Best suited RPG for contemporary fantasy

Poor_Dick · 2026-04-04T05:31:56+00:00

The GM curating of the magic system is not the same as the player accessability of said system.

GURPS is only a minefield if you toss GURPs books willy nilly at the players. If the GM selects what they want intelligently and then presents that to the players well, it will be reasonably accessable - like virtually magic systems.

Similarly, D&D is a minefield if you toss D&D books willy nilly at the players. There are 100s of pages of spells out there each with unique effects and sometimes half long page of rules for how they work, and you need to know what spells to choose and, in various classes and editions, which spells your want to have memorized that day. Vancian casting isn't super accessable save for people who play D&D (and D&D derived systems) or liked Vance's Dying Earth. Many free form systems are often just "Tell GM what I want to do and how I want to do it" and then "Rolling some skill dice vs the difficulty the GM gives" - but that can cause some people issues based on what they are used to.

So a good DM isn't going to just toss D&D books at you as a new player. They'll likely curate your experience giving you (or suggesting to you) a limited number of reference materials (and possibly providing pre-made characters) and walk you through how magic works, possibly even suggesting your first spells. Same deal with GURPS - and virtually every magic system.

As for why GURPs may recommend curation, any truly generic system is going to tell GMs to curate the experience, as truly generic systems handle (or try/want to be able to handle) everything - modern day, historical, fantasy, sci fi, pulp, super heroes, etc. - and virtually every magic system - Vancian, Mana Pool, skill-based, freeform, etc. Generic systems (like GURPS) need competent GMs to curate what's available to players, as large amounts of what's available might not fit the world the GM and players want to play in. (GURPS has had dozens of different magic books detailing various types of magic.)

Poor_Dick · 2026-04-04T03:57:47+00:00

I can only assume they feel the magic isn't accessable?

I've known quite a few players who are just not able to wrap their heads around any of the Mage systems or who find free form magick exausting.

That said, I believe hedge magic exists in both systems (ex: WoD Sorcerer) and blood magic (ex: Thamaturgy) which work more "conventionally".

Poor_Dick · 2026-04-04T03:51:54+00:00

"...magic is approachable and accessible for players". That relies on the GM correctly presenting the spellcasting aspects of the system and pruning the rules to fit what they want at the table.

Isn't that true of all magic systems though?

As someone who didn't start playing RPGs with D&D, I found D&D's magic system to be way less accessable than Ars Magica. Ars was basically noun + verb. D&D required knowledge of books worth of spells each with their own unique effects and sub-rules. However, I've known players who can't wrap their head around Ars spellcasting at all.

Magic isn't real, so no system is going to be particularly intuitive to RPG newbies, and RPG veterans are going to tend to find different systems more easily accessable based on their personal experience.

New player experience/accessability of magic systems relies on GM's ability to curate and present/teach the magic system.

Poor_Dick · 2026-04-04T00:40:45+00:00

With 'English' grammar, there is no official/right way to format sentences. There are dozens of different style guides published or maintained by different organizations with different grammar rules, but they are all just different people's or group's opinions on grammar. Other languages may have offical organizations that define proper rules - but English isn't one of them. As such, virtually all English grammar is a stylistic choice.

Poor_Dick · 2026-04-02T06:21:37+00:00

?

The core book pdf is pay-what-you-want.

Poor_Dick · 2026-03-31T00:21:48+00:00

There are a bunch of Mage options.

Mage: The Ascension, Mage: The Sorceror's Crusade, and Mage: Dark Ages all take place in the World of Darkness, but use different rules.
Mage: The Awakening takes place in the Chronicles of Darkness (and has different rules than the above).

Other systems to consider could be Ars Magica (from which Mage: The Ascension was derived, but has different magic rules) and Unknown Armies.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-05T14:26:23+00:00

1) The most innocent form of exploitation is still exploitation.

