TheRPGSite

Hello,

I'd like to know with all the D&D derivatives available what is truly worth looking into? Which ones actually have meaning improvements and / or do things differently enough that it's worth a look.

Please share your object thoughts and personal views on the matter it's much appreciated!!!

Old school essentials is a very good cleaned up version of B/X that is very easy to learn and play.

Lamentations of the Flame Princess is another very good D&D retroclone with a nice and simple skill system

Both of those games are great

Savage Worlds Pathfinder.

It is D&D on the Savage Worlds chassis. There is none of the Pathfinder woke-shit in it. It's D&D translated to Savage Worlds.

Other recommendations -

Fantasy Craft - It's dense, it's a toolkit. It's awesome. If you're a veteran GM or a dedicated GM that wants strong customization options for their D&D-fantasy game, this is an excellent choice. It's a reimagined 3.x rebuilt from the ground up. It does *everything* differently. And it's scalable and better balanced (if that is a thing for you).

If by "D&D" you mean 5e - I'd also recommend 1e and 2e D&D. Both excellent editions.

Dungeon Crawl Classics - Old School almost BESM-ish. It's very clean and solid if you wanna do some dungeoncrawling (or campaigning). Definitely worth a look.

And if you wanna get pseudo-weird - I always recommend Talislanta. It's FREE (go to the Talislanta website and download the edition of your choice: I recommend ANY of them, but 4e is the most popular.) If you like it - go buy the prequel edition (disclaimer: I helped write) and go hog wild. It comes in a D&D 5e version too. I say pseudo-weird because Talislanta is not very traditional D&D in its races etc. But it's played very traditionally. The setting is exotic and more sword-and-sorcery, but you do all the things you do in a normal D&D game. Go adventure, kill shit, plumb the depths of ancients ruins and tombs, get gold and magic items.

Do you wish to hew close to old school D&D, or play something that spins off the path a little?

Check out Castles & Crusades.  Feels a lot like 1E, but smoother.

Quote from: Jam The MF on July 05, 2021, 05:43:11 PM
Do you wish to hew close to old school D&D, or play something that spins off the path a little?

Games that take the core of D&D and do different stuff with it ( add to/ remove, total reworks ect....)

Adventurer, Conqueror, King
Star Adventurer
Lion & Dragon
Arrows of Indra

The second is D&D in spaaaaaace! with enough differences as to not be the same (based of Lion & Dragon)

The rest are different takes on the mechanics, with their own settings and rules not found on vanilla D&D.

I have always been a fan of Labyrinth Lord.  It is a bit dated.  The system is Moldvay/Cook B/X D&D, so you'll have to deal with Descending Armor Class (or just convert).  My personal favorite is the Advanced Edition Companion, which gives you all the races and classes from the 1e Player's Handbook. 

Labyrinth Lord doesn't add much to the game, but it tightens up a lot of confusing rules.

I also really like Lion & Dragon. Though honestly I have not played it yet.  I like the slow power increases over the levels, yet each level brings a unique ability, that you roll for randomly. 

Oh, and it is modeled on historical medieval professions and magic. 

One game that I have played is Five Torches Deep.  I recently ran a mini campaign of four sessions.  The rules are a 5e framework.  For stats you roll 3d6 straight down the line and swap 2 if you are human.  If you want to be an elf, dwarf, or halfling you get certain stats set at 13c and roll 2d6+ 4 for the others.  I made everyone play a human.

There are four classes. Warrior, mage, thief, and zealot.  At third level you get to choose an archetype which gets you a special ability. 

Warriors can be: Barbarians, Fighters, rangers.
Thieves: Assassin, Bard (no spells, you're just a charming musician), and rogue (a standard thief type)
Mages: Wizard, Warlock, sorcerer
Zealot: Druid, cleric, paladin

The special abilities aren't overwhelming.  Paladins for example can choose Martial Weapon Proficiency.  Or they get an "oath" that helps them against evil creatures like undead and demons.

Sorcerers can do extra damage with fire (if they choose that ability), or get armored skin, etc. think Dragon hericage sorcerer from 5e, but weaker.

