Left out by rules-lite RPGs?

[bento]

You should hunt down a copy of "Unearthed Arcana" by WoTC. It's filled with all sorts of houserules you can add to their D20 system.

You want 3 basic classes like True20? Page 76 - Generic Classes
You want to simplify weapon feats? Page 94 - Weapon Group Feats
You want a couple of different spell systems? Starts on page 153 - Spell Points and Recharge Magic

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000

I still think you should give True20 a look. Just ignore some of the modern stuff that pops up. Anything you want to keep from D&D 3.5 you can easily port over.

 

[zakon]

How 'bout Kobolds ate my baby? It may not be serious, I haven't played it, but from what I hear it's simple.

 

[seskis281]

I think the gist of all this is that you were hoping there was something out there you just hadn't heard of - certainly everyone likes to push the systems they use, but most of the suggestions aren't going to fit what you really want.

I am a C&C guy, but I can clearly recognize it's not your cup of tea (I would say to the poster who intimated that any system that players tweak must be flawed is off-base - is there anyone out there who's EVER run a game without house rules and their own adjustments?) So even though I am an apostle of the system, I'd have to disagree that your better starting with it.

Rather, try to find others like you (start a thread) and put together an e-mail campaign to the guys at Wizards. Until then, use your 3.x material and make the best:

1. Make all magic users sorcerers.

2. Dump all the combat stuff you don't like and make your own simplified system.

3. Bundle your skills into some basic skill categories.

As you said and I agree, your stuck in that hole between two sides of an RPG publishing world. Until just recently, those of us who are now devotees of C&C were in the same boat till TLG developed that game for our tastes. Start that thread I mentioned, and if WotC doesn't respond make a list of other companies publishing under the OGL and push for it (although that could change if Wizards themselves drastically change their system for 4.0, which is the rumor).

Again, best of luck!

John Maddog Wright

 

[jmucchiello]

Rather, I'm commenting on the fact that the existing rules-lite solutions all alter the game's flavor from default D&D. I'm asking why there is no rules-lite system that tries to preserve the default flavor, and if I'm the only person who would be interested in such a system. seskis281 put it best with his "D&D Medium" idea.

You haven't really been clear on what is the essential flavor you don't want to lose. You don't like spell preparation which to me a keystone to being a D&D game. You want less tactical combat. there are many people who play 3.x without figures and maps and they have no problems handwaving the tactical aspects of the game. I gave you another suggestion for simplifying combat. How about giving us a rough outline of what your holy grail would look like so we can better search for a solution?

I've played "D&D" with the HERO system rules and I've played "D&D" with home brewed narrative rules. D&D is elves and half-orcs and dungeon crawls and spellcasting dragons and ghouls and carrion crawlers and retired 30th level fighters who now run the local pub and the damsel in the dungeon is succubus. Any RPG can support what I call D&D because D&D is just a style of fantasy RPG. So, could you be more specific about what you are looking for? Because I don't think I've ever played any edition of D&D by all of the RAW and yet for over 25 years I've been playing D&D.

 

[riprock]

I've been looking at the various rules-lite D20 variants, but repeatedly find that my desires aren't catered to by any of them. My basic dilemma is this: I want (modern) D&D, just simpler.

To clarify, I want to play D&D, not another RPG. That means I'm looking for a system that approximates D&D's genre and flavor. I'm not interested in generic systems, because I like to have my system reflect (as least somewhat) my genre. True20 fails the "too generic" test.

I only ever played older versions of D&D briefly; I have no particular interest in emulating them. I like D&D's flavor and "feel" as it is now, I just wish it were a bit simpler. That rules out Castles and Crusades.

Are there no systems that cater to my needs? Am I the only one who wants these things? If not, I think this is a real hole in the market that some enterprising publisher could do well off exploiting.

What do you think?

Hobbyists tend to add a lot of freeware to the market, so I doubt it's really a market niche.

I would suggest choosing the players who you think add a lot to your games. Show them a few D&D books (I would start with Basic D&D in the red Erol Otus box, and the AD&D corebooks). Ask them, "Okay, team, what is the real D&D flavor? How do we get the maximum fun with the minimum headache?"

 

[Hussar]

I think a lot of people are mistaking my intent in posting this little rant. I know how I can modify the existing system to suit me. I'm not asking for advice on how to change the system.

