# Low Fantasy - Best Systems?



## Argyle King (Jan 13, 2020)

First, to prevent starting from a miscommunication: what do I mean by "low fantasy"?

The common literary definition does not quite fit what I want. I prefer something similar to the definitions found in _GURPS Fantasy._

Regarding "High Fantasy"
_"If fantasy occupies the middle
ground between myth and history,
high fantasy is closer to myth."
~GURPS Fantasy _

With that sliding scale in mind, my desire is for something which is weighted more toward the "history" and reality end of the spectrum. That's not to say I want completely realistic; I still want dragons, magic, elves, or whatever, but I find that contemporary D&D (beyond about level 4) and Pathfinder both skew in a very different direction that what I want. 

In my mind, if some manner of fantasy venn diagram could be draw from my own imagination, the following list would be among the circles involved: R. Howard's_ Conan; _80s movies such as _Beastmaster, Dragonslayer, Legend, and Conan; _early seasons of _Game of Thrones; _PC game_ Mount & Blade; _the book version of confrontations with Smaug in _The Hobbit; _Arthurian fantasy and the knight on horseback trope; and heroic tier D&D. 
(Honorable mention to _Witcher_, the first _Dragon Age _game, and some of the classic fairy tales with a bit of a darker underlying edge of realness.)

I'm not opposed to higher fantasy elements, but I'd like things like demon lords trying to destroy the planet or powerful wizards to be few and far between -typically special events and notable when they occur. I'd prefer a magic sword to be cool because it has some manner of cool special feature rather than simply being a progression from +1 to +2.

From a game standpoint, I'm more interested in high level heroes leading armies rather than fighting them. I mean, yeah, sure, someone like Conan might be able to fight several combatants and regularly win, but that's still below a memory I have of an old D&D 3.5 game in which I realized that taking the leadership feat lead to very different play than imagined. (An army of lower level followers was essentially useless on a battlefield; it was better to have a team of people making and crafting gear.)

I do believe PCs should be people who are far above the average common folk of the world in some way, but not so far above that a player could rampage through a village with impunity. I enjoy many of the tropes from tabletop fantasy games, but not the way in which they are mechanically presented and the style of narrative that tends to lean toward.

If my rambling lead to anything coherent...

What games do you feel produce this style of gaming experience?


----------



## Doc_Klueless (Jan 13, 2020)

I enjoyed the one session I got to play of Modiphius 2d20 Conan. It does that style well.


----------



## The Crimson Binome (Jan 13, 2020)

Honestly, that was one of the reasons why I wrote _Gishes & Goblins_. I have nothing against elves or dwarves, but I never want to run a game where dragonborn and tieflings are considered _normal_.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 13, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> First, to prevent starting from a miscommunication: what do I mean by "low fantasy"?




I always get stuck in my craw that "high fantasy" and "low fantasy" already have technical definitions.  So, pardon me if I chafe a little.  

What you seem to be talking about is low magic, and perhaps low-power fantasy.



> In my mind, if some manner of fantasy venn diagram could be draw from my own imagination, the following list would be among the circles involved




The problem is that listing what the sircles are is not terribly meaningful - we'd need to see the intersections, with a pointer to the segment labelled, "What I want here".



> I'm not opposed to higher fantasy elements, but I'd like things like demon lords trying to destroy the planet or powerful wizards to be few and far between -typically special events and notable when they occur. I'd prefer a magic sword to be cool because it has some manner of cool special feature rather than simply being a progression from +1 to +2.




You realize you just described Lord of the Rings, commonly considered some of the highest high-fantasy there is?  There's only one demon lord (Sauron).  There's only two wizards worth discussing (Gandalf and Saruman).  Their interactions are _most certainly_ the special event of the Third Age of the world, having not really happened ever before.  Swords are cool because they glow in the presence of orcs...



> From a game standpoint, I'm more interested in high level heroes leading armies rather than fighting them.




So, Aragorn does exactly this....



> What games do you feel produce this style of gaming experience?




Well, you opened with GURPS.  I'd put it in the list.

D&D, played E6-style, does a not-too-shabby job of it.  

I daresay, the upcoming Swords of the Serpentine will probably also fit the bill.


----------



## 3catcircus (Jan 13, 2020)

Go pick up Harn.


----------



## chaochou (Jan 13, 2020)

For what you're looking for I'd go for _Burning Wheel_, by a considerable distance.

After that I'd look at _Runequest _or, if you want an explicitly Tolkien game, _The One Ring_.


----------



## Bravesteel25 (Jan 13, 2020)

You might enjoy Harnworld and Harnmaster.


----------



## Don Durito (Jan 14, 2020)

For something like D&D but tweaked more toward low Fantasy, Shadow of a Demon Lord.

For something that is more realistic but offers crunchy combat and skill choices without classes and levels try Mythras.

For something older, but BRP based and relatively simpler try any iteration of Stormbringer/Elric/Magic World.

For something more pulpy but more medium crunch and with a metagame currency maybe Modiphius Conan 2d20.


----------



## Argyle King (Jan 14, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I always get stuck in my craw that "high fantasy" and "low fantasy" already have technical definitions.  So, pardon me if I chafe a little.
> 
> What you seem to be talking about is low magic, and perhaps low-power fantasy.




I've seen "low-fantasy" mean different things depending upon if a literary context or a gaming context is being used. As I was attempting to use a mixture of both, I felt starting with some background concerning what I want was best to prevent miscommunication.



Umbran said:


> The problem is that listing what the sircles are is not terribly meaningful - we'd need to see the intersections, with a pointer to the segment labelled, "What I want here".






Umbran said:


> You realize you just described Lord of the Rings, commonly considered some of the highest high-fantasy there is?  There's only one demon lord (Sauron).  There's only two wizards worth discussing (Gandalf and Saruman).  Their interactions are _most certainly_ the special event of the Third Age of the world, having not really happened ever before.  Swords are cool because they glow in the presence of orcs...




Yes...

Though, I'm of the opinion that -even as what could be called a "high fantasy" setting- it's still more grounded than a typical contemporary d20 (D&D or PF specifically).

That's why I went with the venn diagram approach. I'm not necessarily looking for an exact point on a graph, but more of a general intersecting ballpark.

If it helps, I also like the idea of castle sieges and ship-to-ship battles at sea feeling like fights and challenges rather than the PCs essentially being supers in comparison to the world around them.

I like the general vibe of some classic sword & sandal movies (Ben-Hur, Venus Meets the Son of Hercules, etc), but would like to add in more fantasy. I support (and enjoy) cinematic action and heroics, but I don't like how D&D and PF so quickly render certain challenges trivial; I believe something like a battle should be serious -regardless of level.



Umbran said:


> So, Aragorn does exactly this....




Yes, and the army is able to participate in an encounter in a meaningful way.



Umbran said:


> Well, you opened with GURPS.  I'd put it in the list.
> 
> D&D, played E6-style, does a not-too-shabby job of it.
> 
> I daresay, the upcoming Swords of the Serpentine will probably also fit the bill.




I play a lot of GURPS. I'm trying to be more open-minded and try some other games.

I'm not familiar with Swords of the Serpentine. I'll check it out.


----------



## Argyle King (Jan 14, 2020)

Malkinban said:


> You might enjoy Harnworld and Harnmaster.




I'm reading some info about the games now.


----------



## imagineGod (Jan 14, 2020)

The Modiphius Conan game is very low fantasy, not totally devoid of magic, but a better game engine than The Witcher RPG. 

However, if you open up your options and allow other game types, then "Band of Blades" by Evil Hat or "Ironsworn" are both good low-fantasy gritty role playing games with simple rules.


----------



## Puggins (Jan 14, 2020)

I’m always amused when someone mentions Conan as being low fantasy.  In fewer pages than a single LotR book he meets two dragons, at least three demons, a sorcerer that makes a dragon run the other way and a couple of what would be considered liches and a vampire queen.  He also manages to kill a demonic gorilla with a dagger and walks away from a beating from that gorilla.  A lich wrenches an ancient city from the past to exist in the present.  Huge serpents slither through the streets of Stygia on the new moon looking for human prey.  It makes Lord of the Rings feel like historical fiction.


----------



## JeffB (Jan 14, 2020)

Check out Runequest- While the classic (and once again core) setting Glorantha in the current RQ is high magic/high mythology, the core systems from the RQ 3rd edition (Avalon Hill), the Mongoose versions (MRQ1 and MRQ2- now called Legend I believe), the Design Mechanism (RQ6 and Mythras) or even just heading over to Chaosium and picking up Basic RP are all good ways to go.

Also

Chivalry & Sorcery


----------



## crazy_cat (Jan 14, 2020)

Low Fantasy Gaming ?


----------



## innerdude (Jan 14, 2020)

@Johnny3D3D -- Commenting on your reply to @Umbran upthread, my initial question would be, how is GURPS failing to provide the type of "low fantasy" feel that you want?

Because GURPS is certainly one of the go-to systems that comes to my mind when looking at playing a "low fantasy" campaign/system. In fact, it's probably one of the ONLY general game milieus to which I think I might enjoy GURPS at all. 

Any and all of the Runequest/BRP spinoffs are in many ways going to give you the same feel as GURPS --- deadly combat, loads of tactical combat options, roll-under system (though Runequest's flat distribution versus GURPS normal distribution/bell curve will definitely feel more "swingy" at times). 

I've read through the Legend PDF (the OGL version of Runequest 2) a few times---since it's free, after all---and my general impression is that it was very much tailored from the same basic cloth as GURPS, with the major differences being approaches to magic. So if you're just wanting to try something new without completely abandoning what you like about GURPS, this might not be a bad place to start. 

