WillOfTheWest

Baldur’s Gate is part of a setting several decades older than the game franchise of the same name. It was an official setting of D&D a decade before the first game. In the sense of a ROLEPLAYING game, fidelity to the source material is paramount.

The original games were developed at the end of the life cycle of the edition they used for the mechanics. The ruleset got a major revision the same year BG2 was released. There have been several major editions since. Edition warring aside, no one can argue that the Forgotten Realms played in 5th edition isn’t the same Forgotten Realms played in AD&D 2E. The tone and continued narrative of the setting is the key feature in maintaining the soul of a property, not mechanical fidelity.

The game respects the official canon of the Forgotten Realms, including the canonical ending to BG2 where Gorion’s Ward rejected divinity and eventually led to Bhaal’s revival. Characters from the original series return as companions for BG3, with stories acknowledging the Bhaalspawn crisis. One of the origin playthroughs is the exact same story as the first Baldur’s Gate.

If your only complaint is lack of real time with pause then I reckon it’s you who isn’t the real Baldur’s Gate fan.

Yes because mechanical fidelity is the lowest priority in continuing the series. Continuation of the story and tonal fidelity matter a lot more. The Fallout series went from a turn based 2.5D isometric RPG to a real time action RPG, and one of the best instalments in the series follows the latter formula.

Same IP; returning characters from the original series; revisiting important locations from the original series; uses a D&D ruleset for resolution; expands upon the story of the Bhaalspawn crisis over a century after the incident, especially via the

All of this is apparent through playing the game.

With larger groups I tend to stick to less mechanically complex games.

Most OSR games can be run on the fly with any number of players. I had a fixed group of 9 run through Keep on the Borderlands, with 1 or two extras jumping in for a session here or there.

My absolute favourite is Savage Worlds. It'ss great as the maths isn't tight and "balancing" an encounter is just a matter of throwing in more mooks, throw in a wild card per 2 or 3 players. It can fit to any setting, though I strongly recommend Deadlands.

My close second favourite is Call of Cthulhu, which I've run with 8 players. There's not a combat focus so sessions are unlikely to get bogged down, and even then, most combat actions are a simple contested roll. Investigations tend to resolve as people splitting into pairs and following different leads; two go archiving at the library, two visit a sanitarium patient, two head over to the local paper to see if any stories have been published or even blocked by an editor, two stake out points of interest.

The Crew - Mission Deep Sea - card game with a simple trick taking mechanic. Difficulty is very modular as you decide a difficulty level before each game. Difficulty is decided by the numbers of missions taken and the relative complexity of those missions (this is all explained on the mission cards). Missions are based on which tricks you win, with simple rules like "I win no 1's" or "I win at least 3 9's".

Hanabi - Card playing game where you don't know your own hand. You describe aspects of each others hands (colours of cards, numbers on cards). Your goal is to place a pile of the cards 1,2,3,4,5 in each of 5 colours. Don't play with mathematicians.

Why would you vote for it to be unrestricted? They've only unprivated due to the threats. Stick to Lemmy.

Ah. Are you aware of Mage: the Ascension and Mage: the Awakening? Both World of Darkness books; mechanically crunchy with a strong focus on magic as a solution to all situations. Looking at established systems that have already done something similar can help with ideas.

For a slightly different spin, I just picked up the Black Sword Hack yesterday. In terms of combat items, there are actual listed combat items but it's all fluff really; every weapon is d6 damage. Maybe that would be another thing that interests you: weapons are abstracted to the point of players being able to buy/find "a weapon" which gives you a basic action.

I tend to focus on products which go against certain "maxims" of play; having alternatives to some of the more strict rules inherited from Gygax offers insight into the philosophy behind certain rules and whether such rules are actually fun at the table.

The Black Hack is my go-to book for this purpose: distances are relative, consumables are abstracted to the usage die, experience is based on stories told and not treasure dragged back to town, and all of the dice rolling can be made by players if the GM so chooses. Such a free system allows for easier hacking; You don't need to compare relative power of classes when determining how much XP your homebrew needs in order to level up.

For supplements and splatbooks, I particularly like Wonder & Wickedness and Marvels & Malisons as magic supplements. It's easy as hell to slap together a sorcerer class from these two books and staple it onto the Black Hack. My favourite setting books are Ultraviolet Grasslands and Hot Springs Island; both offer perfect sandbox adventures for the Black Hack. Both offer some manner of departure from the traditional tropes of TSR adventures. I have had to modify some aspects of the latter, such as the

There are a stupid number of blogs and zines that I could namedrop, but the one I find myself agreeing with the most is The Alexandrian.

Some of my favourite systems are light on combat rules or feature combat as some kind of fail state. If you're leveling a shotgun at an ancient void-dweller that may or may not be immune to conventional weaponry, you've messed up somewhere. Maybe the better plan is to douse the floorboards in lamp oil, smash a lit lantern, and run.

Would I play a game with no combat items? Absolutely. I'd love a game that invests as much pagespace into intrigue or stealth systems as some D&D-like systems invest into combat.

I just go for completed series nowadays. It's just not worth the time ranting and actively waiting for the completion of certain series. I've made a conscious decision not to start on Rothfuss's trilogy until he finishes the final book.

I also find that recently I go for books with more mature themes; not gore- and sex-fests where everyone is morally grey for the sake of it, but stuff like Robin Hobb's books which explore feminism through a fantasy lens, or stories with characters who confront their flaws rather than being some ideal version of a character archetype.

The same for me. One of my favourite settings.

Jack Vance (namesake of Vancian magic) introduced two interesting concepts in his Dying Earth series. In earlier books magic was essentially invented by the ancient masters who were expert logicians and scientists. Each spell was essentially a proof of concept that a sequence of actions compelled reality to act in a certain way.

By the time of the first short stories in the Dying Earth series, mankind has long since deteriorated due to an overreliance on what is essentially magic to the layperson. Even the wily magicians of the modern time are only capable of rote learning a few arguments at a time; hence the fire and forget Vancian magic system of old D&D.

In later books, magicians have returned to near godly power. They've somehow found a link between djinn-like creatures capable of controlling portions of reality, and the rote rituals of old. They've learned to essentially cut out the middle-man and directly enslave these djinni to do their bidding.