RPG for Simulation

[Garthanos]

The main guy that wrote RuneQuest was also a founding member of the SCA, so it does try to simulate medieval combat, to a degree.

Yes it did fair job at that... nobody felt like the big damn hero like D&D manages to evoke with its advancing hit points a couple bad rolls and boom even the most awesome could drop to the most lowly.

 

[Garthanos]

The Avalon hill produced RuneQuest had quite a viking expansion I do recall.

 

[zztong]

OD&D or AD&D; however, admittedly, you'd have to modify some of the rules. The combat rules, as written, simply don't work. You could borrow from 3rd or 5th Editions and create a hybrid system.

This comes from my experience with these systems, and a few other medieval-based RPGs.

EDIT: Just thought of this ~ can you elaborate on what you're looking to accomplish? I haven't seen Viking; is it similar, in terms of depicting combat, to Game of Thrones? Are you trying to increase tension or fear during combat, or is it something else?

The original post wasn't so much related to solving a problem or making a choice, but to see if there were a system out there of which I was not familiar. The dominant fantasy RPGs all seem to be converging on a superheroic level, where the PCs outclass the common man and approach godhood. But there are GMs/Players that focus on, or otherwise prefer, settings where the common man remains relevant. What are they using?

Presently, I use Pathfinder and it often means I have to redefine the "common man" to make it work (give them levels). I run games in three different groups and Pathfinder is the preferred system in two of those groups where we have many DMs running in the same world/setting. With PF2e emerging, the different games are going to go their separate ways. One will likely stay PF1e. Another will go with PF2e. And with the third game I can choose whatever system I want.

So I'm looking around. My temptation is to take the D&D 3.5 SRD and modify it with an eye towards the math that creates separation between the levels. For instance, maybe BABs don't advance as fast. This would be a lot of work. If there were another game that fit, I'd be open to taking a look.

 

[Simon T. Vesper]

My temptation is to take the D&D 3.5 SRD and modify it with an eye towards the math that creates separation between the levels. For instance, maybe BABs don't advance as fast. This would be a lot of work. If there were another game that fit, I'd be open to taking a look.

Tracking.

I would highly recommend OD&D/AD&D, or 3rd Edition, given your background with PF (the less you have to learn of a new system, the sooner you'll be prepared). I completely agree with the idea of scaling things back. I did the same with my game (heavily modified AD&D), where I created a handful of NPC classes, each with a slower attack and saving throw progression.

Something else to consider: if you make the assumption that the PCs are extraordinary just as they are, and you adjust NPCs to reflect this, you increase the full range of advancement available to your players without sacrificing the "realistic" feel.

For example: the standard range for ability scores is 3-18. Players roll 4d6 (drop the lowest) and arrange to taste. (This might not be your exact method, but I'm assuming it's fairly standard for most versions of the game.) What if we establish a correlation between a person's ability scores and various factors in their life/background? The majority of NPCs in most medieval societies will belong to some sort of laborer or lower class. These persons are less likely than the upper classes to have access to good food, clean water, good living conditions, etc. If we assign stats to this "peasant class" as 2d6, we create a new standard for the majority of the world. Then, even though the player may think, "Man, I've only got a 13 in Constitution," it's still 6 points higher than the average of 7 for, like, 60-70% of the population.

Obviously, the exact breakdown for these stats and NPC social classes and so on, is variable. It can be whatever makes sense for your world. But the principle is: lower the bar for NPCs and leave the PCs where they are, according to the rules, to create the impression that PCs are better than the average NPC. Then apply the same logic to other rules, like classes and class abilities, feats, skills, etc. Low-level PCs will be more powerful than most NPCs; less powerful than most monsters; and still feel like they have room to grow and develop into something more as the game progresses.

I mention all of this because, in my experience, there isn't an RPG in the market that manages to accomplish what you're looking for. (But I could be wrong; wouldn't be the first time.)