Now, if you're really wanting to "break the mold" from GURPS entirely, there's definitely more stuff out there. Barbarians of Lemuria, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplaying, Harn, Zweihander, Burning Wheel . . . heck, even Genesys would probably do "low fantasy" very well, depending on how you wanted to handle healing.

If you wanted to do "high action / low fantasy", Savage Worlds would also work really well, if you were willing to do a little research on how to "tune" the system to get the proper grim/gritty feel you want from it. But I rarely recommend Savage Worlds to hardcore GURPS players, because on the surface Savage Worlds looks a lot like GURPS, but once an old GURPS player starts digging in, they generally feel that Savage Worlds isn't nearly crunchy enough for their taste. 

But all of this is depending on what kind of game experience you want. Do you want more player narrative freedom? Do you like GURPS, but just want something slightly different? Do you want the players to feel more "heroic" than GURPS, but just want a low-fantasy setting to mill about in? 

I also think @Puggins comment is relevant as well---don't mistakenly equate a "low tech" setting/system with a "low fantasy" setting/system. 

If you're looking for some outstanding examples of what I'd consider "low fantasy" in fiction, I'd highly recommend reading any of Guy Gavriel Kay's pseudo-historical fantasy novels, particularly the Sarantium series, _The_ _Lions of Al-Rassan_, and _Under Heaven_. 

Thanks for being patient with my rambling thoughts, just throwing spaghetti against the wall here to see if anything is useful for sparking ideas.


----------



## B1okHead (Jan 14, 2020)

I have found Hackmaster 5e to be a refreshing take on D&D. A simple orc is stronger than a level 1 character and larger monsters like ogres can be truly terrifying. In general, the default setting is lowish magic with a heavy emphasis on verisimilitude.


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 14, 2020)

WFRP 1E can do this easily... just don't allow magic users careers, and don't use the demons in the bestiary. 2E is a bit less suited to it, but still quite reasonable.

While I've not personally used the "D&D E6", I've run all editions except OE, Holmes, and 4E through 7th+ and I agree a low-level capped D&D may work quite well, if one handles the monster choices carefully. 

GURPS can do it; whether it's a good choice or not depends upon GM self-control, and players agreeing to the limits... and everyone's tolerance for long skill lists. GURPS is a bit complex for even large skirmishes, but there's a mass combat mechanic in 3E (C I or C II) that allows that.

The Fantasy Trip is one I've used for this level/style, but only for minicampaigns (3-5 sessions) or one-shots (1-3 session single adventure); I have extensively played the solo modules. It's a far better fit than GURPS, IMO, in part because of the broader talents vs the narrow skills, and because the magic system is less convoluted, less potent, and closer to the swords-and-sorcery genre tone. Large (20 on a side) skirmishes can be played out with core mechanics, but are a bit slow. Mass battles are beyond scale, but the related "Lords of Underearth" is a related game.

Rolemaster is close to the best for this feel I've run/played, but I've not gotten past minicampaigns and 4th level. 

The old MERP is a streamlined version  of Rolemaster - lousy for Tolkien, but great for that pervasive yet low powered magic and larger than life zero-to-hero. Plus, MERP can use the wider RM monsters, as it's pretty compatible. MERP also much reduces the table load: weapons tables are 2 pages (vs over 20+ for RM), crits another 4 pages (vs about 15 in RM), and attack spells another page (vs 15+ for RM). Moving maneuver and static maneuver tables 1 page each (same as RM). Still, second best.

Which brings me to The One Ring. With Rivendell and the Corebook, one has probably the best for the lots of minor magic, no big magics in play, exotic critters, and slow growth with great thematic combat.


----------



## mach1.9pants (Jan 14, 2020)

Puggins said:


> I’m always amused when someone mentions Conan as being low fantasy.  In fewer pages than a single LotR book he meets two dragons, at least three demons, a sorcerer that makes a dragon run the other way and a couple of what would be considered liches and a vampire queen.  He also manages to kill a demonic gorilla with a dagger and walks away from a beating from that gorilla.  A lich wrenches an ancient city from the past to exist in the present.  Huge serpents slither through the streets of Stygia on the new moon looking for human prey.  It makes Lord of the Rings feel like historical fiction.



I guess because the protagonist doesn't use magic, only NPCs - just like LoTR with Gandalf the DMPC or Bad Guys. TO me that is a big part of Low Fantasy, what magic is available to the protagonist/player - if there is magic about they don't get much of it!


----------



## Argyle King (Jan 15, 2020)

Puggins said:


> I’m always amused when someone mentions Conan as being low fantasy.  In fewer pages than a single LotR book he meets two dragons, at least three demons, a sorcerer that makes a dragon run the other way and a couple of what would be considered liches and a vampire queen.  He also manages to kill a demonic gorilla with a dagger and walks away from a beating from that gorilla.  A lich wrenches an ancient city from the past to exist in the present.  Huge serpents slither through the streets of Stygia on the new moon looking for human prey.  It makes Lord of the Rings feel like historical fiction.




Even so, all of those things are presented in a way which is very different than a D&D party ROFL-stomping an encounter, magic items on every corner, and etc.

It's also worth mentioning that Conan is effectively a high-powered PC. He is capable of things beyond the normal folk of the setting. Yet, he's still vulnerable to mundane things in many circumstances -rather than becoming immune to the world around him. The world around him is a big part of what I consider as well, not just one character.

It's less about the content and more about how the content is presented.   As such, it fits, and -even if I were doing just a Conan game- I would find (and have found) most d20 games (with D&D-style HP, levels, and etc) to very poorly fit what I want out of the experience.




innerdude said:


> @Johnny3D3D -- Commenting on your reply to @Umbran upthread, my initial question would be, how is GURPS failing to provide the type of "low fantasy" feel that you want?
> 
> Because GURPS is certainly one of the go-to systems that comes to my mind when looking at playing a "low fantasy" campaign/system. In fact, it's probably one of the ONLY general game milieus to which I think I might enjoy GURPS at all.




I don't find it to be failing.  

I wanted to ask a question of others, to see what else may be out there. I'm curious to hear what others may recommend.

Having more options doesn't hurt. I may find other games which I enjoy or maybe I'll find a mechanic which I can import into a GURPS session.

I noticed Hackmaster mentioned. I do have one of the books from that system. I've never played it, but reading through it has been enjoyable.


----------



## Argyle King (Jan 15, 2020)

aramis erak said:


> WFRP 1E can do this easily... just don't allow magic users careers, and don't use the demons in the bestiary. 2E is a bit less suited to it, but still quite reasonable.
> 
> While I've not personally used the "D&D E6", I've run all editions except OE, Holmes, and 4E through 7th+ and I agree a low-level capped D&D may work quite well, if one handles the monster choices carefully.
> 
> ...





I'm mostly familiar with GURPS 4th Edition.

I have considered the new edition of The Fantasy Trip.


----------



## 3catcircus (Jan 15, 2020)

aramis erak said:


> Rolemaster is close to the best for this feel I've run/played, but I've not gotten past minicampaigns and 4th level.
> 
> The old MERP is a streamlined version  of Rolemaster - lousy for Tolkien, but great for that pervasive yet low powered magic and larger than life zero-to-hero. Plus, MERP can use the wider RM monsters, as it's pretty compatible. MERP also much reduces the table load: weapons tables are 2 pages (vs over 20+ for RM), crits another 4 pages (vs about 15 in RM), and attack spells another page (vs 15+ for RM). Moving maneuver and static maneuver tables 1 page each (same as RM). Still, second best.




In this regard, HARP might be a better choice than MERP.  Since the magic system in HARP is spells are learned skills, the GM can limit it as he sees fit, but it supposedly streamlines the Rolemaster rules even more and takes some design cues from d20 so it may be easier to grok.


----------



## The Crimson Binome (Jan 15, 2020)

Puggins said:


> I’m always amused when someone mentions Conan as being low fantasy.
> [...]
> It makes Lord of the Rings feel like historical fiction.



The problem is that The Forgotten Realms is such an absurdly High-magic setting, that it makes anything else look Low by comparison. By having that as the default, it skews perception about what's normal.


----------



## Bilharzia (Jan 16, 2020)

Mythras and Mythic Britain does this. You get a Bernard Cornwell-style depiction of Arthurian Britain, much closer to historical reality than you see in Excalibur for instance, but the spirits of Annwn Britain and the Saxon supernatural world are real, as well as a look-in from the early Christian church. The campaign supplement includes an adventure series that takes players across Britain searching for some of the treasures of Britain for Merlin, amongst other things and involves the PCs in larger scale battles against the Saxon invaders, using mass battle rules for the engagements.

For a smaller scale experience, the adventure and possible mini-campaign "Waterlands", uses the same Mythic Britain setting, to deliver a perfectly executed dark-age mystery-thriller, set in the fenlands of Lincolshire & Yorkshire and featuring a bit more of a 'local' Celtic supernatural experience.


----------



## pemerton (Jan 16, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> I also like the idea of castle sieges and ship-to-ship battles at sea feeling like fights and challenges rather than the PCs essentially being supers in comparison to the world around them.
> 
> I like the general vibe of some classic sword & sandal movies (Ben-Hur, Venus Meets the Son of Hercules, etc), but would like to add in more fantasy. I support (and enjoy) cinematic action and heroics, but I don't like how D&D and PF so quickly render certain challenges trivial; I believe something like a battle should be serious -regardless of level.
> 
> ...



Burning Wheel is good for what you're looking for, and no crunchier than GURPS. I would recommend it over Rolemaster, which (in my pretty extensive experience) pushes fairly strongly towards more widespread D&D-ish magic. HARP might be better in this respect, though without healing magic I suspect it might be pretty heavy going.

A system no one has mentioned yet is Prince Valiant. We've been playing that a lot lately - here's a link to an actual play report of our most recent session, which figured some skirmish-level resolution. (Two of the PCs lead a holy military order. And their participates in skirmish-type encounters in a meaningful way.)