Rather, I'm commenting on the fact that the existing rules-lite solutions all alter the game's flavor from default D&D. I'm asking why there is no rules-lite system that tries to preserve the default flavor, and if I'm the only person who would be interested in such a system. seskis281 put it best with his "D&D Medium" idea.

There are rules lighter systems out there that preserve the flavour.

I would go with, as Riprock said, Basic DnD or 2e if you want the flavour without the crunch.

 

[Dragonhelm]

Rather, I'm commenting on the fact that the existing rules-lite solutions all alter the game's flavor from default D&D. I'm asking why there is no rules-lite system that tries to preserve the default flavor, and if I'm the only person who would be interested in such a system. seskis281 put it best with his "D&D Medium" idea.

It all depends on what you consider "D&D flavor" to be. If y ou take a hundred D&D players and ask them, they'll all tell you something different.

I could see that argument with True20. C&C, though, has tons of D&D flavor, though it might be said that it has tons of AD&D flavor with some 3e thrown in. In some ways, I think C&C is more D&D than what the current edition is.

If the flavor you're looking for is d20 flavor, then that might be a different scenario altogether. Personally, I think there should be a D&D rules system that is somewhere between C&C and 3.5. A basic D&D game should be out there for people who want a combat-light system. But I digress...

Oh, on the magic thing, I tend to agree with the idea of going with spontaneous spellcasters like the sorcerer. Check into Dragonlance's mystic for the divine counterpart. It gets a domain, so you could use that with any number of gods.

You may also look into the spells readied mechanic in Arcana Evolved. Essentially, you can still learn spells like a wizard, though you prepare a limited number of them per day. The ones you prepare can be cast in any order you like.

I've done research into all sorts of rules-lite systems, and really, there isn't any single all-encompassing idea. My advice is to take a close look at C&C, then port over the things you want to keep. It's a great system.

 

[resistor]

I'm totally aware that nobody will ever make my personal holy grail of a system. I accept that. But I'm somewhat concerned that nobody seems to try to address general *area* that my personal holy grail system would be in.

I've seen Unearthed Arcana, and it has some very good things in it. I would love it if WotC produced more UA-type books. I think they're a good way to address side-interests like mine and others. Plus, they can throw bones to more than one group per book.

I haven't looked over the D&D Basic Game, but I somewhat resent the feeling that my group would need to "graduate" to full D&D in order to play past a certain point (4th level?).

Certainly nobody will ever agree on exactly what defines "D&D flavor." What defines it for me may be quite different from what defines it for you. But, as far as I'm aware, nobody has simply taken D&D 3.5e and just tried to make it simpler. It's always make it simpler with an old-school feel or make it simpler and genre-neutral. Nobody has tried making a simpler system without a secondary design goal as well.

It would probably be quite hard, but I know that there are some very talented designers out there. So if any of you are reading the thread, this is my challenge to you: design me D&D 3.5e, but simpler. The more compatible with "official" D&D in terms of flavor (of core assumptions, of archetypes, of "feel") the better.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I haven't looked over the D&D Basic Game, but I somewhat resent the feeling that my group would need to "graduate" to full D&D in order to play past a certain point (4th level?).

Do you mean classic D&D (i.e. the old basic/expert/etc boxed sets)? If so, then no, you can get the Rules Cyclopedia, which goes from 1st through 36th level. If you're talking about the 3E basic game, then I don't know -- I've never looked at it.

Actually, what you're wanting sounds like what I'm advocating for 4E in the "attacks of opportunity" thread. That is, that the core rules be simplified, with some things like grid-based tactical rules included as options, rather than assumed and built into the system.

 

[Dragonhelm]

But, as far as I'm aware, nobody has simply taken D&D 3.5e and just tried to make it simpler. It's always make it simpler with an old-school feel or make it simpler and genre-neutral. Nobody has tried making a simpler system without a secondary design goal as well.

I totally agree. That's what I looked for initially before I decided to use C&C. There should be a "D&D-lite" game for those who like it at its basic levels, but don't want to get into its complexities. I've done quite a bit of research, and to my knowledge, such a system doesn't exist.

Now you might try True20 coupled with True20 Fantasy Paths. That might be close.

I feel for ya. I've been there, and I've been through a lot of disappointment. There are options, though, if you don't mind some work.