Blue
Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
In one group I'm in the we're on hiatus because the DM and their spouse, who is one of the players, had a baby. Woo!
The DM is looking at moving away from 5e, but keeping to a similar style game. With the proliferation of post-OGL-debacle Fantasy Heartbreakers out there, he's been focusing on them. I'm the "system wonk" in our group, so I've been helping him look at them. The issue is that I believe we have some competing interests in the group. So all of us are way more informed than just I am, so I figured I'd crowd-source this out.
Still looking for a D&D-like fantasy experience, that works well in a 2.5-3 hour weeknight window. Also we have a wide gap in optimization ability and interest in the group, so something like 5e where one person is playing a concept character and another is playing an moderately optimized character aren't super far apart.
EDIT: We play online, so VTTs that help are a good selling point, especially for the established systems that I'd have to convince the DM to look at since he's focused just on the new crop.
The DM: Runs on a spectrum between trad and neo-trad, with a stated preference to shift more neo-trad for this upcoming campaign. While will play a variety of systems including Story Now, for him to run it needs to support that DMing style. Got burned out on 3.x, sees the cracks in 5e and wants to move on even though enjoyed it. While likes all aspects of running, specifically likes mechanical support for crunchier, tactical combat. Likes 4e but didn't get to play a lot so knows there are problems they haven't encountered. Which harkens back to cracks in 5e, especially balance between classes when running short adventuring days - in 4e everyone has the same. Has been primarily looking at the new crop of games like DC20, PF2R, MCDM, Daggerheart and Tales of the Valiant. Wants to do a test run before commiting, so lack of quickstart/playtest/SRD is a problem. Could be sold on other systems, but would need to be shown it's definitively a better fit than the ones he's looking at. Note: 13th Age 2nd Ed has been disqualified because it's not tactical grid combat, so that's a requirement. Also isn't interested in OSR.
The Professor: Super busy, wants to have a straightforward system that they can absorb and understand. (Straightforward doesn't neccesarily mean rules-lite - 5e was fine.) Works best if they understand mechanically what their character can do, doesn't appreciate more free-form RPGs. Once and done - doesn't want to learn lots of systems. Wants to be powerful, doesn't optimize but will make sure not to shoot themselves in the foot. Probably best with a system that's doesn't have half a dozen sourcebooks with character options. EDIT: Will not do well with lots of small situational bonuses.
The Dreamer: Not particularly into mechanics. Would not do well with a system with lots of fiddly bits, especially around character creation/advancement. No feat taxes/trap options sort of thing. Fine with 5e, mostly because it's what everybody plays, but also fine with PbtA, Fate, and other systems. Also the person who puts together all of the clues the DM has been dropping and figures out the big picture stuff. Doesn't optimize. EDIT: Will not do well with lots of small situational bonuses.
Mr. and Mrs. Professional: Another couple, both whom are DMs of other games, including doing things like paid DM gigs at "D&D in a Castle" events. Experience with multiple systems. They both pick up systems quickly, and like to make quite able/powerful but interesting characters. Expect the least trouble with picking up a new system, though one is laid back and will go with whatever the DM says and the other is a bit more nitpicky about addressing their own wants.
Me: Likes a variety of systems, but never tried PF1 because of how burned out I was from 3ed and 3.5. Don't want to have to preplan a character's advancement to make it work. Have the most fun reigning in optimization to be where the group's power level is, and am concerned if that's a wide gap between the optimizers and non-optimizers in the group. More into neo-trad and Story Now, but I do like a robust character creation/advancement system. EDIT: While the DM likes 4e, two problems I had with it were: far too many conditions to evaluate on different tokens, and one player prone to decision paralysis will slow combat to a halt. I'd like to avoid those.
I just went back through and underlined some important parts. And just to reiterate, needs a crunchy, tactical, grid-based combat that still goes quick enough not to dominate a 2.5-3 hour session.