Everything is weaker.  Hit points are lower, and weapons do slightly more damage.  And there's a chart you roll when you get to 0hp. No "three death saves" like in 5e.  You might lose a limb, or some stat points. It is gritty.

Magic is limited.  There are only 5 spells for each level, and two types of spells: divine, and arcane.  A spell caster can cast a spell as much as they want, but they have to roll each time and beat a certain number.  If you fail the roll, you can't use that spell any more that day.  Also there is a spell fumble table and you could nuke your whole party if you are really unlucky. 

Monsters are very easy.  They have a system they call "monster math" with suggested hp, ac, attack bonuses and damge.  They give you a list of special powers monsters can have, and you can choose from it like a buffet.  Just plug in what you want. 

You can also convert mosters from other editions. 5e critters will need to be nerfed or they'll wipe out a party. I used B/X monsters and it worked out just fine. 

Thereis a random dungeon generator in the book thatbuses a rubick's cube.  I did not use it.

I also nerfed weapon damage since most of the opposition were humans who carried weapons. 

My players liked the game but said casters were too weak.  A level 1 caster gets 1 first-level spell.  Just like the old days.  Except you could cast it until you fizzled, and then you could fry your friends.  I house ruled that the spell fumble chart would only be used if you rolled a nat "1". 

I thought the game needed more spells and they should be able to be swapped out. 

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on July 05, 2021, 10:21:04 PM
I have always been a fan of Labyrinth Lord.  It is a bit dated.  The system is Moldvay/Cook B/X D&D, so you'll have to deal with Descending Armor Class (or just convert).  My personal favorite is the Advanced Edition Companion, which gives you all the races and classes from the 1e Player's Handbook. 

Labyrinth Lord doesn't add much to the game, but it tightens up a lot of confusing rules.

I have the exact opposite opinion of Labyrinth Lord. It's based on Moldvay/Cook/Marsh's B/X, which is extraordinarily tightly written. LL muddled all that up, with vague wordiness replacing concise precision.

That's why I stuck to B/X. Though I like Basic Fantasy. The fan community is great.

D&D 5th edition is kind of like real D&D if you don't think about it too much.   ;D

Obligatory response from me:

Earthdawn!

Quote from: Blackthorne26 on July 05, 2021, 07:12:23 PMGames that take the core of D&D and do different stuff with it ( add to/ remove, total reworks ect....)

Here's two free RPGs that do exactly that.

MAZES & MINOTAURS
M&M is D&D via Hollywoodized Greek mythos (If you liked Clash of the Titans, 300, Jason & the Argonauts, etc and want to combine that with old school D&D, you will like M&M)
http://mazesandminotaurs.free.fr/ (http://mazesandminotaurs.free.fr/)

VALKYRIES & VIKINGS
M&M, but for the Norse mythos
http://mazesandminotaurs.free.fr/VIK.pdf (http://mazesandminotaurs.free.fr/VIK.pdf)


The "D&D derivative" that's caught my attention recently is MORK BORG - it's extreme grimdark fantasy with an evocative artpunk style.
https://morkborg.com/ (https://morkborg.com/)

The free content in support of the paid game is high quality:
https://morkborg.com/content/ (https://morkborg.com/content/)

The Hyperboria 3e is up on KS now.  I missed out getting their 2nd edition so not missing out on this one.
The first and second time it was released it was great and likely still is.
Might scratch that itch for you.

Quote from: Blackthorne26 on July 05, 2021, 03:23:12 PM
Hello,

I'd like to know with all the D&D derivatives available what is truly worth looking into? Which ones actually have meaning improvements and / or do things differently enough that it's worth a look.

Please share your object thoughts and personal views on the matter it's much appreciated!!!

Between BECMI D&D, D&D 3ed (or, to be honest, Pathfinder), and D&D 5ed, I feel pretty well set for D&D fantasy options.   

If I want something that isn't D&D but inspired by it, I'd go with either Mutants & Masterminds 2ed (3ed is a bit better, but strays even more from D&D) or Godbound (because I want a version of Exalted that's still borked a dozen different ways and whose mechanics don't mesh with its themes, but at least it blows up quickly and can actually be played with just reference sheets instead of reference books).