----------



## BrokenTwin (Jan 16, 2020)

If you want something similar to D&D5e but lower on the player power scale, I'll second the suggestion for Shadow of the Demon Lord.

It has more of a horror fantasy vibe, rather than D&D's epic fantasy heroes feel. Easy to tweak to taste though.


----------



## Razjah (Jan 17, 2020)

A few people have mentioned some of the ones I would recommend:
Burning Wheel
Shadow of the Demon Lord
Forbidden Lands
Savage Worlds
E6 Style D&D/PF

Romance of the Perilous Land is very Authurian but would probably do what you are looking for as well.


----------



## Anoth (Jan 17, 2020)

Call of Cthulhu


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 18, 2020)

3catcircus said:


> In this regard, HARP might be a better choice than MERP.  Since the magic system in HARP is spells are learned skills, the GM can limit it as he sees fit, but it supposedly streamlines the Rolemaster rules even more and takes some design cues from d20 so it may be easier to grok.



It's not as well written, tho'. I've tried several times to read HARP, and found it just not up to the older quality.


----------



## Argyle King (Jan 18, 2020)

I had considered trying Genesys (the system which Edge of The Empire is based upon,) but I have not heard much about it.

Despite being constructed in a very different way than GURPS, I enjoy the Star Wars games. (In fact, I've actually borrowed a few mechanics from it that I've incorporated into GURPS when I GM.)

Now, with recent FFG woes, I'm on the fence about buying one of the books.


----------



## Argyle King (Jan 18, 2020)

pemerton said:


> Burning Wheel is good for what you're looking for, and no crunchier than GURPS. I would recommend it over Rolemaster, which (in my pretty extensive experience) pushes fairly strongly towards more widespread D&D-ish magic. HARP might be better in this respect, though without healing magic I suspect it might be pretty heavy going.
> 
> A system no one has mentioned yet is Prince Valiant. We've been playing that a lot lately - here's a link to an actual play report of our most recent session, which figured some skirmish-level resolution. (Two of the PCs lead a holy military order. And their participates in skirmish-type encounters in a meaningful way.)





I'll look into that. I'm reading some of your play report.


The stuff below isn't necessarily @ you. I just thought of it while reading.

Side note: I don't necessarily want to focus on mass combat, but that crops in a lot of my comments because it's a place where D&D tends to break down pretty badly for me.  In my mind, I have a lot of cool things I imagine concerning a siege scene or two ships of the line blasting each other in a naval fight.  However, those pieces of imagination (in the past) have played out at the d20 table as something along the lines of "I cast X, their whole ship dies."  Which isn't necessarily bad in a vacuum, but -when it becomes the norm- I find that it is a little bit of an imagination buzzkill.

It's not limited to magic either; just being a knight on horseback becomes a lot less cool when you realize that the whole character concept is based around a creature which is woefully unprepared to survive things which are generally trivial encounters.

As a poster upthread said, yes, Conan does include crazy gonzo magic, necromancers, and etc, but I find that it's still presented in a way which ties into the world rather than being in a power bubble floating above the world. The powerful sorcerer still has concerns about being stabbed in the face and dying (as opposed to shrugging it off as "oh well, I lost a few HP, but I'm good." Additionally, that translates into the heroes being similarly tied to the world because they're not required to be involved in an arms race of vertical math or magic item Christmas trees. 

I don't want to get stuck on a tangeant, but a lot of this captures previous conversations in which I have expressed having a love/hate relationship with D&D 4E. I actually really liked a lot of the game's concepts, but how those concepts were implemented went in a drastically different direction than my tastes.


----------



## GMMichael (Jan 18, 2020)

I'd like to give an honorable mention to my game, Modos RPG, for the following reasons (while the search for Best continues). . .



Johnny3D3D said:


> . . .the following list would be among the circles involved: R. Howard's_ Conan; _80s movies such as _Beastmaster, Dragonslayer, Legend, and Conan; _early seasons of _Game of Thrones; _PC game_ Mount & Blade; _the book version of confrontations with Smaug in _The Hobbit; _Arthurian fantasy and the knight on horseback trope; and heroic tier D&D.
> 
> . . .I'd prefer a magic sword to be cool because it has some manner of cool special feature rather than simply being a progression from +1 to +2.
> 
> ...



First, the magic rules are in a module.  Pull out the module and the remainder is, basically by default, low-fantasy.

Magic swords don't get damage or attack bonuses.  Actually, they don't exist in the book, except for the suggestion that a sword with increased damage has that feature by virtue of being on fire.

There aren't mass combat rules, but you can use the Engage skill to captivate your troops, Persuade to make them risk their lives, and Detect to decide how combat-ready they are.  The extended conflict rules support mass combat in the abstract.

Rampaging through a village is a bad idea; unopposed attacks (pitchforks) deal a minimum of one point of damage.  A tenth-level rampager, for example, with about 22 physical health, would come very close to a draw in a fight against six villagers in three rounds of combat.  Provided the villagers don't have much respect for their own lives


----------



## Nebulous (Jan 18, 2020)

BrokenTwin said:


> If you want something similar to D&D5e but lower on the player power scale, I'll second the suggestion for Shadow of the Demon Lord.
> 
> It has more of a horror fantasy vibe, rather than D&D's epic fantasy heroes feel. Easy to tweak to taste though.




I thought about running Shadow of the Demon Lord and overlay it with some classic 1e adventures.  How would that work?  Low to mid level, not high level.


----------



## Crusadius (Jan 19, 2020)

aramis erak said:


> WFRP 1E can do this easily... just don't allow magic users careers, and don't use the demons in the bestiary. 2E is a bit less suited to it, but still quite reasonable.




Even with magic user careers, I would consider WFRP 1E (or any edition) low fantasy (in comparison to D&D). I remember looking at the 1E wizard careers and the spell casting rules and thinking how hard it is to be a spell caster and as a consequence my first WFRP character was a Dwarf Pit Fighter-turned Troll Slayer (despite my favored choice of character type usually is magic user).


----------



## pemerton (Jan 19, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> As a poster upthread said, yes, Conan does include crazy gonzo magic, necromancers, and etc, but I find that it's still presented in a way which ties into the world rather than being in a power bubble floating above the world. The powerful sorcerer still has concerns about being stabbed in the face and dying (as opposed to shrugging it off as "oh well, I lost a few HP, but I'm good."



The closest I've ever felt to REH Conan in play is Burning Wheel - here's an actual play report.


----------



## PabloM (Jan 19, 2020)

Definitely _Forbidden Lands_ is the game you´re looking for.


----------



## Anoth (Jan 19, 2020)

It’s simple to make d&d more medieval. Most wizards are evil. Most kingdoms are evil. Evil doesn’t have to be snidely whiplash for kingdoms, it can be nobles more worried about their own positions and titles. Good wizards would not neccessarily be offering their services

don’t have court magicians. That is a big one. Or if you do have sorcerer Kings. Wizards don’t like to serve Kings they would much rather be the king. And with their power they could do it at high levels. Have wizards a little fearful of being known because sorcerer Kings or any king may want them killed for casting magic. Go back to only allowing good clerics or spellcasters to heal.

the Big one is superstition. Have the general populace fearful of spellcasters. Even a 20th level wizards can be destroyed in a mob of peasants fighting one that is in league with Lucifer.

make your clerics more like real world clerics. Limit their spells more like in early editions with less offensive magic. That may be more difficult in 5E.

That’s just a few and expect the last one that is kinda optional it really doesn’t affect mechanics.

another one would be to actually research the history of how people lived in that era.  The mechanics are not what is making d&d anti-medieval.


----------



## pemerton (Jan 19, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> just being a knight on horseback becomes a lot less cool when you realize that the whole character concept is based around a creature which is woefully unprepared to survive things which are generally trivial encounters.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> The powerful sorcerer still has concerns about being stabbed in the face and dying (as opposed to shrugging it off as "oh well, I lost a few HP, but I'm good." ically different direction than my tastes.





Anoth said:


> It’s simple to make d&d more medieval. Most wizards are evil. Most kingdoms are evil.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> ...



I think that the things I've quoted are @Johnny3D3D's main concerns about D&D. And they are mechanical issues. Changing cleric spell lists (itself a mechanical change) won't deal with them.

I think heroic tier 4e can deal with some of them but Johnny3D3D isn't looking to go down that pathway. But many of the various non-D&D systems mentioned in this thread can provide the sort of experience that is being looked for.


----------



## S'mon (Jan 19, 2020)

I'm using Mini Six RPG (free pdf at Mini Six: Bare Bones Edition - AntiPaladin Games | DriveThruRPG.com ) for a cinematic low fantasy swords & sorcery campaign. Not Game of Thrones gritty, but Conan/Kull/Beastmaster sort of level. Mini Six derives from the d6 System used for stuff like 1987's d6 Star Wars from West End Games, and does Hollywood style action very well.

My campaign page, including some rules extracts Primeval Thule


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 19, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> I had considered trying Genesys (the system which Edge of The Empire is based upon,) but I have not heard much about it.



Genesys is the child, not the parent... Genesys is based upon Edge.

If you like FFG star wars, you're not going to be making a horrible choice to pick up genesys, and maybe the setting books.


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 19, 2020)

mach1.9pants said:


> I guess because the protagonist doesn't use magic, only NPCs - just like LoTR with Gandalf the DMPC or Bad Guys. TO me that is a big part of Low Fantasy, what magic is available to the protagonist/player - if there is magic about they don't get much of it!



Actually, from certain points of view, LoTR is inundated with magics everywhere. Just most of them minor. 

Such as Aragorn packing Frodo's wound with Athelas...
Elven Cloaks - rare, but not artifact level rare.
Sting.
Mithril mail.

