Still Searching for "That" System

[Retreater]

At the very first - all of your requirements sounds like you want lethal combat to be a common solution to challenges. For instance the superhero genre is very survivable in general as well as being built around the concept of having interesting options unqiue to each character. You have TMNT & Other Strangeness (not that Palladium fits the other requirements) and MARVEL (FASERIP) on your list of owned games, but they are definitely a minority. But truth be told you have a lot more (high/grim/*) fantasy games on that list as well as some SF versions of that type of play. So are you okay with any genre, or are you looking for a D&D-like in terms that combat to the death is a common occurrence?

TMNT was my intro to RPGs. Growing up in the U.S. South during the Satanic Panic with conservative parents meant D&D was off the table for my entire childhood. Both TMNT and Marvel I've found the best parts to be the character creation, making your hero with interesting mutations or superpowers. And then both systems sort of fall apart after that minigame - when actual play occurs. I've found this to also be the case for Mutants & Masterminds - with the strange scaling and charts to figure out how fast a Power Ranking 9 Speedster is vs. a Power Ranking 5 Super Alien.
With the fantasy games, I think it's a marketing thing. I've seen A LOT more ads and reviews for systems like Mork Borg, Forbidden Lands, Warhammer Fantasy than systems like Blue Rose, Fantasy AGE, Age of Sigmar, (assuming these are more narrative/less grim and gritty type systems). And I think "serious roleplayers" (and critics, reviewers, etc.) speak very highly about products like "Masks of Nyarlahotep" or "The Enemy Within." In the culture, I've been more directed to grim and gritty games. Often, this is counter to what my players actually want to play.
This group specifically wants high adventure, lots of exciting action, killing monsters, etc. They predominantly enjoy a power fantasy (even the adults).
Another genre as a palate cleanser after so much D&D-like fantasy would be fine. But it needs to be a genre that I feel like I have the familiarity to run. (For example, I'd be bad at running RPGs about Wrestling, Anime, Westerns, etc.)

Or, to flip this around: are you okay with character/party failure as long as it's more like a downbeat in a story, as long as character death is not a common result of that failure?

Yeah. I'm thinking that something like a "story loss" to replace a TPK - like what is used in 13th Age - might be a good idea.

Next question - Good GM tools. A number of systems are a lot lighter on needed (and even wanted) GM prep. For example a lot of PbtA games and other Story Now are forgiving in "encounter building" and adventures are minimal. I see Monster of the Week on your list, and the most recent adventure I saw for that was complete at three non-dense pages. Does looking for "good GM tools" have the assumption that you are looking for a system with a traditional DM style RPG like D&D/PF/etc. where you need those tools? Or would a game that has a lot less reliance on that also fit your needs?

Along those lines, if you could say why Monster of the Week doesn't meet your requirements, that would help clear up understanding for a whole swath of games of a particular style.

I've run some lengthy PbtA games. For other groups, I did a Dungeon World campaign and a series of Monster of the Week adventures for a few months. With both systems, I did struggle with "what can I do as the GM?" and "when can I attack?" I did find that both of them got extremely predictable and "easy" - just focus on your "good thing" and you can't fail. Neither system seemed capable of running more than 2-3 sessions before they got too easy and boring.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Yeah. I've gotten to the point where I don't enjoy 5e at all. It's probably a burn-out issue with that system, but it's also that I can't figure out how to get the experience I want from it - and I've been struggling against the core assumptions of 5e for close to a decade now.
It's a resource management/attrition system that doesn't give practical advice for how to deplete resources because the Encounter system is seriously out of whack, and no one has 6-8 encounters per day. The closest thing to a solution is the Gritty Rest mechanic, but players balk at this (I know I have).
Perhaps going through and cutting out certain spells would help? Perhaps requiring the expenditure of Hit Dice to heal would help? Perhaps allowing death save failures to accumulate until the character has a short rest would help?
But I didn't have to do this for any other edition of D&D. I feel like for all their failings, they at least worked for the attrition concept.


Thanks for the vote of confidence.
So I've been criticized by players in other groups for being a "system junky" - playing 5-10 sessions with a game and then moving on, just because I like learning new systems, having new experiences, and searching for the best fit for the group. This has frustrated players that they can't gain a system mastery, develop a relationship with a character, explore the world, gain high levels, etc.
Many players don't want to buy-in with another system, so that's why I struggle with finding something I can sell them on for a "long term" experience.

Have you tried AiME or the LotR RPG for 5e?

its 5e, but the classes are not high-powered, magic is rare and mysterious and it drains many resources other than just HP by targeting Exhaustion, HDs and Shadow Corruption.

The whole system, while combat heavy, does put a resources cost on most pillars of play. You dont get to skip the journey to the destination or ask for the moon during an audience without leveraging resources and advantages.

The best part? You can take the system and plug-it in any other system you'd like as long as it fits somewhat the premise of LotR as a setting (low magic, high adventuring). I've used it in my Forgotten Realms and it's pretty efficient.

 

[Lord Shark]

Looking over your requirements again, have you ever checked out 13th Age? It feels like, compared to name-brand D&D versions it hits your 1-3. I'm not sure about 4 as I've never GM'ed it.

