PDA

View Full Version : Least Favourite RPGs



Zolkabro
2009-07-28, 11:45 AM
What are peoples least favourite RPGs? Here you can post about them, discuss them, and do whatever you want with them.

My least favourite RPG is the Artix Entertainment series. They are, starting with the worst, and ending with the best, (which is still pretty bad), Adventure Quest, Dragon Fable, and Mech Quest.

Swordguy
2009-07-28, 12:10 PM
d20. Not because it's an especially bad system, but because it's a) so overexposed, b) people think it's the be-all and end-all of gaming (partially a function of "a"), and c) thinks it's a universal system, which it's not. It's made to portray D&D, and does a passable job at that. Everything else feels forced; the only non-bad, non-D&D d20 games I've ever played are Lone Wolf (Mongoose Publishing) and Stargate SG-1/Spycraft (AEG). Both of which really only use the core mechanic, and change so much else that they're really completely new games rather than d20 ports.

GURPS. The only thing it's good for is crazy, multi-verse mashups. Which is awesome if that's what you're looking for. But a dedicated system designed to portray a specific game genre is almost certainly be superior to a game system designed to portray ALL game genres in the specific game genre being discussed. It's a good third or fourth choice for any given genre, but never the first choice. With the obvious exception of the mashups.

RIFTS. Simply because the system doesn't work. Flat-out (you hit on a natural 5+ on a d20 and have a +10 to strike? Come on.). The setting is made of awesome and win, and its level of such inversely proportional to the mechanics.

L5R 3e. The game is maddening, in that the fluff and setting are completely awesome, and the mechanics do a good job of making it easy to portray the setting...but the company is far, FAR worse than WoTC in their inability to see the effects of stuff they release. They just have no concept of the "gamist" part of the GNS theory...which would be fine if the mechanics were simple, but they're actually extremely complex and non-intuitive, and the lack of effort from the company to make the mechanics smooth is just...frustrating.

FATAL. Because I've played it. 'Nuff said.

Winterwind
2009-07-28, 12:12 PM
I'll go with d20, too, for pretty much the reason that so many people seem to think it's the only RPG in the world and are utterly blind for so many other, for many purposes better ones.

kamuishirou
2009-07-28, 12:12 PM
Paranoia - Maybe it was the DM, but then again we did have some pretty memorable other games. But wow did I hate that game the moment we started. You're in character at all times? You die countless times and you have petty little things to take out other people in your 'party'?

I'd rather play Frag.

edit:



FATAL. Because I've played it. 'Nuff said.

I have the rules, and want to read them just because I heard how bad it is. Though I just haven't had the chance. I heard it was pretty awful.

AstralFire
2009-07-28, 12:16 PM
d20. Not because it's an especially bad system, but because it's a) so overexposed, b) people think it's the be-all and end-all of gaming (partially a function of "a"), and c) thinks it's a universal system, which it's not. It's made to portray D&D, and does a passable job at that. Everything else feels forced; the only non-bad, non-D&D d20 games I've ever played are Lone Wolf (Mongoose Publishing) and Stargate SG-1/Spycraft (AEG). Both of which really only use the core mechanic, and change so much else that they're really completely new games rather than d20 ports.

I've heard good things about Mutants and Masterminds and I feel Star Wars Saga did a really good job. I can't stand the majority of d20 spinoffs, however (including some of the ones I've worked on). Even if I haven't had as much exposure to other game systems as I'd like, it doesn't take much to see where d20 in any of its variations has issues. Until we get to the point where you can throw dice roll chains into a computer and have everything effortlessly precomputed for us, there's no way to really have a truly universal system that can use the same mechanics for everything.

Also, what the hell compelled you to play FATAL.

Indon
2009-07-28, 12:16 PM
d20. Not because it's an especially bad system, but because it's a) so overexposed, b) people think it's the be-all and end-all of gaming (partially a function of "a"), and c) thinks it's a universal system, which it's not. It's made to portray D&D, and does a passable job at that. Everything else feels forced; the only non-bad, non-D&D d20 games I've ever played are Lone Wolf (Mongoose Publishing) and Stargate SG-1/Spycraft (AEG). Both of which really only use the core mechanic, and change so much else that they're really completely new games rather than d20 ports.

Mutants and Masterminds is D20 based, and I think it works quite well.

Also, the D20 system is named after the core mechanic - that's what defines it.

Hmm, least favorite RPG... the LARP ruleset for World of Darkness. Not just because I'm not a LARPer, but because I think rock-paper-scissors is a pretty silly way to resolve actions.

subject42
2009-07-28, 12:17 PM
Rifts was a bit of a mess last time I played it.


The rules frequently flat-out contradicted themselves
The resolution system for different things (attacks, skills, etc) felt like they each came from a different system.
A d30, really?
It was extremely easy to create broken characters, even by accident.


That's all I remember for now.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-07-28, 12:18 PM
FATAL. Nothing can justify FATAL.