None of them are surprised that Sting is magical; Bilbo seems surprised they let _him_ keep it. If magic were rare, the greed of the dwarves would have rendered it an object of great desire.


----------



## S'mon (Jan 19, 2020)

S'mon said:


> I'm using Mini Six RPG (free pdf at Mini Six: Bare Bones Edition - AntiPaladin Games | DriveThruRPG.com ) for a cinematic low fantasy swords & sorcery campaign. Not Game of Thrones gritty, but Conan/Kull/Beastmaster sort of level. Mini Six derives from the d6 System used for stuff like 1987's d6 Star Wars from West End Games, and does Hollywood style action very well.
> 
> My campaign page, including some rules extracts Primeval Thule




Re mass combat mini 6 and d6 system have a great technique where you use average result for all dice except the Wild Die, and can assume 1 in 6 wild die rolls get a 6 and reroll. This makes it very easy to do say 60 shots at once vs the hero pc or ship.


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 19, 2020)

S'mon said:


> Re mass combat mini 6 and d6 system have a great technique where you use average result for all dice except the Wild Die, and can assume 1 in 6 wild die rolls get a 6 and reroll. This makes it very easy to do say 60 shots at once vs the hero pc or ship.




I found the WEG Star Wars Miniatures Battles rules a brilliant solution for d6 mass combat. And I say this as someone who loves the scaling and many-on-1 rules of 2E unrevised...

The basic idea is this: instead of the roll of a pool for a given character, roll 1d then add to the result the number before the d...
EG: Fred normally has 8d melee, and 5d melee parry. Fred rolls 1d6+8 to attack, and 1d+5 to parry. If he takes both, he's rolling 1d+7 attack and 1d+4 to parry.  I'll note that a 6 also open ends...
The default difficulties and damage steps are not coming to mind.

I've used it both for ground actions (which it was written for) and ship actions...  I was able to run a wing-vs-wing level fight, with PC squadron leaders, in about 5 hours.


----------



## S'mon (Jan 19, 2020)

aramis erak said:


> I found the WEG Star Wars Miniatures Battles rules a brilliant solution for d6 mass combat. And I say this as someone who loves the scaling and many-on-1 rules of 2E unrevised...
> 
> The basic idea is this: instead of the roll of a pool for a given character, roll 1d then add to the result the number before the d...
> EG: Fred normally has 8d melee, and 5d melee parry. Fred rolls 1d6+8 to attack, and 1d+5 to parry. If he takes both, he's rolling 1d+7 attack and 1d+4 to parry.  I'll note that a 6 also open ends...
> ...




That's nice; the Mini Six approach is to count each D as a 3; so 8D > 7x3=21+WD, 5D > 4x3=12+WD, which keeps close to the results of rolling 8d6 & 5d6. Mind you I'm not sure this is explicitly stated in the Mini 6 rulebook, I came across it in d6 Fantasy (etc), which unlike Mini Six use 3.5 not 3 per die. '3' certainly makes calculating much quicker while giving heroes a slight edge vs massed mooks, depending on where you cap dice rolls - the game suggests cap at 5d6 but I'm going with 10d6, so eg Emperor Palpatine 15D Force Sense skill > 10d6+15.


----------



## Scott Christian (Jan 19, 2020)

I saw this in B&N last night. I've never even heard of it, but it looked pretty good. Will pick it up and let you know if it meets your criteria. 









						ZWEIHANDER RPG: Revised Core Rulebook|Hardcover
					

2018 ENnie gold winner of Best Game and Product Of The Year, this revised edition features an all-new layout, rules clarifications, and errata updates from 2018.WELCOME TO GRIM & PERILOUS GAMING Featured on Forbes.com, ranked one of the best-selling fantasy...




					www.barnesandnoble.com


----------



## Scott Christian (Jan 19, 2020)

Judging by the description I read (first page), it seems to have what you are looking for. A group of villagers can still overpower a knight, etc.


----------



## PencilBoy99 (Jan 19, 2020)

Low Fantasy Gaming, Forbidden Lands


----------



## BrokenTwin (Jan 19, 2020)

Nebulous said:


> I thought about running Shadow of the Demon Lord and overlay it with some classic 1e adventures.  How would that work?  Low to mid level, not high level.



I haven't had much difficulty converting things to SotDL. Biggest thing to remember with monsters is that if they have large to-hit modifiers, convert part of the bonus to boon(s) instead, otherwise they'll never miss the party.
If you understand the rules well enough, converting on the fly is relatively easy. Honestly, I find converting OSR adventures to be a lot less work than D&D5e adventures. You'll definitely want to cut back on the amount of loot you hand out though. I find the expected amount of loot from most adventures to be a LOT higher (like, 10x and up) than what SotDL assumes you'll be giving them. Not a game breaker by any means, just something to keep in mind.
And if you're doing a megadungeon or other larger adventure, keep in mind that SotDL assuming characters level up after every adventure, so there's no EXP rules in the book. If you want to use loot as experience or experience points in general, you're going to have to ad hoc something.


----------



## Nebulous (Jan 19, 2020)

BrokenTwin said:


> And if you're doing a megadungeon or other larger adventure, keep in mind that SotDL assuming characters level up after every adventure, so there's no EXP rules in the book. If you want to use loot as experience or experience points in general, you're going to have to ad hoc something.




Every adventure/session you level up?  I don't use XP in D&D, I just do milestones.


----------



## pogre (Jan 19, 2020)

Scott Christian said:


> I saw this in B&N last night. I've never even heard of it, but it looked pretty good. Will pick it up and let you know if it meets your criteria.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It is a love letter to Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, which is mentioned up thread. IMO it would take some heavy rules modifications to fit the OP's stated goals.


----------



## BrokenTwin (Jan 19, 2020)

Nebulous said:


> Every adventure/session you level up?  I don't use XP in D&D, I just do milestones.



SotDL was build with the assumption that each session is a single adventure, with long stretches of in-world downtime between sessions.
If you're already using milestones, than the conversion is dirt simple. Since most campaign books / adventure paths / d20 adventures assume the characters are getting up to a lot more "on screen" than SotDL does, you just need to space out your milestones appropriately to match the expected power curve. I did something similar when I converted Lost Mines of Phandelver.


----------



## pemerton (Jan 20, 2020)

If the goal is to have a play experience that feels something like REH Conan, or perhaps Arthurian legend, then it's not just about converting D&D modules (with their dungeons, treasure, etc) to a system with grittier combat.


----------



## Argyle King (Jan 20, 2020)

pemerton said:


> If the goal is to have a play experience that feels something like REH Conan, or perhaps Arthurian legend, then it's not just about converting D&D modules (with their dungeons, treasure, etc) to a system with grittier combat.





There's truth to that.

Combat is part of it, but how the other "pillars" are handled is part of it also.


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 20, 2020)

pemerton said:


> If the goal is to have a play experience that feels something like REH Conan, or perhaps Arthurian legend, then it's not just about converting D&D modules (with their dungeons, treasure, etc) to a system with grittier combat.



On the other hand, the dungeon concept is very strong in Conan novels... and movies... 

But they're not all underground. Some are - the movies have several nifty "dungeons" in the D&D sense... but not the historical one... Castles on hills, cathedrals underground, mazes in the mountains... Conan's dungeons are mostly functional places, not simple prisons or monster-hovels.

And the novels have even better cave and fortress complexes. Not a one of which is good against Conan and a friend or two... 

D&D can work quite well for such a setting - AD&D did it just fine in the  CB series modules. But those were carefully worded.

And avoided most of D&D's kitchen sink.


----------



## pemerton (Jan 20, 2020)

aramis erak said:


> On the other hand, the dungeon concept is very strong in Conan novels... and movies...



My knowledge of the Conan movies is weak. I know the REH stories fairly well. Dungeons _in the D&D sense_ aren't a big part of them. For instance, the action in The Tower of the Elephant is, in D&D terms, confined to a few rooms. In The Scarlet Citadel there is the giant snake, the hell plant and the encounter with the wizard who's name I temporarily forget, the pit with the ghost/spirit/floating thing, and the gibbering mouther.

Exploration is not really a focus - even less so than in JRRT's account of Moria, I would say - and he is not looting them for treasure: even though The Tower of the Elephant starts this way, it doesn't end this way; and in the one about the Jewels of Gwahlur the jewels end up being sacrificed to save Conan's companion.

Off the top of my head I can't think of any D&D dungeon that would be a good REH Conan vehicle. Maybe if some of Gygax's weird shrines (like in KotB) are excised from their bigger locations and made into their own things, that might have the right feel.


----------



## Puggins (Jan 20, 2020)

pemerton said:


> My knowledge of the Conan movies is weak. I know the REH stories fairly well. Dungeons _in the D&D sense_ aren't a big part of them. For instance, the action in The Tower of the Elephant is, in D&D terms, confined to a few rooms. In The Scarlet Citadel there is the giant snake, the hell plant and the encounter with the wizard who's name I temporarily forget, the pit with the ghost/spirit/floating thing, and the gibbering mouther.




That’s more a question of  story scope than anything else, really.  Conan stories would usually fit into a single session of an rpg campaign.  Even though some games are designed specifically for that style of play (SotDL, for example, which I am also a really big fan of), you can easily pull this off with 5e.

As for specific recommendations, I definitely don’t see eye to eye with the OP’s characterization of Conan as low fantasy, but I’d echo a few recommendations.

* Using 5e but limiting character choices to fighter, ranger and rogue and us8ng alternate rewards (ala 4e dark sun/13a glorantha) is probably the best way to go, frankly, if you want to echo the Conan stories.  Sprinkle in high level mystical threats with not-so-showy powers and you have an almost perfect engine for the short stories.