I will say I skipped Lamentation of the Flame Princess as a system, but I tend to at least look at its scenarios and supplements for some good ideas.  Whichever system you end up going with, there's some pretty good stuff you can use in the catalog of LotFP.

Quote from: KingCheops on July 05, 2021, 11:38:52 PM
Obligatory response from me:

Earthdawn!

Earthdawn's magic system was great.   From the items that had elemental earth/fire/water/air woven into them to the blood magic to magic items that grow as you invest in them.   To this day any system I run will have some of those aspects "woven" into them ;) 

Do any of the systems mentioned here not have the "linear fighters, quadratic wizards" progression? Looking for something with more balance between martial characters and magic characters.

Quote from: Sellsword on July 06, 2021, 10:13:21 AM
Do any of the systems mentioned here not have the "linear fighters, quadratic wizards" progression? Looking for something with more balance between martial characters and magic characters.

Everything I recommended qualifies for that criteria.

Specifically - Fantasy Craft resolves nearly *all* the common issues groused about with D&D for the last few decades.

- LFQM: solved. Non-casters can end fights with ridiculous ease. And they do this without lessening the overall effectiveness of casters (though there are some changes.

- AC/HP Sponginess: FC uses Defense instead of AC which is based on the Class, not the armor worn. Armor absorbs damage. Likewise HP in FC is a literal abstraction of combat effectivness, not necessarily ones strict "Health". Instead you have Wounds (which is your Con score). Combat allows the possibility of bypassing HP (they call it Vitality) *entirely* and do damage directly against Wounds. This is how non-casters can be *insanely* dangerous.

(I could go on and on) but it would swallow up this thread. Of possible interest in this old thread

https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/3e-side-by-side-battle-pathfinder-dd-3-5-fantasy-craft-walk-into-the-thunderdome/

Savage Worlds
By the design of the system it is internally balanced emphasizing fast and fluid play. Non-casters are over-the-top. Magic is handled differently than in D&D being more like "powers" than discrete Vancian spells. I put this on the list mainly because to me "D&D Fantasy" is its own genre and doesn't need to be married to the system. And with Savage Worlds now doing Pathfinder, you get D&D Fantasy in an entirely different system.

Talislanta
Is largely a skill-based system. This includes their magic-system (depends on the edition). Now while casters are at the top end *insanely* powerful, they are also very glass-cannon and frail. The game really reinforces that depending on the edition (where they can have rules that force spellcasters to ALWAYS go last in the round) but again that depends on the edition.

I suppose the real question is "what do you mean by D&D"?

If you're talking about direct "derivatives" of the d20 system vs. D&D-as-genre would probably help a bit more.

T/OSR esque- Exemplars & Eidolons, Relics & Ruins, Spellcraft & Swordplay
Modern take fave- 13th Age (and definitely solves the caster vs. martial issue)

Quote from: Krugus on July 06, 2021, 09:49:47 AM

Quote from: KingCheops on July 05, 2021, 11:38:52 PM
Obligatory response from me:

Earthdawn!

Earthdawn's magic system was great.   From the items that had elemental earth/fire/water/air woven into them to the blood magic to magic items that grow as you invest in them.   To this day any system I run will have some of those aspects "woven" into them ;)

8)  I see what you did there.

@Sellsword:  Earthdawn still has LFQW but not quite as severe as regular D&D.  Also you can multi-discipline much more easily so Fighters can get spells if they want.  That being said technically everyone is using magic already just not necessarily weaving spells.

My favorites:

Shadow of the Demon Lord - a truly great simplified version of D&D, with lots of options, but fewer at the low levels. Magic is dark and dangerous.
DCC RPG - full of awesome content; also dangerous magic.
OSE - a "clone" of my favorite D&D (B/X) with a free SRD.

... and my own, Dark Fantasy Basic. It has only 20 spells, it is based in 5e, basic D&D (1981), and a bit of 3e. It has no "races", only human, and it makes skills and feats more important than classes (fighters and thieves get more options than clerics and magic-users precisely because I find most of D&D too spell-based). Spells are less powerful, but OTOH spellcasters can use swords, have more HP, etc.

