. Here's how it should work:

• Are there enemies in the area you are moving into? Pick front or back rank. If you are by yourself, you are always in the front.
• No enemies? No need to track it.

If enemies are in your area it can get tricky. When you move, you can:

• Move to a different area, as long as your enemies are not blocking the path
• Move to a different rank in your area

The trick is that teleport allows you to move through enemies. It also lets you avoid obstacles.

I think it'll come together as I start publishing adventures. The trick is to err on the side of creating more areas rather than trying to fit several terrain features into one area. As example, a cave with a chasm running down the middle should be three areas - west side, chasm, and east side. For a while I tried to make it one area, and I think the rules still need to adjust.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

Complete in 50 pages or less, I suppose. I think I found a system that is really stripped down 5e.

Interesting. There's a slightly altered version from a couple of months later here: https://legacy.drivethrurpg.com/product/510669/One-Page-D20-Minimalist-Fantasy-Roleplaying

Given your stipulation, this might also work for you:

https://legacy.drivethrurpg.com/product/509850/Solo-5e--Quickstart--Tables

There really is something to be said for starting from the ground and building your way up with careful and deliberate additions.

 

[Reynard]

Nimble 2e actually has its own specific rules and as such, it's moving into an alternate (albeit very close) ruleset that's simplified.

I don't even know if that's true. "Damage on a miss" isn't inherently "simpler" that a hit roll.

 

[zakael19]

I think the way I wrote it needs some work. Here's how it should work:

• Are there enemies in the area you are moving into? Pick front or back rank. If you are by yourself, you are always in the front.
• No enemies? No need to track it.

If enemies are in your area it can get tricky. When you move, you can:

• Move to a different area, as long as your enemies are not blocking the path
• Move to a different rank in your area

The trick is that teleport allows you to move through enemies. It also lets you avoid obstacles.

I think it'll come together as I start publishing adventures. The trick is to err on the side of creating more areas rather than trying to fit several terrain features into one area. As example, a cave with a chasm running down the middle should be three areas - west side, chasm, and east side. For a while I tried to make it one area, and I think the rules still need to adjust.

Ok, that makes sense - His Majesty the Worm’s battle zones are like that, I think the author uses the decks of a ship as his analogy.

 

[darjr]

Complete in 50 pages or less, I suppose. I think I found a system that is really stripped down 5e.

Oh! Tasha is a friend of mine! I'm an idiot for not pointing this out. She's got a lot of small light RPGs.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

I don't even know if that's true. "Damage on a miss" isn't inherently "simpler" that a hit roll.

Errr... which is true? Nimble 2e having its own rules/procedures as opposed to the first version, which has more of a hack to the 5e rules?

Or the question as to whether or not "Damage on a miss" is simpler?

As for the first, I'm only going based on what I've been able to see. I haven't bought Nimble since these days, I'm finding 5e in general to be repeating the shotgun slop of the 3.x era where everyone and their cousin was spamming 3.x products. It's too tiring for me to even begin to contemplate trying to keep up with and my new health problems mean I can't devote my time to system mastery like I used to.

As far as whether or not "Damage on a miss" is simpler... that's what I mean by JDrakeh being more explicit in what he was looking for. I agree that simplicity, much like "balance" is very much in the eye of the beholder and situational. I don't consider limiting levels to inherently be "simpler" and/or stripping down of complexity... but others clearly due, given that they offered it as a solution.

As a former interpreter and current writer for the government, I find it useful to try and be as clear as possible in laying out the (perceived) problem, to ensure that proposed solutions match as best as possible. Tends to work well on forums too, although it does tend to result in my appearing a bit pedantic.

Oh and while "Damage on a miss" may or may not be simpler... I find that "players roll all the dice" is simpler (overall) to my way of thinking. Might just be a perception issue but I like it on both side of the screen. So, sometimes something might be simpler more because of a way of reframing, rather than a distinct rule "change". I mean, it's kind of a rule change but functionally not really so... YMMV.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

Ok, that makes sense - His Majesty the Worm’s battle zones are like that, I think the author uses the decks of a ship as his analogy.

I personally like "zones" as a way to abstract out the encounter area. I tend to do Theatre of the Mind when I run combats, regardless of system. It can get a bit tricky though with D&D-based games, given its love of more precision. Not insurmountable but tricker.

Definitely a space where "rulings not rules" applies and you need to make sure your group is on-board for it. But nice when they are.