 

[zztong]

I have looked back at D&D 1e/2e and it would be viable and a homecoming of sorts. It was easy to modify and the levels basically flat-lined after 10th, which is kind of appealing. But for my players, the D&D 3e/3.5e melee math would be desirable instead of THACO. Plus with D&D 3e/3.5e I get basically the same skill system that I would add. I've even considered using Castle and Crusades, but I don't care for its skill/proficiency system. Likewise, I don't care for D&D 5e's skills, nor the announced PF2e skills. This basically had me thinking: D&D 3.5e base, drop Feats, drop Magic, and see where I stand.

Actually, PF1e would remain viable, though the bummer with PF1e is that we pretty much always play with Hero Lab for automation. This messes with my ability to introduce house rules. For instance, one cool way to bring the game's math back down to "common man" levels is to say "no bonuses of any type stack" (use only the highest). But there's no Hero Lab option to implement that. The classic way to do a "common man" game is to say "Pathfinder stops at 9th level" or perhaps y'all know of "E6" where the game stops at 6th level.

But anyways, yes, I can make a viable game system from all of the parts laying around. But if there were another game already out there, then I'd look at it. Thus far, RuneQuest. And, given my background with the Hero System, maybe that probably not. I liked the Hero System for Super Heroes and some modern "common man" games, but not for something where I might introduce a magic system.

 

[Simon T. Vesper]

Actually, PF1e would remain viable, though the bummer with PF1e is that we pretty much always play with Hero Lab for automation. This messes with my ability to introduce house rules. For instance, one cool way to bring the game's math back down to "common man" levels is to say "no bonuses of any type stack" (use only the highest). But there's no Hero Lab option to implement that. The classic way to do a "common man" game is to say "Pathfinder stops at 9th level" or perhaps y'all know of "E6" where the game stops at 6th level.

This. Right here. This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about (on a different thread, that is): it's the 21st freaking century and we don't have a digital game management tool that lets us input house rules?

Fail.

 

[zztong]

This. Right here. This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about (on a different thread, that is): it's the 21st freaking century and we don't have a digital game management tool that lets us input house rules?

Fail.

Not to disagree, but to possibly redirect. Technically, Hero Lab does allow me to make this happen. Unfortunately, it involves a really significant ramp-up time in my developing the skills to make intricate changes to the Hero Lab Pathfinder scripts. Its arguably simpler for me to make my own game system and keep it simple enough to not need automation.

The other viable approach is if the game developer (Paizo if we stick with Pathfinder) to release a book full of common house rules. Then their relationship with Hero Lab would lead to those house rules being supported in configuration files that were for sale by Hero Lab.

So yeh, like you said, we don't have a tool that lets us make house rules, but its as much an economic problem as it is technical.

 

[toucanbuzz]

Hackmaster combat.

While a fantasy setting, it markets itself as having the most realistic combat rules, including accounting for the power of Shields in combat (which no system really does), weapon types versus defenses, and so on. If you're looking for Simulation, perhaps worth a try. D&D and its kin sacrifice this level of simulation with the purpose to speed up combat, appeal to new players who might be intimidated by a complex system, and leave more time for roleplay.

 

[zztong]

Hackmaster combat.

While a fantasy setting, it markets itself as having the most realistic combat rules, including accounting for the power of Shields in combat (which no system really does), weapon types versus defenses, and so on. If you're looking for Simulation, perhaps worth a try. D&D and its kin sacrifice this level of simulation with the purpose to speed up combat, appeal to new players who might be intimidated by a complex system, and leave more time for roleplay.

Oh, okay. I'll have to get a copy then. I've never really looked at it, assuming it was just joke-D&D rules.

 

[toucanbuzz]

Oh, okay. I'll have to get a copy then. I've never really looked at it, assuming it was just joke-D&D rules.

There should be more free links showing the KoDT comic characters playing a combat and illustrating rules. It's more numbers than my group could probably handle.