Also, about the "quadratic wizard" thing, it is mostly a 3e-ism IMO. In older versions, magic has more limitations, you have to find spells IIRC; also, in 4e it is completely solved (not that I enjoy that edition) and 5e also does a decent job with that.

Quote from: Sellsword on July 06, 2021, 10:13:21 AM
Do any of the systems mentioned here not have the "linear fighters, quadratic wizards" progression? Looking for something with more balance between martial characters and magic characters.

Old school D&D doesn't really have that problem, and the same is true for many clones and OSR games. Yes, magic-users start out weak and end up powerful, but it's nowhere near the same degree as in third edition. Saves are a big part of it. In old school D&D, there are no spell DCs. So as you go up in level, your chance to save increases, period. If you save on a 6+, that means you will successfully save 75% of the time. It doesn't matter if you're trying to save against a 1st level spell from an apprentice, or a 9th level spell from an archmage. As a result, high level fighters can shrug off most magic. Casters also aren't as free to choose from all possible spells (limits on spells known, many spells are restricted to certain subclasses, etc.), making min-maxing the best combinations harder. And some of the most powerful spells like haste and polymorph have hard restrictions (aging, chance of instant death, etc.) that allow them to be used in critical situations, while discouraging regular use.

Quote from: tenbones on July 06, 2021, 10:33:42 AM

Quote from: Sellsword on July 06, 2021, 10:13:21 AM
Do any of the systems mentioned here not have the "linear fighters, quadratic wizards" progression? Looking for something with more balance between martial characters and magic characters.

Everything I recommended qualifies for that criteria.

Specifically - Fantasy Craft resolves nearly *all* the common issues groused about with D&D for the last few decades.

- LFQM: solved. Non-casters can end fights with ridiculous ease. And they do this without lessening the overall effectiveness of casters (though there are some changes.

- AC/HP Sponginess: FC uses Defense instead of AC which is based on the Class, not the armor worn. Armor absorbs damage. Likewise HP in FC is a literal abstraction of combat effectivness, not necessarily ones strict "Health". Instead you have Wounds (which is your Con score). Combat allows the possibility of bypassing HP (they call it Vitality) *entirely* and do damage directly against Wounds. This is how non-casters can be *insanely* dangerous.

(I could go on and on) but it would swallow up this thread. Of possible interest in this old thread

https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/3e-side-by-side-battle-pathfinder-dd-3-5-fantasy-craft-walk-into-the-thunderdome/

Savage Worlds
By the design of the system it is internally balanced emphasizing fast and fluid play. Non-casters are over-the-top. Magic is handled differently than in D&D being more like "powers" than discrete Vancian spells. I put this on the list mainly because to me "D&D Fantasy" is its own genre and doesn't need to be married to the system. And with Savage Worlds now doing Pathfinder, you get D&D Fantasy in an entirely different system.

Talislanta
Is largely a skill-based system. This includes their magic-system (depends on the edition). Now while casters are at the top end *insanely* powerful, they are also very glass-cannon and frail. The game really reinforces that depending on the edition (where they can have rules that force spellcasters to ALWAYS go last in the round) but again that depends on the edition.

I suppose the real question is "what do you mean by D&D"?

If you're talking about direct "derivatives" of the d20 system vs. D&D-as-genre would probably help a bit more.

Thanks for the recommendations, going to have plenty of things to suggest after we are done with our 4E campaign, although we will most likely go with Savage Worlds.

Quote from: Pat on July 06, 2021, 01:40:03 PM

Quote from: Sellsword on July 06, 2021, 10:13:21 AM
Do any of the systems mentioned here not have the "linear fighters, quadratic wizards" progression? Looking for something with more balance between martial characters and magic characters.

