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

  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.