So, what will resonate the DM so that he wants to run it, but would also be a decent fit for the players?
The DM is looking at moving away from 5e, but keeping to a similar style game. With the proliferation of post-OGL-debacle Fantasy Heartbreakers out there, he's been focusing on them. I'm the "system wonk" in our group, so I've been helping him look at them. The issue is that I believe we have some competing interests in the group. So all of us are way more informed than just I am, so I figured I'd crowd-source this out.
Still looking for a D&D-like fantasy experience, that works well in a 2.5-3 hour weeknight window. Also we have a wide gap in optimization ability and interest in the group, so something like 5e where one person is playing a concept character and another is playing an moderately optimized character aren't super far apart.
EDIT: We play online, so VTTs that help are a good selling point, especially for the established systems that I'd have to convince the DM to look at since he's focused just on the new crop.
The DM: Runs on a spectrum between trad and neo-trad, with a stated preference to shift more neo-trad for this upcoming campaign. While will play a variety of systems including Story Now, for him to run it needs to support that DMing style. Got burned out on 3.x, sees the cracks in 5e and wants to move on even though enjoyed it. While likes all aspects of running, specifically likes mechanical support for crunchier, tactical combat. Likes 4e but didn't get to play a lot so knows there are problems they haven't encountered. Which harkens back to cracks in 5e, especially balance between classes when running short adventuring days - in 4e everyone has the same. Has been primarily looking at the new crop of games like DC20, PF2R, MCDM, Daggerheart and Tales of the Valiant. Wants to do a test run before commiting, so lack of quickstart/playtest/SRD is a problem. Could be sold on other systems, but would need to be shown it's definitively a better fit than the ones he's looking at. Note: 13th Age 2nd Ed has been disqualified because it's not tactical grid combat, so that's a requirement. Also isn't interested in OSR.
The Professor: Super busy, wants to have a straightforward system that they can absorb and understand. (Straightforward doesn't neccesarily mean rules-lite - 5e was fine.) Works best if they understand mechanically what their character can do, doesn't appreciate more free-form RPGs. Once and done - doesn't want to learn lots of systems. Wants to be powerful, doesn't optimize but will make sure not to shoot themselves in the foot. Probably best with a system that's doesn't have half a dozen sourcebooks with character options. EDIT: Will not do well with lots of small situational bonuses.
The Dreamer: Not particularly into mechanics. Would not do well with a system with lots of fiddly bits, especially around character creation/advancement. No feat taxes/trap options sort of thing. Fine with 5e, mostly because it's what everybody plays, but also fine with PbtA, Fate, and other systems. Also the person who puts together all of the clues the DM has been dropping and figures out the big picture stuff. Doesn't optimize. EDIT: Will not do well with lots of small situational bonuses.
Mr. and Mrs. Professional: Another couple, both whom are DMs of other games, including doing things like paid DM gigs at "D&D in a Castle" events. Experience with multiple systems. They both pick up systems quickly, and like to make quite able/powerful but interesting characters. Expect the least trouble with picking up a new system, though one is laid back and will go with whatever the DM says and the other is a bit more nitpicky about addressing their own wants.
Me: Likes a variety of systems, but never tried PF1 because of how burned out I was from 3ed and 3.5. Don't want to have to preplan a character's advancement to make it work. Have the most fun reigning in optimization to be where the group's power level is, and am concerned if that's a wide gap between the optimizers and non-optimizers in the group. More into neo-trad and Story Now, but I do like a robust character creation/advancement system. EDIT: While the DM likes 4e, two problems I had with it were: far too many conditions to evaluate on different tokens, and one player prone to decision paralysis will slow combat to a halt. I'd like to avoid those.
I just went back through and underlined some important parts. And just to reiterate, needs a crunchy, tactical, grid-based combat that still goes quick enough not to dominate a 2.5-3 hour session.
So, what will resonate the DM so that he wants to run it, but would also be a decent fit for the players?
Last edited:
