Best system for a roleplay-heavy group?

[theonesin]

One of my tabletop groups play mostly 4e DnD(though we've done a little 3.5e, and BESM). This isn't a problem though, and no one has really voiced thoughts on playing anything else. It's just that the group as a whole is much more into the roleplay aspect of the game, and can often go one or even two sessions without a single fight. The players(including me, I'm not the DM) all enjoy it for the most part. It's just that 4e is a much more combat-focused game, and it seems a waste to use that as the ruleset when there might be something better suited to the group that we could play. We might just stick to 4e out of convenience of learning a new system though.

This is in contrast to another group I play with, and one of our campaigns using Eclipse Phase(a much more RP/skill-based game as opposed to combat). Combat isn't the focus in EP, and is actually far more dangerous to get into in the first place.

So what I'm asking is this: Are there any systems that have functional combat, but not have it be the real focus? Or a more skill-based system, something that would mesh better with that group's roleplay interest?

Thanks.

[Rhynn]

A question with many answers!

The one that best supports the setting you want to play.

The one where the rules get in your way the least. (If you're looking for a replacement for D&D 4E in this vein, my sig is full of links to D&D retroclones.)

HeroQuest.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Fate is always good for roleplay. (I'm sure three people will have recommended it by the time I finish typing this post, in fact).

[BWR]

I suppose it depends on how important you think system support for roleplaying is. You can perfectly well have a RP heavy game with little or no mechnical support for anything but combat. If no one in your group is particularly interested in learning a new system and are happy playing 4e you don't have to find another system.

Personally, I like Ars Magica's RP support. While the system for anything but magic is rather simplistic, it has a lot of nice ideas for building story hooks and personality into the characters and their place of residence. Of course, AM is more focused on stories in one specific area rather than the wandering of typical D&D, but there are lots of fun ideas to steal.

[tensai_oni]

Hello.

Fate is always good for roleplay. (I'm sure three people will have recommended it by the time I finish typing this post, in fact).

This.

[Lorsa]

It depends on what you mean with "roleplay" and what you want out of the system. Is it just better support for non-combat related tasks or is it mechanical support for character growth?

Basically all systems does non-combat related tasks better than D&D.

EDIT: Ok, not really, but especially D&D 4E is somewhat lacking in this area. By design though, so it's not like they messed up.

[Ceiling_Squid]

Roleplay-heavy groups tend towards two different approaches, I've noticed.

Some roleplayers prefer systems that have a lot of non-combat rules. Skill-heavy systems that encourage roleplay by having consequential mechanics attached to it.

Other roleplayers prefer to free-form their roleplay and like rules-lite noncombat systems to keep bookkeeping to a minimum. Basically, getting the rules and tables out of the way.

Both are valid approaches, but I think you're probably more of the former than the latter, considering that 4e's relatively sparse skill and DC system isn't doing it for you. If you're looking for concrete RP mechanics, can't really help you myself. I'm more of the latter, rather than the former; my group (back when we played 4e) had some sessions with minimal to zero combat, but it was a lot of talking and freeforming, and the DM would use whatever skill rolls and DCs he thought were appropriate as situations came up. I'll admit 4e's heavy combat rules means that we were doing a lot of this in spite of the system, rather than because of it.

On the off-chance you do want to try a system that's rules-lite across the board, but also friendly to roleplayers, I'd recommend Savage Worlds. The non-combat mechanics aren't particularly robust (it's largely skill-based), but the combat is also simplified compared to DnD 4e, and doesn't dominate the game.

SW encourages a lot of refluffing, and the character generation (which is classless) also leads to some interesting choices. You give your character Edges and balance them out with Flaws. Some Flaws are roleplay-based (your character might be especially foolhardy, or have made an enemy, etc.), and some are more typical mechanical penalties.

Its a fast and loose system that I think requires decent roleplaying skill and a lot of "winging it" to get the best of out of it, but its sleek and gets the job done. It also has the benefit of being setting-agnostic; the simplicity of SW encourages its use as a generic RPG for either fantasy or sci-fi (with a couple splatbooks to help out with either). It's also a fairly minimal investment, because the core books are intentionally cheap.

Again, if your group desires more hard mechanics to back up their roleplay, I wouldn't recommend it. But it's all down to personal taste.

[~Corvus~]

I've been in a Fudge game for a year, and what's really nice about it is that the amount of bookkeeping is dependant on how much the DM wants to set up. It can be rules-lite or rules-heavy, and it allows for an incredibly enjoyable experience.

Fate is (I hear) similar to FUDGE in this regard.

[Black Jester]

I personally think that any but the most simple rules concerning actual roleplay are more of a burden than a help. For actual roleplaying, you don't need any rules and most of them will make the game feel over-regulated and formulaic. This is probably a really unfair judgment but I have Burning Wheel in mind as a particularly cumbersome example.

If you want to have a good game focused on actual roleplay, immersion in the character etc. the best thing you can do is to tie in the player characters into their setting and environment and thus establish them as a part of a living, breathing world where their decisions and ideas have relevance to the surrounding people and ongoing events.
The setting is way, way more important than the rules. The setting establishes a framework and an inner reality you can refer and rely to and you have the characters as an organic part of something that gives them context and meaning.
Good examples in my opinion are Harnmaster (for this purpose, probably the best fantasy setting around), Legend of the Five Rings, the older versions of the Forgotten Realms (the newer editions are unfortunately more concerned with being flashy and kitchen-sinky) or stuff like Call of Cthulhu which is mostly set in the real world.

