PbtA is Bad for new GMs
When people ask for a good system change - from say something like 5e - that's easy to handle, I used to always recommend PbtA. Now, I don't, and it isn't because PbtA is bad. It's because you need an experienced GM to properly pilot the system.
Powered by the Apocalypse (PbtA) is a framework designed by Meguey and Vincent Baker for Apocalypse World. In fact, they're running a Kickstarter for its third edition. Go check it out! The way PbtA works is players pick a Playbook that has a set of actions, called Moves, that are custom to that Playbook. There are also specific progressions notes for each Playbook. Everything a player does is a Move, and the same is true for the GM, having their own sheet of GM Moves.
The Playbooks provide players everything they need, and GMs can focus on narratively storytelling. At least, that's the pitch I got for it. Here's what happened instead.
You get a Playbook, and you get a Playbook!
In PbtA, character sheets are a compact trifold with all the progression for a player cleanly laid out in advance. I didn't have to look up anything for when they leveled up, and leveling up happened at different moments for the party based on their rolls and how they narratively played. This is good stuff, and I love it to this day.
Where the character sheets become difficult is when each playbook has their own series of moves that give them special actions. In theory, this is fun and makes playbooks unique. As a GM, this is a nightmare, especially if your players are new to the system. Rather than the GM having the opportunity to look up an action and make a ruling in the moment (or in advance during prep), the narrative is stalled as the party resolves how an ability happens. To me, this means the GM must have mastery of the Playbooks for them to be viable at the table. Okay, that's a lot. It means there aren't that many playbooks, right? Wrong! There are dozens of playbooks, and custom made ones pop-up as soon as someone types the letters PbtA for any PbtA inspired system. Just writing this has spawned a dozen playbooks into existence.
In a big picture sense, this is a boon to the PbtA community, because it gives agency to GMs and players to create the kind of setting and characters they want ala Blades in the Dark. Yet, this is only really viable if your GM is comfortable with quick rulings when players are constantly saying, "I have this ability here. Can I use it?" What started as a compact trifold has turned into a bunch of 1-2 page reference sheets that everyone needs to constantly read until wrot memorization takes place.
To GM Move or not to GM Move...
This is assuming the players are active participants. If they're new to PbtA altogether, then you might end up in a situation like I did where players didn't read their playbook beyond their 3 stats and treated the playbook as either a no clas character or tried to wedge 5e stat checks into it. When I was a newer GM, I didn't push back and let players do what they wanted. This led to me not using the GM moves that are provided at all. One because the list was exhaustingly long and felt like it slowed down play from me wanting to check, "Is this a move? Do I do it here?" when really it's just general GM pacing and set dressing. It feels like a GM being turned into bubble boy rather than given guard rails. This might be bias as a more experienced GM now, though, so take that as you will.
As a more experienced GM, I sometimes reference the GM rules but not really. I have a better handle on pacing and when to raise stakes or push players, so I don't feel the need for them. Rather, I have a way better grasp on the Player moves and when to ask for them if a player is new or maybe forgets to apply them but wants to.
Because see, the Playbook is just the character sheet and the players also have a list of Moves they have to track that tie to a stat where they maybe could have used a Playbook ability to a much higher degree of success...At least the dice rolling is always 2d6...
Conclusion
Now when a more experienced GM is at the helm with players actively reading their playbook in advance, the session is wildly different. For example, listening to Monster Hour where one season they played Absurdia, a PbtA inspired system, the fluidity of play is wonderful. Of course this is with editing and polish so it isn't an ideal example, but it's one of many things that got me thinking about this. I thought to myself how I have never run such a fluid PbtA game except maybe Brindlewood Bay and I only ran it like a month ago for my book club. So again, an experienced GM is almost needed to best utilize the mechanics of a PbtA system. This isn't even taking into account any special mechanics that are on top of PbtA-adjacent games where there's faction involvement, special moves for the party, etc.
Nowadays, I recommend anything that's considered "rules lite" but even this is a can of worms and doesn't accurately capture a system in any way, shape, or form other than it being "different" as so aptly pointed out here. Honestly rather than system, I ask about setting, because that dictates the kind of system you want way more. Is it dystopian? Is it cozy? Is it futuristic? Medieval? What are the vibes you want at the table and then let's talk about a system, or set of mechanics, you might enjoy.