* SotDL is an excellent option, but it’s deadly.  I’m not sure the Conan stories would be an awesome fit, but this games would work really well for magic-rare games- just dial back the “Demon Lord is on the doorstep of reality” conceit and you’re there.


----------



## pemerton (Jan 20, 2020)

Puggins said:


> That’s more a question of  story scope than anything else, really.  Conan stories would usually fit into a single session of an rpg campaign.



I'm not 100% sure what you mean by "scope", but I would say this is about the focus and theme of the fiction. There is not a great focus on exploration in the stories I mentioned. To emulate them in a RPG, I'd be resolving an Escape or Search-type check and on a success or failure framing the appropriate situation in the dungeon. And also looking for some sort of buff when heroic/valorous action is undertaken (like rescuing Pelias the wizard).


----------



## Scott Christian (Jan 22, 2020)

pogre said:


> It is a love letter to Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, which is mentioned up thread. IMO it would take some heavy rules modifications to fit the OP's stated goals.



Ahh... okay. Thank you for the clarification. Maybe it was the art work, but it just looked (at a glance) as if it was low fantasy. Thanks again.


----------



## S'mon (Jan 22, 2020)

Scott Christian said:


> Ahh... okay. Thank you for the clarification. Maybe it was the art work, but it just looked (at a glance) as if it was low fantasy. Thanks again.




WFRP is a particular sort of ultra-gritty low fantasy.


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 25, 2020)

S'mon said:


> WFRP is a particular sort of ultra-gritty low fantasy.



Not really. It has powerful casters, and lots of overt magic.


----------



## reelo (Jan 25, 2020)

Low Fantasy Gaming, Forbidden Lands, Beyond the Wall, Crypts & Things, Old-School Essentials, ...
Take your pick!


----------



## Argyle King (Jan 26, 2020)

_edit: This meandered all over the place.  I'm not sure if the end result was something which contains a coherent idea._

If this helps any, part of my "problem" with trying to do this style with D&D/d20 often boils down to how (for a lack of better words) the "world math" of the games work. 

I'm pefectly fine with PCs being above and beyond average folk. They're heroes, so they should be. (Likewise, "named" villains should be above the common orc rabble.)

At the same time, it's a bit anticlimactic when scenes such as castle sieges or ship battles are regularly so easily short-circuited by readily available resources and built-in assumptions of how the game is designed. The key word there is "regularly." If the players come up with a cool way to solve a challenge or use a strategy that the GM hadn't considered, that's something I see as good; the fact that the players are that engaged to put that much thought into it should be applauded. However, when it becomes a problem is when the players are so above and beyond the world around them that it doesn't even make sense to buy into the scene from an in-game perspective. The type of narrative I would like to tell is still possible, but it suffers (likely in a similar way that trying to tell a 4-color Supers story is professed to not work for some people in GURPS; the game can do it, but the mechanical strengths of the game likely lend it to something else more readily).

I often compare my rpg tastes to professional wrestling (because I believe it's a good analogy). A pro-wrestling match contains a ton of things which likely would not work in an actual fight. (However, to be fair, some things certainly would.) That being said, when it's done well, I still have an ability to suspend my disbelief and enjoy it. The small details are often more important than the big details.

The idea that the Undertaker is some sort of undead mortician who can call lightning from the sky does not jar me out of enjoying the show.  I can even buy that Hulk Hogan is essentially a paladin (or maybe barbarian) who can tap into the power of the fans to "hulk up" and recover from massive damage to come back and win.  On the other hand, when someone does something like no-sells (shows no ill effects) from being kicked in testicles, it can be a bit tough to buy into it.  If on the next show, if the ante is upped by no-selling a hit in the testicles with a flaming barbed-wire covered baseball bat, something about that isn't going to compute in my brain.  

Maybe if it were a one-time thing and explained storywise as a burst of adrenaline or something... yeah, okay, maybe.  But if it's happening every encounter?  At that point, something isn't making sense... or, you run into the Superman problem: once everybody is at a power level to shrug stuff like that off, the only way to advance the story is by continuing to stack more and more ridiculousness and power onto the situation.  That might be fun the first few times, but -for me- it starts to have diminishing returns.


----------



## PencilBoy99 (Jan 26, 2020)

Also any of the Renaissance d100 things. Also the wildly underrated Shadow Sword and Spell / Colonial Gothic.


----------



## Crusadius (Jan 27, 2020)

aramis erak said:


> Not really. It has powerful casters, and lots of overt magic.




For starting characters WFRP is low fantasy. I played 1E for two years and only got to a 2nd career, and still no magic items, the wizard's apprentice fearful of casting spells and no healing. Our characters were at risk of random goblin with dagger getting a lucky blow in and ending our lives. 4E does make this less likely but the dearth of magic items and healing is still there.

Warhammer Fantasy Battles does, unfortunately, give people the impression that WFRP has characters involved in big magical battles every day since they're both using the same setting.


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 27, 2020)

Crusadius said:


> For starting characters WFRP is low fantasy. I played 1E for two years and only got to a 2nd career, and still no magic items, the wizard's apprentice fearful of casting spells and no healing. Our characters were at risk of random goblin with dagger getting a lucky blow in and ending our lives. 4E does make this less likely but the dearth of magic items and healing is still there.
> 
> Warhammer Fantasy Battles does, unfortunately, give people the impression that WFRP has characters involved in big magical battles every day since they're both using the same setting.



So does TEW, and running TEW, I've never failed to have 2nd rank casters (3rd or 4th career characters) by the end of DotR. The suggested XP levels are plenty good for pushing up the levels. And not a one of those was over 1 year of weekly sessions. 

It's only low fantasy if the GM isn't using the setting as written, and is stingy with XP.


----------



## Crusadius (Jan 27, 2020)

aramis erak said:


> It's only low fantasy if the GM isn't using the setting as written, and is stingy with XP.




I think my opinion on what constitutes low fantasy is different to yours. I see D&D as high fantasy because you are expected to collect magic items as you advance levels, and you need magical healing and easily get it with a cleric. 

Whereas WFRP doesn't give out magical weapons like candy (if at all) and magical healing is rare.

Disease in D&D is no threat with the aforementioned cleric whereas WFRP lists gruesome diseases that threaten the health of characters.

So to me WFRP is low fantasy despite having wizards who can blast the heavens. But as you say, it can also come down to the GM running it.


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 28, 2020)

Crusadius said:


> I think my opinion on what constitutes low fantasy is different to yours. I see D&D as high fantasy because you are expected to collect magic items as you advance levels, and you need magical healing and easily get it with a cleric.
> 
> Whereas WFRP doesn't give out magical weapons like candy (if at all) and magical healing is rare.
> 
> ...



If you have a wizard per city who can take out an entire company of troops with one spell, it's NOT low-fantasy. 
If you have threats that require that power level to solve, again, not Low Fantasy.
If you have the ability to generate PC's with that power level, again, not Low Fantasy.
If a wizard can cast a spell in under a minute, not low fantasy.

WFRP is neither high fantasy, nor low, but in between. Or more accurately, it falls in a different subgenre... Dark Fantasy.


----------



## GMMichael (Jan 28, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> _edit: This meandered all over the place.  I'm not sure if the end result was something which contains a coherent idea. . . _
> 
> Maybe if it were a one-time thing and explained storywise as a burst of adrenaline or something... yeah, okay, maybe.  But if it's happening every encounter?  At that point, something isn't making sense... or, you run into the Superman problem: once everybody is at a power level to shrug stuff like that off, the only way to advance the story is by continuing to stack more and more ridiculousness and power onto the situation.  That might be fun the first few times, but -for me- it starts to have diminishing returns.



I think you made it to "coherent" at the end here.  Congrats!

So what you're saying is that you'd like to run a professional wrestling RPG in a medieval-low-fantasy setting? 

Since you mentioned D&D again, out here on page 4 after so many other games have been proffered, I'd say you have a slight addiction.  I recommend hiding the books, watching five back-to-back episodes of the Dark Crystal (AoR) on Netflix, and then decide what you want more: to watch the remaining five episodes, or open your D&D books again.  If you choose Dark Crystal, there is hope for you!


----------



## Aldarc (Jan 28, 2020)

Reading through some of the discussion of the thread, I get the feeling that people are talking past each other regarding the meaning of terms. It seems that are multiple gradients of a setting that are getting conflated: low/high fantasy with low/high magic. I don't necessarily think that these things are necessarily synonymous.


----------



## Argyle King (Jan 28, 2020)

DMMike said:


> I think you made it to "coherent" at the end here.  Congrats!
> 
> So what you're saying is that you'd like to run a professional wrestling RPG in a medieval-low-fantasy setting?
> 
> Since you mentioned D&D again, out here on page 4 after so many other games have been proffered, I'd say you have a slight addiction.  I recommend hiding the books, watching five back-to-back episodes of the Dark Crystal (AoR) on Netflix, and then decide what you want more: to watch the remaining five episodes, or open your D&D books again.  If you choose Dark Crystal, there is hope for you!





I only mentioned it to address more-recent comments which had mentioned it.

I would likely not pick Dark Crystal, but that's because I've already watched all of the available episodes. I might fire up a new game of Mount & Blade though; I'm anxiously awaiting the newer game.


----------



## GMMichael (Jan 29, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> I would likely not pick Dark Crystal, but that's because I've already watched all of the available episodes. I might fire up a new game of Mount & Blade though; I'm anxiously awaiting the newer game.



Me too, but I need to watch them again!

Dark Crystal's a good palette cleanser from D&D because it's low magic (the Skeksis, who look like lizard-illithid, use iron weapons instead of spells for Pete's sake) and you can't find any of the given races in a Monster Manual.