Old school D&D doesn't really have that problem, and the same is true for many clones and OSR games. Yes, magic-users start out weak and end up powerful, but it's nowhere near the same degree as in third edition. Saves are a big part of it. In old school D&D, there are no spell DCs. So as you go up in level, your chance to save increases, period. If you save on a 6+, that means you will successfully save 75% of the time. It doesn't matter if you're trying to save against a 1st level spell from an apprentice, or a 9th level spell from an archmage. As a result, high level fighters can shrug off most magic. Casters also aren't as free to choose from all possible spells (limits on spells known, many spells are restricted to certain subclasses, etc.), making min-maxing the best combinations harder. And some of the most powerful spells like haste and polymorph have hard restrictions (aging, chance of instant death, etc.) that allow them to be used in critical situations, while discouraging regular use.

Wow, earlier editions were really hardcore. 

Quote from: Pat on July 06, 2021, 01:40:03 PM

Quote from: Sellsword on July 06, 2021, 10:13:21 AM
Do any of the systems mentioned here not have the "linear fighters, quadratic wizards" progression? Looking for something with more balance between martial characters and magic characters.

Old school D&D doesn't really have that problem, and the same is true for many clones and OSR games. Yes, magic-users start out weak and end up powerful, but it's nowhere near the same degree as in third edition. Saves are a big part of it. In old school D&D, there are no spell DCs. So as you go up in level, your chance to save increases, period. If you save on a 6+, that means you will successfully save 75% of the time. It doesn't matter if you're trying to save against a 1st level spell from an apprentice, or a 9th level spell from an archmage. As a result, high level fighters can shrug off most magic. Casters also aren't as free to choose from all possible spells (limits on spells known, many spells are restricted to certain subclasses, etc.), making min-maxing the best combinations harder. And some of the most powerful spells like haste and polymorph have hard restrictions (aging, chance of instant death, etc.) that allow them to be used in critical situations, while discouraging regular use.

   That is something in a PVP context, high level casters were still extremely powerful to party dynamics in 1e, and there were many instances in many modules if you do not have a magic-user, you are done.  So I am not so sure your example shows they were less powerful, just less powerful against fighters maybe.

Quote from: oggsmash on July 06, 2021, 03:39:43 PM

Quote from: Pat on July 06, 2021, 01:40:03 PM
Old school D&D doesn't really have that problem, and the same is true for many clones and OSR games. Yes, magic-users start out weak and end up powerful, but it's nowhere near the same degree as in third edition. Saves are a big part of it. In old school D&D, there are no spell DCs. So as you go up in level, your chance to save increases, period. If you save on a 6+, that means you will successfully save 75% of the time. It doesn't matter if you're trying to save against a 1st level spell from an apprentice, or a 9th level spell from an archmage. As a result, high level fighters can shrug off most magic. Casters also aren't as free to choose from all possible spells (limits on spells known, many spells are restricted to certain subclasses, etc.), making min-maxing the best combinations harder. And some of the most powerful spells like haste and polymorph have hard restrictions (aging, chance of instant death, etc.) that allow them to be used in critical situations, while discouraging regular use.

   That is something in a PVP context, high level casters were still extremely powerful to party dynamics in 1e, and there were many instances in many modules if you do not have a magic-user, you are done.  So I am not so sure your example shows they were less powerful, just less powerful against fighters maybe.

Yes and no.  It's true that without a wizard you could be in trouble.  It's also true that without a fighter you could be in trouble.  That's the big difference between, say, 1E and 3E.  Saves working the way they do means that:

- It's a real gamble for a wizard to go for the "save and die" effects instead of whittling away at targets or buffing his friends.
- The fighters are holding up to all kinds of monster effects.

It would be pushing things too far to say in AD&D that it is "linear party, quadratic monsters".  That's not really true at all.  But the fact that high level characters are making those saving throws more often than not really skews it something like, "no fighters means the monsters are quadratic," at least in many common situations.

Quote from: Blackthorne26 on July 05, 2021, 03:23:12 PM
Hello,

I'd like to know with all the D&D derivatives available what is truly worth looking into? Which ones actually have meaning improvements and / or do things differently enough that it's worth a look.

Please share your object thoughts and personal views on the matter it's much appreciated!!!