As someone who's run 13th Age extensively, I can tell you it satisfies point 4; coming up with stats for interesting monsters and leveling them up and down for whatever kind of challenge you want to present is a snap. And there are plenty of fun adventures; Eyes of the Stone Thief deserves all the praise it gets.

 

[Retreater]

Have you tried AiME or the LotR RPG for 5e?

No. I completely disregarded both systems because I didn't think the world of Middle Earth would be an exciting place to adventure in. (Heresy, I know!) Plus, I'm tired of 5e.

 

[payn]

I've run some lengthy PbtA games. For other groups, I did a Dungeon World campaign and a series of Monster of the Week adventures for a few months. With both systems, I did struggle with "what can I do as the GM?" and "when can I attack?" I did find that both of them got extremely predictable and "easy" - just focus on your "good thing" and you can't fail. Neither system seemed capable of running more than 2-3 sessions before they got too easy and boring.

For you? The players? Or both?

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

No. I completely disregarded both systems because I didn't think the world of Middle Earth would be an exciting place to adventure in. (Heresy, I know!) Plus, I'm tired of 5e.

Like I said AiME rules can be used in many setting, dont have to be Middle-Earth (it does become rather bland after a few adventure of just orcs & spiders & ghosts).

But are you tired of 5e in general or are you tired of the problems you have with it? Like, if I had a magic wand and created 5e with superb encounter building and clear adventures, would you play it?

Because balancing encounters in those system is way easier. Taking your last experience with CoS, challenging a group of regular 5e characters and challenging a group of characters with only a few magic items, no spells, half-corrupted by the power of Castle Ravenloft and 2 exhaustion level from journeying to the Castle without safe haven is a whole different story.

 

[Velderan]

You're very likely correct, and a straight answer is always appreciated.

I have to admit that I've gotten frustrated and given up a lot of hope over the years. I feel like I used to be a good GM. I don't know if maybe I've been broken down by ...
1) Running too many games.
2) Running games for players with no investment outside of the session.
3) Expecting systems and adventures to do more than their shares of heavy lifting.

On the bolded part, how do you choose which game you'll play? Do the players get to pick, even if it's from a list of games you'd be willing to run?

 

[Retreater]

For you? The players? Or both?

I think I got bored with it before the players. Dungeon World, specifically, there was nothing that the characters couldn't handle. They ended up fighting an elemental darkness possessing a living ziggurat - that was about 4 sessions into the game.
"I roll to attack." 2d6+4 = 14. "I kill it!"
That's basically how PbtA games work when I run them.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Yeah. I've gotten to the point where I don't enjoy 5e at all. It's probably a burn-out issue with that system, but it's also that I can't figure out how to get the experience I want from it - and I've been struggling against the core assumptions of 5e for close to a decade now.
It's a resource management/attrition system that doesn't give practical advice for how to deplete resources because the Encounter system is seriously out of whack, and no one has 6-8 encounters per day. The closest thing to a solution is the Gritty Rest mechanic, but players balk at this (I know I have).
Perhaps going through and cutting out certain spells would help? Perhaps requiring the expenditure of Hit Dice to heal would help? Perhaps allowing death save failures to accumulate until the character has a short rest would help?
But I didn't have to do this for any other edition of D&D. I feel like for all their failings, they at least worked for the attrition concept.

This is interesting because, this has been my issue with almost all editions of D&D except 4e. It seem to me that you want more high stakes combat than 5e delivers, but do your players want that?
I used to be a bit like that but with 5e I just went with the system, it seems to be what the players want. I do not pay attention to the attrition (8 encounters per day) and just tune up the boss fights.

Thanks for the vote of confidence.
So I've been criticized by players in other groups for being a "system junky" - playing 5-10 sessions with a game and then moving on, just because I like learning new systems, having new experiences, and searching for the best fit for the group. This has frustrated players that they can't gain a system mastery, develop a relationship with a character, explore the world, gain high levels, etc.
Many players don't want to buy-in with another system, so that's why I struggle with finding something I can sell them on for a "long term" experience.

Really do not know what to say, except that there is a disconnect between you and your players. May be find an online group as a player to explore different systems or look at online plays.

 

[Retreater]

Like I said AiME rules can be used in many setting, dont have to be Middle-Earth (it does become rather bland after a few adventure of just orcs & spiders & ghosts).

I agree. Just didn't know how easily the setting could be divorced from the system.

But are you tired of 5e in general or are you tired of the problems you have with it? Like, if I had a magic wand and created 5e with superb encounter building and clear adventures, would you play it?

Sure, I'd play it. (Provided my group would go along with it.)
I'm doubtful that the chassis could support that style of game and still be considered 5e-compatible, though. The "flattened math" is one area that makes it difficult for me to plan for it.

Because balancing encounters in those system is way easier. Taking your last experience with CoS, challenging a group of regular 5e characters and challenging a group of characters with only a few magic items, no spells, half-corrupted by the power of Castle Ravenloft and 2 exhaustion level from journeying to the Castle without safe haven is a whole different story.

It was the artifacts in CoS that really tilted the balance. The Holy Symbol of Ravenkind, especially, won the day.
I don't know how it would work with the encounter balance. Even if there was exhaustion, would the math of the encounters work out? Because so many monsters are "worthless" as a challenge after 5th level or so.
(Monster: "I have a +3 to hit and cause 5 damage." That's like the standard 5e monster.)