Game of Thrones might be a better choice, since someone designed a game for it, and it's thoroughly low-fantasy.  Until the horde of undead show up.

Mount & Blade looks like a good choice as well!


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 29, 2020)

Anoth said:


> It’s simple to make d&d more medieval... don’t have court magicians.



There were court magicians in medieval Europe, mostly astrologers and other kinds of diviner.

Within courtly society itself, diviners seem to have been very much in demand... we know there were often astrologers at court, and they gained special popularity there in the twelfth century.
- Magic in the Middle Ages (1989) Richard Kieckhefer​


----------



## Anoth (Jan 29, 2020)

Doug McCrae said:


> There were court magicians in medieval Europe, mostly astrologers and other kinds of diviner.
> 
> Within courtly society itself, diviners seem to have been very much in demand... we know there were often astrologers at court, and they gained special popularity there in the twelfth century.​- Magic in the Middle Ages (1989) Richard Kieckhefer​




very good point. And something to take into consideration. They also weren’t throwing fireballs and teleporting all over creation that I know of. They may have just been someone with the 2E proficiency in astrology. But thanks for the reference. That will be the next book I order. Greatly appreciated.


----------



## Tony Vargas (Jan 29, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> _~GURPS Fantasy _
> 
> With that sliding scale in mind, my desire is for something which is weighted more toward the "history" and reality end of the spectrum.



Since you mentioned it, why not GURPS Fantasy?  Maybe crossed with High Tech?

RuneQuest always struck me as fairly 'low fantasy' in the sense you're using, too  - but, though it doesn't have levels, per se, I only ever played at the equivalent of low level.  At 'Rune' levels it might be more high-fantasy.

D&D - including PF, 13A, &c - is obviously right out.  

hmm.... while it's more cinematic, 7th Sea might not be entirely off base.


----------



## Anoth (Jan 29, 2020)

Tony Vargas said:


> Since you mentioned it, why not GURPS Fantasy?  Maybe crossed with High Tech?
> 
> RuneQuest always struck me as fairly 'low fantasy' in the sense you're using, too  - but, though it doesn't have levels, per se, I only ever played at the equivalent of low level.  At 'Rune' levels it might be more high-fantasy.
> 
> ...




runequest can get way complicated if you let it. And the spells and armor rules real get clunky any interesting. Much prefer playing COC. But i still steal ideas from runequest and it’s relatives.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Jan 29, 2020)

@Anoth I should add that magic was also popular amongst the common people, I think in much the same way alternative medicine, palmistry, spirit mediums, and astrology are popular today (but even more so). It blended with Christianity. Spells made use of Bible passages or invoked God, Jesus, the Virgin Mary, etc. Consecrated communion wafers were believed to have magical powers, and were sometimes stolen for this purpose.

We find various types of people involved in diverse magical activities: monks, parish priests, physicians, surgeon-barbers, midwives, folk healers and diviners with no formal training, and even ordinary women and men who, without claiming special knowledge or competence, used whatever magic they happened to know
- Kieckhefer, as above​


----------



## DeanP (Jan 30, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> First, to prevent starting from a miscommunication: what do I mean by "low fantasy"?
> 
> The common literary definition does not quite fit what I want. I prefer something similar to the definitions found in _GURPS Fantasy._
> 
> ...




Forbidden Lands.


----------



## slipshot762 (Jan 30, 2020)

I reccomend D6 Fantasy.


----------



## pemerton (Jan 30, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> part of my "problem" with trying to do this style with D&D/d20 often boils down to how (for a lack of better words) the "world math" of the games work.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> At the same time, it's a bit anticlimactic when scenes such as castle sieges or ship battles are regularly so easily short-circuited by readily available resources and built-in assumptions of how the game is designed.



Have you considered running a system which is "fiction first" rather than "mechanics first"?

By that, I mean a system where the mechanics establish success or failure, but _what this means in the fiction _is much more about how the GM has framed things, and how the GM and players have established what is at stake in resolution, rather than (wargame-style) reading a fictional result of a numerical outcome of the resolution process. Or in other words, roughly the opposite of GURPS!

There are a lot of systems like this. Dungeon World is one, and it isn't quite low fantasy, but it might be low enough for your purposes. And there's plenty of good advice (on this board and elsewhere) for helping to run it.


----------



## Argyle King (Feb 1, 2020)

pemerton said:


> Have you considered running a system which is "fiction first" rather than "mechanics first"?
> 
> By that, I mean a system where the mechanics establish success or failure, but _what this means in the fiction _is much more about how the GM has framed things, and how the GM and players have established what is at stake in resolution, rather than (wargame-style) reading a fictional result of a numerical outcome of the resolution process. Or in other words, roughly the opposite of GURPS!
> 
> There are a lot of systems like this. Dungeon World is one, and it isn't quite low fantasy, but it might be low enough for your purposes. And there's plenty of good advice (on this board and elsewhere) for helping to run it.




I have. 

I find that (for me) I think the two go hand-in-hand. I'm somebody for whom the mechanics and narrative have a relationship.

That being said, the narrative approach of Edge of The Empire is something I highly enjoyed (and I have liberally borrowed some of the game's concepts when running GURPS). I'm aware that Genysis is derived from EoTE, but haven't heard much concerning how well it works for what I have in mind.


----------



## TheSword (Feb 1, 2020)

I have tried Adventures in Middle Earth and Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 4e.

I enjoyed both and they capture what I would consider low fantasy. Magic and magic items are rare and martial classes dominate.


----------



## TwoSix (Feb 1, 2020)

Crusadius said:


> I think my opinion on what constitutes low fantasy is different to yours. I see D&D as high fantasy because you are expected to collect magic items as you advance levels, and you need magical healing and easily get it with a cleric.
> 
> Whereas WFRP doesn't give out magical weapons like candy (if at all) and magical healing is rare.
> 
> ...



With the understanding that these terms aren't defined in any way other than soft conventions of use, I'd probably say that equating high-fantasy with "scientific fantasy", for lack of a better term (magic is used to power devices and help improve the human condition) aren't the same, although they are commonly correlated.  

Depending on how magic is structured, you could easily have a low-magic but high convenience setting, where the only magic is potions and tinctures to cure disease and trauma, and small devices to help with daily chores (an enchanted cookpot that can warm itself, a magic icebox).  It sort of reminds me of the items powered by sygaldry in the Kingkiller Chronicles.

Likewise, you could have a high-magic but low-convenience setting, where wizards can raise undead armies and blast apart cities, but no one has magic that can mend a sword blow.  Like a setting where the only types of magic are pyromancy and necromancy.


----------



## John R Davis (Feb 2, 2020)

Romance of the Perilous Lands is great. D20 inspired with interesting take on DND style magic in a near Britain land set just post dark ages.


----------



## aramis erak (Feb 7, 2020)

Tony Vargas said:


> Since you mentioned it, why not GURPS Fantasy?  Maybe crossed with High Tech?
> 
> RuneQuest always struck me as fairly 'low fantasy' in the sense you're using, too  - but, though it doesn't have levels, per se, I only ever played at the equivalent of low level.  At 'Rune' levels it might be more high-fantasy.



Sounds like you only played the Mongoose version and later...
Earlier, many, if not most, characters wound up with a couple spells.


Anoth said:


> runequest can get way complicated if you let it. And the spells and armor rules real get clunky any interesting. Much prefer playing COC. But i still steal ideas from runequest and it’s relatives.



At least in RQ3 (Chaosium/AH/GW), the armor rules are dead simple... armor on a location reduces damage from a hit to that location.
The magic rules, yeah, they can be a bit cumbersome... but they're more consistent than, say, D&D's...


----------



## aramis erak (Feb 7, 2020)

DMMike said:


> Dark Crystal's a good palette cleanser from D&D because it's low magic (the Skeksis, who look like lizard-illithid, use iron weapons instead of spells for Pete's sake) and you can't find any of the given races in a Monster Manual.
> 
> Game of Thrones might be a better choice, since someone designed a game for it, and it's thoroughly low-fantasy.  Until the horde of undead show up.



Luke Crane designed a TDC RPG, based upon Mouse Guard... Archaia Studio Press paid him for it, but for whatever reasons, have not released it. Luke noted he was done writing it in 2013. I suspect Archaia had license issues.

I've been waiting for release of it for 8 years now...


----------



## Tony Vargas (Feb 7, 2020)

aramis erak said:


> Sounds like you only played the Mongoose version and later...
> Earlier, many, if not most, characters wound up with a couple spells.



Nope, RQII (c1980).  Though, IIRC, the latest versions call back to it, rather than to RQ3 (which had sorcery and so forth, and was closer to what the OP was considering high fantasy, though still not to the extent D&D rapidly gets into).



> At least in RQ3 (Chaosium/AH/GW), the armor rules are dead simple... armor on a location reduces damage from a hit to that location.
> The magic rules, yeah, they can be a bit cumbersome... but they're more consistent than, say, D&D's...



The magic in RQII was battle magic and rune magic.  The former most any character could learn, but it wasn't the kind of overt/spectacular magic the OP seemed to want to avoid, really, a lot of battlemagic you could have written off as superstition.  Rune Magic had more going on, but I didn't ever get a character to the point they could more than dabble in temporary Rune Magic, so can't speak to the feel of it, so much.

Where RQ might not be such a great fit to the OP's 'low fantasy' is some of the monsters got a little whackier than your usual elves & dragons and so forth.

Where RQ (BRP) is a good fit is that it's a fairly wargaming-style 'realistic' take.  The guys that came up with it were SCAers and applied personal experience with modeled sword & board combat.  The skill system, likewise, captures some 'realistic' (moreso than D&D with it's meteoric zero-to-hero advancement) development, in that you advance, incrementally, in the skills you actually use & train in.


