New Systems

Look at GURPS Dungeon Fantasy. There is a new box set for it coming out next year which should make things even easier. Smooth resolution, very fun tactical combat, and it has lots of out of combat options as well.

Shadow of the Demon Lord has a very easy resolution system and a lot of customization options without getting too complicated

>>50751159
I started playing 2nd edition Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay recently and I love it. It's entirely based on percentile roles which makes rolls and tests extremely easy to figure out. Combat can be fatal even if you're character is a veteran so there's essentially no power playing or demi=god characters. Magic is unpredictable with miscasting at best and completely damming chaos corruption at worst. Careers are better than classes in my opinion cause it's a more natural progression of a character and has more roleplaying hooks. Subtract the magic and you can run any kind of low or no magic home-brew you can think of.

>>50751159
>fantasy-esque
Be more specific. There's a lot of simple fantasy systems out there.

Maybe specific mechanics, or settings, or themes?

>>50751681
My group really likes the aspect of heavy customization, which is why we gravitated towards PF in the first place, due to the sheer amount of content. Themes-wise, we're pretty flexible, but they expressed a preference for medium or high fantasy, anything with pretty commonplace magic.

>>50751790
>Heavy customization
Most systems have that honestly. See next point
>Sheer amount of content
>But not bloated
Pick one

>medium to high fantasy
This helps more.

Do you want a "generic" system, with modules that would fit and others if you like without learning anything new, or do you want a one-setting tailor specific system?

OK, is your group more towards roleplay or rollplay?
Some people gravitate towards "sheer amount of content" then proceed to play it like a wargame and actually enjoy minmaxing crap.
Other people get more out of low/no combat sessions just being clever and in-character, and there's systems built more around rewarding that then fleshing out combat.

>Heavy Customization
>Low Bloat
>Fantasy focus

Looks like Tavern Tales might be of interest. A quick Google will find you the free pdf on the site, but the gist is you build your character from themes like Beast, Wizard, Alchemist, Monk etc. You can mix and match traits from themes as much as you want. Traits are designed in 3 categories: Combat, Exploration, and Interaction.

It's very free flowing, especially if you do what my group did and not use their system of conflict, but instead do good tale vs bad tale until combat is resolved narratively. Plus, you only need 3d20, take the middle for any check. No other dice for damage, minimal bookkeeping, and just 4 stats.

I will say the system is probably very abusable by powergamers, since some of the traits can be a tad better than others (like the one that opens a decent sized portal to nothingness)

>>50751790
Mythras. There's complete customization (no classes), the crunch is there but the rules make sense, there are 5 magic systems and rules to make magic fit right into your setting.

It also has a D&D supplement called Classic Fantasy that gives minis rules and "classes" which are treated as a generic guide with milestones when different goals are met in character development.

>>50751159
>Can /tg/ recommend any other fantasy-esque systems that maybe aren't quite as bloated?
No.
All fantasy set systems are inherently bloated and disgusting, worthless trash.
Play a real game, like Amber Diceless or Apocalypse World

>>50751239
I'm a huge fan of GURPS, but I would just caution that whichever of you decides to be the GM for it needs to know the rules inside out. If you're coming from Pathfinder they shouldn't have a hard time (I'd say PF is WAY harder to grasp than GURPS) but, just be aware that there's is some complexity.

>>50751827
Yeah, us gravitating on quantity over quality was a mistake for sure.

In terms of systems, "generic" is probably what we'd jump at first, but both are welcome. Our group also seems to prefer tight combat rules. One in particular enjoys minmaxing but limits himself for the group.

>>50751988
OK. More roleplay-reward specific I'd suggest Burning Wheel, which has been adapted to several things, but is otherwise pretty generic. Savage Worlds would also be an easy transition from Pathfinder, or at least it was for me, and has a lot of content to pull from, as a nice middle-ground for complexity. FATE was OK, and tried to pull inbetween combat and roleplay mechanics, but it's probably the lightest system I've tried.
There's other generic systems ...like GURPS but they tend to get kind of bloated with the "just don't use what you don't want" arguments.

Setting specific has had good suggestions already in the thread. My group tends toward SciFi or lower fantasy though, so I don't have a lot else to add other than 5e D&D technically having nothing wrong... compared to Pathfinder. You might be better off browsing game settings in detail to find something that actually sparks interest. A lot of new systems aren't "generic fantasy" anymore, so most of them are legacy from earlier RPG days, eg Glorantha which I haven't had a chance to play.

Tight-combat is kind of rare. Of everything I've played, Ironclaw Omnibus had the best overall combat flow/design/etc by a long shot, was kind of an oddball mechanically to wrap around at first, but it's hard not to want to burn the book and never mention it again. The newer content books for it look a lot nicer than Core at least.

Open Legend is a system that just finished a kickstarter for a campaign setting. The ruleset itself is free and open source.

openlegendrpg.com