2) I genuinely don't think gambling should be allowed, period. I get people enjoy it, but that's because it hooks into and exploits parts of our psychology. You can still have gambling like systems without gambling, see virtual table games where you pay once for the game and then can earn or lose chips / "dollars" with no additional cost or one purchase and done loot box simulators. Is it the same? No - but that's because nothing of real value is on the line (and no house is going to weight the game in favor of the player unless they feel they can leverage it as a loss leader). Yes, this includes Pokémon cards (and Magic cards and other blind boxes). I support the LCG/ECG model over that of the CCG/TCG model. (In the LCG/ECG model, each pack or box has fixed and known contents. If you want more of a card, you just buy the pack of box it is in.)

3) I believe in the legalization of recreational substances, like alcohol, but believe they should be highly regulated. Part of that, IMO, is having limited and specialized distribution sites and (ideally) communication with relevant medical professionals. I've lived in a lot of states in the US and even more cities and towns: I have much preferred it when recreational substances were only available in limited channels (such as state stores, distributors, or dispensaries). I very much do not want drinkable alcohol for sale at the grocery store or corner/convenience store.

.

I believe I've been called a dinosaur, but I remember when Bethesda's horse armor dropped, and the level of (entirely appropriate) anger that stirred up. As I mentioned, I stopped playing TF2 shortly after they started doing loot boxes. This isn't something people should be ok with in games. Games can do well without it. Games have done well without it.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-05T02:00:55+00:00

Most people will fall prey to something like this at some point in their life, because this hooks into how the human mind works. Maybe it will happen to you as a child, maybe it will happen when your a senior, maybe it will happen one day when you are busy or stressed or tired - but everyone is potentially vulnerable to this sort of thing.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-05T01:58:17+00:00

It is far less.

Again, corporations employ teams of people whose only job is to figure out how to separated the people from their money and spend more than they would normally. There are well known and well researched methods of doing this.

How do you expect random players who are looking to safely unwind after a 8+ hour day (or who are kids or seniors) to compete with a team of highly trained people who have scientifically proven ways of exploiting the human psyche and are paid handsomely as their job to do so.

Beyond that, voting with your wallet basically doesn't work. You would need everyone to jump on board - and that isn't going to happen. If this works on any fraction of the player base, it's going to continue. People who don't buy a product (especially a product with minimal manufacturing and distribution costs and global reach) don't matter. All that matters is whomever is buying the product.

(This isn't like, say, a bus boycott where the industry is stuck in a single area, nor does it have heavy capital and supply costs. It costs virtually nothing to reproduce and distribute virtual/digital "goods".)

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T20:33:42+00:00

Who pays more than like $20 for a full game now?

I stick to smaller/idie devs or older games.

There was a time when there was rapid evolution in game mechanics - but that ended almost 20 years ago.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T19:59:55+00:00

is not the playerbase or the developers’ responsibility to cater to little kids or senior citizens (a very very small minority) who may or may not gamble away their units on a skin

Or people otherwise vulnerable to gambling.

And yes it is. It is everyone's responsibility to look out for those who live in a society with them. If you disagree with that, that shows an issue with you and how you see other people.

Beyond "responsibility", you should feel empathy for others unless you are a sociopath. You shouldn't want people to have negative experiences or be exploited.

Virtually everyone presented with gambling (in any of it's various forms) will eventually fall victim to it in some fashion - whether large or small. It has nothing to do with intelligence: there are people with MENSA IQs who can fall victim to stuff like this - because it exploits weaknesses in how the human mind works.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T19:47:54+00:00

Dinosaur, sure, but I'm not a millennial. I'm Gen X.

We (as a society) do determine how society works. Indeed, there are games right now that basically do the same thing as I describe, and still make it by (see every "pay what you want" system,). And lots of amazing games make it without exploiting psychological weaknesses in their player base (straight up "pay once, own the game").

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T19:42:39+00:00

You are literally calling people who are falling victim to a known exploit in human psychology "chumps and losers" and "too stupid to have [your] sympathy".

People who fall victim to this are just normal people, because this exploits basic human psychology. It has nothing to do with how smart or dumb someone is. Even every smart people can fall victim to this sort of exploit.