----------



## aramis erak (Feb 8, 2020)

Tony Vargas said:


> Where RQ might not be such a great fit to the OP's 'low fantasy' is some of the monsters got a little whackier than your usual elves & dragons and so forth.
> 
> Where RQ (BRP) is a good fit is that it's a fairly wargaming-style 'realistic' take.  The guys that came up with it were SCAers and applied personal experience with modeled sword & board combat.  The skill system, likewise, captures some 'realistic' (moreso than D&D with it's meteoric zero-to-hero advancement) development, in that you advance, incrementally, in the skills you actually use & train in.



*I agree on its realism, to a point.* To be more specific:

The combat mechanics are excessive on the fumbles (both frequency and severity). In part, I suspect, to the mid-70's lack of research and experience of SCA Armored Combat at that time. Even given the 12 second combat rounds... too many fumbles.

A typical flurry in SCA rapier is about 4-5 seconds, but includes 2-5 attacks and 2-5 parries. I've seen few disarms not caused by hits to hand or arm; intentional disarms are bloody hard to do. The combat round has too little action. Heavy can do about the same... Tattershall and FKA fighters also do similar speeds,  But I also know that such flurries are often several seconds apart... I've often stood there waiting for a motion of import for up to a dozen seconds...  so the number of attacks is low - a typical fight is under 30 seconds. 

*If one is coming from 2E* (which I have a copy of but have not run) I can see it being interpreted as much lower magic than the supplements and later games in the setting of Glorantha,,, 2e as a low-rate of using magic seems plausible but misinterpreted. Especially given that about 1/5 of the sheet is spell listing space. Especially given the wording on page 31 of 2E: 
The listed battle magic spells can be learned from almost any Rune cult. There is nothing secret about them and they are commonly available to any character with the money to pay for them. These spells are the common property of all the magical orders.​
If one treats the cult credit as part of CGen, it's very useful to have credit for a combat guild and a rune cult, both of which will also drive adventures for the character in paying them off.


----------



## Bilharzia (Feb 8, 2020)

*RuneQuest 6* uses 5-second rounds during which most human characters can make 3 actions. The addition of Special Effects have dramatically improved the verisimilitude and interest of RQ combat, although they add complexity, combats now don't end when opponents have been chopped to bits, but usually when they have been disabled and/or surrendered. The new combat mechanics were developed and tested by people with both SCA and HEMA experience. It doesn't pretend to be a perfect simulation but instead to have the feel of realistic combat while keeping reasonably playable, for more realism, see GURPS if that's what you're after.

*Low Magic / High Magic?* - this depends on the campaign. There are 5 magic systems in the core rules. A campaign setting like Mythic Britain only uses Celtic Druidic Animism which can call on the spirits of Annwn, and the early Christian church (Theism) but christian miracles are extremely rare, and called on through devotion to saints. Most players will have no access to magic, unless they play a druid who will have some ability to negotiate with spirits but will have no ability to cast magic directly themselves.

Other campaign settings such as Monster Island include sorcery (used by corrupt Serpent folk), animism (used by tribal peoples) and theism (used by colonial settlers. Each is in-keeping with a sword & sorcery setting inspired by Clark Ashton Smith, and as a result can be risky and unpredictable to use.

RuneQuest 6 came out in 2012, and was renamed to* Mythras* in 2016, when Chaosium took the licence back in-house. RuneQuest in Glorantha published now by Chaosium goes back to RQ2.

Mythras continues the RuneQuest 6 under the new name. It has a fair few supplements out:

*Free stuff -*
http://thedesignmechanism.com/downloads
Mythras Imperative - a 40 page version of the core system, includes chargen, combat, Folk Magic & Superpowers.
Games Master's Pack - charts, tables & two adventures
Firearms - covers from black powder to SF
Sariniya's Curse - intro adventure with pregen characters
Thennla - intro to the Thennla setting
Caravan - excerpted from "Book of Quests"
Caves of the Circind - excerpted from "Mythic Britain"

*Rules additions -*
Mythras Companion - tactical combat, social conflict, sanity & corruption, vehicles, chases, chargen alternatives.
Ships & Shieldwalls - rules for ships, and rules for mass combat

*Mythic Britain -*
Mythic Britain + "Waterlands" adventure
Mythic Logres
Mythic Rome
Mythic Constantinople + "Life's Long Consequences" adventure

*Thennla -*
Shores of Korantia
The Taskan Empire
Sorandib - city location, adventures and new rules for Alchemy & Artificing
The Arkuline Tribute (adventure)
Khakun Shrugs (adventure)

*Classic Fantasy -*
Classic Fantasy Rules - a translation of the d&d tropes to Mythras
Classic Fantasy Expert Set
7 adventure modules

*Other Settings -*
Luther Arkwright - Steampunk Superpowers + "Parallel Lines" adventure
Worlds United - Planetary Romance supplement
After the Vampire Wars - Urban fantasy

*Combat Modules -* these are encounters designed to showcase the combat rules
Breaking the Habit - close order melee
Take Cover! - ranged combat

*Adventures & Supplements -*
Monster Island - a landmark supplement, a weird fiction sword & sorcery campaign book
Book of Quests - a campaign series of adventures in "The Realm"
Hessaret's Treasure
Xamoxis' Cleansing
A Gift from Shamash - a SF/Horror adventure
Madness & Other Colours - bonkers adventure on a sorcerer's base
White Death - contemporary (1980s) espionage adventure on an arctic floe
Agony & Ecstacy - a superhero adventure with pregen supers & brief superpower rules
Mythras Combat Cards - Player game aid detailing special effects
Coddefut's Stipule - an adventure for the forthcoming Lyonesse

*Mediterráneo Mítico* - a Spanish campaign setting "Mythic Mediterranean" and series of adventures "The Fate of Atlantis". Not available in English.

*Frostbyte Books (Third party publisher) -*
M-Space - Toolkit SF RPG, similar feel to Traveller
Odd Soot - SF Mystery 1920 alternate Earth

*Old Bones Publishing (Third party publisher) -*
Savage Swords Against the Necromancer - Sword & sorcery adventure
Secrets of Blood Rock - Fantasy/horror adventure
Broch Groddath - 'Haunted house' adventure
+ a number of free game aids

*Mythras en Francais*
DriveThruRPG.com - d100.fr - The Largest RPG Download Store!

*Mythras Deutsche*
Home

*Mythras en Español*
https://www.77mundos.com/

*Mythas in Brazil*
Log In or Sign Up to View

*Media -
Mythras Matters* - a monthly podcast dedicated to Mythras produced by Inwils - Mythras Matters
*Mythras Rules* - a video guide to Mythras produced by Inwils - Mythras Rules YouTube playlist
*Official Discussion Forum* - Design Mechanism
*The Design Mechanism* - The Design Mechanism
*Discord* - Join the Mythras Discord Server!
*Subreddit* - r/Mythras
*Fenix* - Swedish RPG magazine features a regular column in English written by Pete Nash (English compilations and articles available from Driverthrurpg - https://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse/pub/8767/Askfageln/subcategory/31736/Fenix-in-English)
*Runeblog* - not exclusively Mythras but arguably the most active website featuring Mythras, in Spanish and English - https://elruneblog.blogspot.com/
*Mythras Encounter Generator* - Skollz's site is one of the wonders of Mythras, an encounter generator for Mythras - http://skoll.xyz/mythras_eg/ - to really appreciate and understand how it works requires a visit to 'Notes from Pavis' ...
*Notes from Pavis* - despite the title, this is not exclusively Gloranthan it is the home of Hannu Kokko's reference sheets and work with the Mythras Encounter Generator - https://notesfrompavis.blog/
*Roll20* - Mythras has a dedicated, comprehensive sheet written by Matt Carpenter. It can be slow to use at the moment but a new version of the sheet is in development which should resolve the performance issues dramatically, until then Firefox goes a long way towards a speedier experience. It works fine with a free Roll20 account.


*Due for release in 2020 -*
Lyonesse - a self contained RPG based on the Jack Vance novels.
Mythic Babylon - the latest in the Mythic Earth series.

*In the works -*
Mythic Greece - probably 2021
"Destined" - a superheroes supplement
Fioracitta - Italian city state supplement
Mythic Polynesia - being worked out but in early development

_Lyonesse _(and others) preview from here - https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/des...s-lyonesse-fioracitta-take-cover-c-t3278.html


----------



## DammitVictor (Feb 9, 2020)

Five pages deep and I can't believe I have the privilege of being the first to mention _Barbarians of Lemuria_ which is available in both free and premium versions-- and _The BoL Hack_, by the author himself, for people who want a _little_ more of that D&D flavor in their BoL.

It is a dead simple 2d6 + X + Y affair with combat and skill systems designed to model competent action-adventure heroes.


----------



## reelo (Feb 9, 2020)

FaerieGodfather said:


> Five pages deep and I can't believe I have the privilege of being the first to mention _Barbarians of Lemuria_ which is available in both free and premium versions-- and _The BoL Hack_, by the author himself, for people who want a _little_ more of that D&D flavor in their BoL.
> 
> It is a dead simple 2d6 + X + Y affair with combat and skill systems designed to model competent action-adventure heroes.



Ah yes, forgot about BoL. Great system...


----------



## Aldarc (Feb 14, 2020)

Thinking about this thread the last few days. Have you looked into Index Card RPG? It is fundamentally a D&D hack stripped down for fast play. Player HP remains relatively small: with each player starting with one heart, equal to 10 HP. There are no levels. In the default, spells are handed out as items that players can carry, which means that you can impose a limit. In the expanded magic supplement, I believe that HP are used to power spells. It may or not be to your liking but it’s worth a look.


----------



## pming (Feb 14, 2020)

Hiya!