All of them are truly worth looking into. I'm not being flippant. This is like asking which of the 20 craft beers on this shelf you will enjoy more than Budweiser. The answer is "probably about half of them", but nobody can predict which half will please you. It's different for everyone. You just have to try them to see what works for you. Every D&D derivative game is somebody's favorite, or it wouldn't exist. But since you ask ...

Fantastic Heroes & Witchery cherry-picks its systems from the first three editions of D&D. It offers 30 - 40 classes and over 600 spells. Classes are grouped by genre, including weird sword & sorcery, sword & planet, cosmic horror, and semi-historical low fantasy. In that last genre it really shines, replacing the D&D clerics with several classes that actually resemble what people of the medieval era believed about the practice of faith and magic.

For a simpler game, I would recommend either Basic Fantasy or Lamentations of the Flame Princess, which are both based on B/X with improvements. Use Basic Fantasy if you want D&D's generic vanilla high fantasy, or LotFP for a 17th-century weird fantasy horror vibe.

All three of these suggestions use ascending armor class.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on July 06, 2021, 03:46:56 PM

Quote from: oggsmash on July 06, 2021, 03:39:43 PM

Quote from: Pat on July 06, 2021, 01:40:03 PM
Old school D&D doesn't really have that problem, and the same is true for many clones and OSR games. Yes, magic-users start out weak and end up powerful, but it's nowhere near the same degree as in third edition. Saves are a big part of it. In old school D&D, there are no spell DCs. So as you go up in level, your chance to save increases, period. If you save on a 6+, that means you will successfully save 75% of the time. It doesn't matter if you're trying to save against a 1st level spell from an apprentice, or a 9th level spell from an archmage. As a result, high level fighters can shrug off most magic. Casters also aren't as free to choose from all possible spells (limits on spells known, many spells are restricted to certain subclasses, etc.), making min-maxing the best combinations harder. And some of the most powerful spells like haste and polymorph have hard restrictions (aging, chance of instant death, etc.) that allow them to be used in critical situations, while discouraging regular use.

   That is something in a PVP context, high level casters were still extremely powerful to party dynamics in 1e, and there were many instances in many modules if you do not have a magic-user, you are done.  So I am not so sure your example shows they were less powerful, just less powerful against fighters maybe.

Yes and no.  It's true that without a wizard you could be in trouble.  It's also true that without a fighter you could be in trouble.  That's the big difference between, say, 1E and 3E.  Saves working the way they do means that:

- It's a real gamble for a wizard to go for the "save and die" effects instead of whittling away at targets or buffing his friends.
- The fighters are holding up to all kinds of monster effects.

It would be pushing things too far to say in AD&D that it is "linear party, quadratic monsters".  That's not really true at all.  But the fact that high level characters are making those saving throws more often than not really skews it something like, "no fighters means the monsters are quadratic," at least in many common situations.

  I dunno, even then wizards could summon monsters to help them, bring a golem, have a simulacarum, and some spells were not save or die, they were get hit hard enough to die, or get hit hard enough that death is not far away.   I think the fighter required more role playing to a degree (voicing their taunts to the monsters/bad guys) and weapon specialization did wonders for fighters (mostly in increasing number of attacks).  I was never in a game with level 18 characters, and I have a feeling very few people were.  Magic users also had access to spam magic items that really made it easy for them to choose their spells, and with minion armies to summon I am not so sure fighters are truly needed after a certain point.   My point being, magic users were SIGNIFICANTLY more powerful than fighters at high levels in D&D.  I always felt the low HP and high mortality rate to get there coupled with the higher XP requirements justified this.    I think if you want a game where wizards and fighters are more "even" though, you are not going to find it in any edition of D&D.   I think they are much more comparable in Savage Worlds and GURPs in terms of equality, but magic is still strong there too.   It SHOULD be, being able to control energy and time and space SHOULD be more powerful than working out and being handy with a sword.  So I have no problem with it, I just think talking as if the old days had more caster vs fighter parity is often nostalgia.  But I am willing to agree to disagree, as well as say my complete lack of any extended experience playing a tremendous amount at really high levels colors my point of view greatly.   Levels 5-10, mages are extremely potent to most of the challenges a party will face.

   I do not disagree though that 3e made casters into gods.