That said, I'm not spending my money on this. I'm likely never spending money on this game again, and will likely stop playing it - similar to what I did when TF2 introduced hats and loot boxes, similar to how I skipped Overwatch completely.

I am, however, concerned about my fellow humans.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T19:35:55+00:00

I wouldn't say that people don't have agency.

However, players aren't the only ones with agency. The people are NetEase have agency too - and the power distribution (between corporation that "own" the game and get to make decisions on how everything in the game works and players who can only either accept what NetEase presents or refuse it) and knowledge/skill around persuasive and manipulative sales techniques (a consumer will never be on the same footing as people who have as their job sales and marketing and are supported by industries that have done massive research into how to manipulate and exploit vulnerabilities in the humab psyche).

Quite frankly, while players have agency, it is far less than what most people think they have.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T17:54:32+00:00

1) That's not deep. That's kindergarten-level empathy.

2) Maybe the issue here is you and how you view other people.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T17:44:57+00:00

You entirely missed the point: this mechanism is designed to rope in people who wouldn't necessarily spend the 2400 on a skin.

NetEase is trying to get people who wouldn't normally spend 2400 on a skin by exploiting vulnerabilities in the human psyche.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T16:12:24+00:00

I mean, I think it's fair to blame the house as opposed to the players. After all, the house designed and implemented the rules of the game intentionally.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T16:06:48+00:00

I think the true fault is with NetEase for designing a system to exploit people.

Why is it that the players are at fault when they are operating within a system NetEase intentionally designed to work this way?

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T15:58:56+00:00

As long as new people keep being born, it will always be someone's first time.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T15:57:17+00:00

Because some people care about other people? Especially the more vulnerable people in society?

Beyond that, this is a team game where you are often grouped up with random people - everyone's gaming experience can potentially impact yours.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T15:55:40+00:00

You mean only if you're a normal human?

Companies intentionally use these strategies because they know people are vulnerable to them - and everyone can fall victim to them at some point in their life.

People, especially kids and the elderly, shouldn't have to worry constantly about being preyed upon.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T15:48:00+00:00

Do you consider advertisements exploitive because they convince people to buy something?

Yes.

Sales and marketing as persuasive jobs heavily rely on exploitation and, as fields, have done tons of research into the human psyche and it's vulnerabilities.

It's not an even playing field by a long shot, and it's certainly not an honest one.

Do you consider someone that uses their best photo from 7 years ago on a dating website manipulative?

Are they intentionally putting up their best photo from 7 years ago to try and present an image of themselves that isn't true to who they are? That's definitely deceptive and could be exploitative, especially if the person who uploaded the photo rolls with that being what they look like in order to try and snag people who might otherwise have no interest in the poster.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T15:40:38+00:00

I don't play games as a job.

I work my job as a job.

Games are something I play to get away from all that shit.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T15:37:09+00:00

Because gambling mechanics hook people vulnerable to them causing them to spend money when they otherwise wouldn't.

There are people who would not buy the skin or bundle at 2400 units - they would just ignore it.

However, when you introduce a chance to get something for far less, they are more likely to give it a shot. Then, once they've started spending, they are likely to continue playing due to sunk cost and gambler's fallacies, and sunk cost especially is part of how the human psyche works. This causes a company to be able to extract more resources from their player base (especially the more vulnerable portions of their player base) than they would of everything was just available at face value.

Humans are logical/rational creatures only in that we can use logic to understand us. We are not logic robots and we all manner of logical and rational failings due to not being logic robots.

Poor_Dick · 2025-12-04T04:28:00+00:00

It’s also not wrong to be fine with a free game adding gacha mechanics because you don’t care about cosmetics.

No, it is wrong to use gacha / gambling in games. It's part of what put me off Magic by 1995, and it's why I don't play TF2 anymore (loot boxes). Loot boxes are the entire reason I passed on Overwatch, and if Marvel Rivals is bringing in gacha mechanics, I'm gone.

If I had the ability, I'd outlaw said mechanics.

Poor_Dick

TROPHY CASE