*HarnMaster
WHFRP1
Rolemaster *(just disallow non-Full spellcasters the ability to start with spells and make ALL interested find someone to teach it to them in-game).
*Fantasy HERO* (HERO system; just put restrictions/cost-increase on 'magic stuff').
*Masterbook RPG
Silohuette RPG
Dominion Rules RPG* (free, btw; www.dominionrules.org).
*Powers & Perils* (old Avalon Hill RPG; now free and community updated...or at least we try: www.powersandperils.org ) <-- have to do some 'no casters unless...' stuff, or other tweaks, but the system models 'classical fantasy' very VERY well! 

^_^

Paul L. Ming


----------



## Argyle King (May 8, 2020)

This is a bit of thread necromancy, but I have been watching a few shows lately which had parts that emulated some of the feel I am going for. This is post is a quick recap. My thoughts are on the post after this one.




Johnny3D3D said:


> First, to prevent starting from a miscommunication: what do I mean by "low fantasy"?
> 
> The common literary definition does not quite fit what I want. I prefer something similar to the definitions found in _GURPS Fantasy._
> 
> ...








Umbran said:


> I always get stuck in my craw that "high fantasy" and "low fantasy" already have technical definitions.  So, pardon me if I chafe a little.
> 
> What you seem to be talking about is low magic, and perhaps low-power fantasy.
> 
> ...






Doc_Klueless said:


> I enjoyed the one session I got to play of Modiphius 2d20 Conan. It does that style well.


----------



## Argyle King (May 8, 2020)

Honestly, this post is going to contain a lot of "feel," and that is not very helpful in discussions such as this, but I am hoping that some more specific examples may add context.


I started watching the show Knightfall. The second half of Season 2: Episode 1 contains what I would consider a good example of an rpg adventure. A group of Templar initiates need to sneak into what was formerly the Paris Templar stronghold through a secret passage, with the goal being to recover treasure. (As you might guess, things do not go as planned, and it turns into a fight to get out.)

A lot of how things play out is similar to what I imagine with a fantasy adventure. Granted, there is no magic or elves or other such things, but the general feel of how things play out is somewhere in the ballpark of what I want.  To me, the ensuing fight (and indeed the entire setup of the scene) was cooler than (and sucked me into the story more than) how I imagine things would play out in the typical contemporary d20 fantasy session.

I am not in any way opposed to typical fantasy elements or tropes. It is also cool to hurl a fireball or play some big hulking beefcake of a warrior, but, if there's some way to find a middle ground between that and what I posted about Knightfall, I think I would be close to the experience I want from a game.

====

Upthread, Rolemaster was mentioned. I may give that a try through Roll20. A silver lining to most things being locked down is that the amount of games available through VTT services has increased.

Likewise, I have some of the 2d20 Conan materials. However, as of yet, I have not found a group with which to try the game.


----------



## Bravesteel25 (May 8, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> Upthread, Rolemaster was mentioned. I may give that a try through Roll20.




Rolemaster might very well be the system for you. Word of warning: the onus on the GM to know the rules is much greater than, say, 5E, Pathfinder, or PF2.


----------



## Argyle King (May 8, 2020)

Malkinban said:


> Rolemaster might very well be the system for you. Word of warning: the onus on the GM to know the rules is much greater than, say, 5E, Pathfinder, or PF2.




I had thought that might be the case. I am not bothered by that. I don't know if this is the case for Rolemaster, but I have found that a lot of games with a reputation for being "clunky" or "rules heavy" aren't that bad in actual play. (For example, I play GURPS, and -in many ways- I think the rules are far more intuitive than some aspects of D&D or Pathfinder.)

Even so, I will likely try to join a game as a player first and get a feel for how things go.


----------



## pemerton (May 8, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> A lot of how things play out is similar to what I imagine with a fantasy adventure. Granted, there is no magic or elves or other such things, but the general feel of how things play out is somewhere in the ballpark of what I want.  To me, the ensuing fight (and indeed the entire setup of the scene) was cooler than (and sucked me into the story more than) how I imagine things would play out in the typical contemporary d20 fantasy session.



For this, I would strongly recommend Prince Valiant.



Johnny3D3D said:


> Upthread, Rolemaster was mentioned. I may give that a try through Roll20.



I have nearly 20 years experience GMing RM - 1990-2008. It is not low fantasy. It is very high fantasy, and it's combat resoultion system tends to make healing magic pretty central. It is also _very _mechanically heavy in its resolution. _GIven your stated aims_, I would not recommend it.

Also, _given your stated aims_, if you are interested in a a mechancally heavy system I think that Burning Wheel would be a better fit than Rolemaster. Burning Wheel can easily toggle between low and high fantasy without affecting the workings of the system.


----------



## Argyle King (May 8, 2020)

pemerton said:


> For this, I would strongly recommend Prince Valiant.
> 
> I have nearly 20 years experience GMing RM - 1990-2008. It is not low fantasy. It is very high fantasy, and it's combat resoultion system tends to make healing magic pretty central. It is also _very _mechanically heavy in its resolution. _GIven your stated aims_, I would not recommend it.
> 
> Also, _given your stated aims_, if you are interested in a a mechancally heavy system I think that Burning Wheel would be a better fit than Rolemaster.




I wouldn't say that I necessarily desire a game to be mechanically heavy. That is to say, I'm not opposed to lighter mechanics. But, I am also not opposed to more moving parts. Maybe my brain works differently, but I find that many games with a reputation for being difficult tend to be built around ideas that I find intuitive. In contrast, some games which are "rules light" are (to me) more difficult because they operate in a way which seems counterintuitive to how I imagine a situation should play out.


----------



## pemerton (May 8, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> I wouldn't say that I necessarily desire a game to be mechanically heavy. That is to say, I'm not opposed to lighter mechanics. But, I am also not opposed to more moving parts. Maybe my brain works differently, but I find that many games with a reputation for being difficult tend to be built around ideas that I find intuitive. In contrast, some games which are "rules light" are (to me) more difficult because they operate in a way which seems counterintuitive to how I imagine a situation should play out.



As I said, I GMed RM for 19 years. And I GM and play BW. I have nothing against mechanics.

But RM has lots of table look-ups (nearly all action resolution requires that, both combat and non-combat) and so is almost never going to run quickly. And RM defaults to D&D or higher levels of magic, and if you try to strip that out will not handle it all that well.

For a heavy game that can do low fantasy I would really recommend BW. But for the feel of the show you described I think Prince Valiant straight away!


----------



## Argyle King (May 8, 2020)

pemerton said:


> As I said, I GMed RM for 19 years. And I GM and play BW. I have nothing against mechanics.
> 
> But RM has lots of table look-ups (nearly all action resolution requires that, both combat and non-combat) and so is almost never going to run quickly. And RM defaults to D&D or higher levels of magic, and if you try to strip that out will not handle it all that well.
> 
> For a heavy game that can do low fantasy I would really recommend BW. But for the feel of the show you described I think Prince Valiant straight away!




I'll check that out.

I was a fan of the old Prince Valiant cartoon.

I'm not necessarily married to being a templar or something of that nature. It's more the manner in which the scene played out that I enjoyed. It's clearly a scene of action and adventure, but there is an underlying sense of seriousness and urgency to the ensuing battle. 

Similar examples would be the foray into the bear-people cave toward the end of 13th Warrior.

Fantasy examples would be the battle against the cave troll in LoTR: Fellowship of The Ring; earlier seasons of Game of Thrones; some of the mass army battles in The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardobe. Magic and various fantasy tropes are obvious in these, but it's a very different feel from tossing spell slots around with ease or wading into battle and soaking damage via copious amounts of HP.


----------



## pemerton (May 8, 2020)

@Johnny3D3D

I've got lots of Prnce Valiant actual play posts over the past couple of years. Here's the most recent, which also happens to have some mass combat and a grim confrontation with the angry spirit of a dead king.

I think it will give you a good sense of how the system works. Quite different from the GURPS (? have I remembered that right?) that you lean towards - but in that thread there is a discussion between me and another GURPS player that might be helpful for you.


----------



## Argyle King (May 8, 2020)

pemerton said:


> @Johnny3D3D
> 
> I've got lots of Prnce Valiant actual play posts over the past couple of years. Here's the most recent, which also happens to have some mass combat and a grim confrontation with the angry spirit of a dead king.
> 
> I think it will give you a good sense of how the system works. Quite different from the GURPS (? have I remembered that right?) that you lean towards - but in that thread there is a discussion between me and another GURPS player that might be helpful for you.




Yeah. I play GURPS quite a bit. I still enjoy it, but I would like to try a few other things. I had thought that Dungeon Fantasy* would be a product that would fit what I wanted, but it went a different direction than I expected. 

(*It's still a very good product line, and it does attempt to find a middle ground between what GURPS does and what something like D&D does, but it appears to be geared toward trying to approach finding that middle ground in a very different way than I would like to. I've taken ideas from it, and it's certainly worth looking at for worked examples of how to build certain things.)

I have also explored Genesys more. Though, I'm not confident in my ability to build things using that particular game engine yet. The worked examples in the core book don't offer a whole lot of valuable insight.

I picked up some of the 2d20 Conan stuff. I do not yet have an opinion on the game as presented. Honestly, I'll likely get more out of reading the books as someone who loves R. Howard's writing and world than I'll get out of it as a gamer.

Thanks for the link to your Prince Valiant game. I'll check that.


----------



## pemerton (May 8, 2020)

I don't know Genesys excep by reputation. But that reputation suggests that it mandates a fair bit of intricate narration coming out of resolution.

Prince Valiant is very simple opposed-roll resolution. It's the expectations around scene-framing and consequence-narration that differentiate it from (eg) RuneQuest or Pendragon. I like it because of how simple and flexible it is. But I've got a lot of experience with that sort of GMing.


----------