[Terraoblivion]

It really depends on what you want to do. There are a multitude of systems out there suitable for all kinds of different games oriented more towards roleplay than mechical challenges, so I don't think anybody can point you towards the right one. That said, I think Legend of the Five Rings might be a good bet. It has a very strong, detailed setting that encourages roleplay, solid mechanics for most common non-combat situations and the system is generally very solid. It also isn't so far from the D&D norm that you know as to be borderline incomprehensible, the way a system like Nobilis, for example, would likely be.

[CombatOwl]

I'll add another vote in for Fate.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Basically all systems does non-combat related tasks better than D&D.

EDIT: Ok, not really, but especially D&D 4E is somewhat lacking in this area. By design though, so it's not like they messed up.

No, no, you're pretty much spot-on there.

It really depends on what you want to do. There are a multitude of systems out there suitable for all kinds of different games oriented more towards roleplay than mechical challenges, so I don't think anybody can point you towards the right one. That said, I think Legend of the Five Rings might be a good bet. It has a very strong, detailed setting that encourages roleplay, solid mechanics for most common non-combat situations and the system is generally very solid. It also isn't so far from the D&D norm that you know as to be borderline incomprehensible, the way a system like Nobilis, for example, would likely be.

I cannot recommend this strongly enough. It's a nigh-bewildering world beyond D&D, especially if you haven't stepped outside of it. There's a lot of games that do a lot of different things, and some styles mesh better with some people than others. I definitely agree that L5R would be an excellent choice to try something out of the usual. Knowing and following the culture is effectively part of gameplay, because the culture frames your actions. It's basically a non-numeric mechanical component of the game in itself.

Mostly, I'd recommend that you experiment. Find something your group would like. The cool thing is, outside of D&D, a lot of games tend to fit into more specific niches and genres, instead of a sprawling "high fantasy" mega-genre that D&D fills. This makes it a lot easier to pitch and learn about a game. For instance...

Want to play a game about international spies taking down vampires? Play Night's Black Agents.

Want to play a game of space exploration and transport? That's Traveller. (Of which I definitely recommend the Mongoose edition, but that's a matter of opinion.)

Want to survive a gritty, character-intensive dungeon grind? Have a look at Torchbearer.

Want to play Tolkienian fantasy? The One Ring is one of the best licensed RPGs out there.

And so on, and so forth. Have a scan through your local gaming shop, and you're probably going to find something to your tastes.

[erikun]

It dependson what you want from the roleplay perspective. Do you want the freedom of the system not getting in your way, or do you want mechanical support of roleplaying actions?

For the first, I'd recommend Fate Core, Fate, or HeroQuest RPG. (Also, pretty much any generic system that doesn't get in the way much.) Fate Core is new, and even has some free downloads - including a very handy, 50 page quick start rules. Your stats in the game are the method you try to get solutions, such as doing things Forcefully or Carefully, whereas aspects are a character's unique abilities and what makes them different from others - you invoke an aspect by showing how it can apply to the current situation, to get a bonus from it. The biggest problem with Fate Core is that it is distinctly different from other RPGs, which model stats off physical abilities and roll dice based on which ability applies. Fate Core, by contrast, has you roll dice based off how you approach a challenge, and require a lot from the players in invoking their own aspects.

Fate also has some free downloads (Fate 2.0 Downloads for the system) and is from the people who made Fate Core. Fate uses a "come up with your own skills" method, along with the aspects mentioned above. The main reason I bring up Fate is that it's a lot more of a traditional RPG, with testing skills that apply to the situation, than Fate Core is. Also, Fate tends to have a lot less aspects, and focuses them more on the character personally. Some versions of Fate may modify this, but I felt that having aspects that just reflected important character aspects to work better than aspects for everything unique to a character.

For games with mechanical support towards roleplay aspects, I'd recommend Fate Core (see above) and Burning Wheel. Fate Core, because players have the ability to invoke aspects important to their character - thus, you see them in play frequently - and players have the ability to compel aspects, bringing them into play that negatively impacts a character in exchange for Fate points. Burning Wheel is more along the lines of a traditional RPG, but there are a lot of parts of the character which really help to flesh them out. Instincts are actions the character takes automatically, things that they are naturally adept at and so will automatically do in a specific situation, regardless of if it is a good idea. Natures are how closely your character associates with their particular race/society and how strongly they work with their natural instincts - strong Natures can grant them bonuses to rolls when acting with their nature, but act as barriers and penalties when trying to fight them.

[kyoryu]

A lot of it depends on what you mean by "roleplay".

Do you mean non-combat encounters?

Deep, "I am my character", method-actor-like immersion?

Heavy emphasis on what will happen in the story?

Heavy emphasis on playing out your character's individual personality, and making that drive the game as much as anything?

These are all different things that someone might mean by "a roleplay heavy group", and while they're not necessarily mutually exclusive, some games will serve subsets of these goals better than others.

For instance, while I love Fate, neither it nor Burning Wheel are particularly well-suited for people that want to constantly be in their character's head in a method-actor-like fashion, and can't handle rules that make them think 'as a player' or highlight the distinction between player and character. (I've met them - to the extent that some don't like using mental Disadvantages in GURPS).

[Annos]

Try GURPS and use Bunnies and Burrows . On a more serious note, GURPS is really good for RP.

[Equinox]

Dungeon World is good in that the rules simply force you to (a) come up with motivations for your character (b) follow those motivations.

So you are basically constantly keep in mind that you are Esric, Elven Mage, rather than a guy named Jon who runs an Elven Mage.

[Black Jester]

Try GURPS and use Bunnies and Burrows . On a more serious note, GURPS is really good for RP.

Actually Bunnies and Burrows at least for a one-shot or so is a really good recommendation because the game's premise and gameplay is so different that it is a basically a paradigm shift and can easily become a welcomed change of pace; I just don't see that the whole concept is particularly useful for a longer campaign, but for a brief mini-campaign or so, it is a really good idea.