JMobius
2009-07-28, 12:20 PM
D&D. I know its "cool" to hate on it because its popular, but it is really just lies at the polar opposite of everything I enjoy about the hobby.

Morty
2009-07-28, 12:20 PM
I think we're going to have to exclude FATAL from this thread, otherwise everyone's just going to say FATAL and, true as it might be, it'd be boring.
I don't have much to contribute myself, having played only D&D and WFRP, both of which I like. The worst-designed system I've ever seen is my homebrewed one, and Exalted sounds like something I'd never play.

alexi
2009-07-28, 12:20 PM
rifts god i had such fond memories of playing in the eraly 90's, tried playing again ugh that system needs a reboot way more then dnd

Saph
2009-07-28, 12:21 PM
Paranoia was probably the least fun system I've played.

It's sad, because I love the concept, and when Paranoia threads crop on this board I think they're funny as hell, but the actual game just led to everyone sitting around in silence (because saying ANYTHING got you more treason points, so the players eventually stopped talking). The fact that the mission resembled a D&D dungeoncrawl through a train tunnel didn't help.

kkortekaas
2009-07-28, 12:22 PM
Dragonstar, it's a offshoot of d20 mechanics that tried to replicate Spelljammer and failed in my opinion.

jmbrown
2009-07-28, 12:27 PM
I have the rules, and want to read them just because I heard how bad it is. Though I just haven't had the chance. I heard it was pretty awful.

It's 900 pages of charts designed to accurately measure a man's junk and the damage you do to a woman (and man) when you force things inside them.

I don't have to explain how terrible it is both in mechanics and concept any further.

mikeejimbo
2009-07-28, 12:30 PM
Paranoia - Maybe it was the DM, but then again we did have some pretty memorable other games. But wow did I hate that game the moment we started. You're in character at all times? You die countless times and you have petty little things to take out other people in your 'party'?

I'd rather play Frag.

That's odd, I loved the only game of Paranoia I played. It was awesome. Of course, you have to accept the fact that you're supposed to die a multitude of times in a variety of hilarious (and/or treasonous!) manners. It's definitely a game to be taken lightly.

Swordguy
2009-07-28, 12:31 PM
Also, what the hell compelled you to play FATAL.

I'll keep the threadjack fast:

We played it because I have a group of incredibly mature people, with ZERO "squick" factor (we're all actors/actresses), who were all bored, had read the FATAL review, and thought, "this sounds like a snow job rather than a real review", and so we picked up the PDFs. It was there - it's the same reason people climb Everest. And this way, as a bonus, we have an educated opinion about it (which is, "it sucked"), rather than just parroting the popular opinion of the internet.

EDIT:

It's 900 pages of charts designed to accurately measure a man's junk and the damage you do to a woman (and man) when you force things inside them.

Like this. It's not. The pointless sex crap (what people call a "rape simulator", which is is) takes about 36 pages of a 900 page document. It doesn't make those 36 pages any better, true, but stuff like this is simply factually incorrect.

</threadjack>

AstralFire
2009-07-28, 12:33 PM
Even without looking at the review and just glancing at the mechanics there, FATAL scares me with the number of die rolled. But you're a more open-minded person than I am in that regard, I suppose.

WhiteHarness
2009-07-28, 12:37 PM
Exalted.

L5R.

Anything in the World of Darkness.

mikeejimbo
2009-07-28, 12:39 PM
I don't think FATAL was ever supposed to be a serious system though. When I read the rules, it sounded a lot like a parody. Especially the line about how even though it has some objectionable things in it, these things happen in real life and so RPGs try to simulate them. But the way it was written sounded a lot more cynical, to me.

Tyrrell
2009-07-28, 12:41 PM
There are some truly horrible games that I've played (Blood Dawn springs to mind) but I never expected much out of them so they didn't really earn my dislike. the ones that have earned honest distaste are the games that IMO should have been much better

I'm not fond of the paladium games I've been exposed to (ninjas and super spies, beyond the supernatural , and Rifts) because I think that the system is poorly cobbled together and poorly edited, making painfully frustrating to achieve the suspension of disbelief crushing results that it generates. At least that's my experience.

Mage the Ascension:I was hyped about this game and it had lots of good ideas behind it. I really liked how using coincidence made magic feel. However character abilities and the setting were not sufficiently well defined and I always ended up with misunderstandings among the players and storyguides about what was possible, what was coincidence versus vulgar and what the nature of the setting was. This wasn't just a failure of description it was a failure of mechanics that didn't do what they were supposed to and were dull to boot. Once again this was just my experience.

PLUN
2009-07-28, 12:43 PM
I don't think FATAL was ever supposed to be a serious system though. When I read the rules, it sounded a lot like a parody. Especially the line about how even though it has some objectionable things in it, these things happen in real life and so RPGs try to simulate them. But the way it was written sounded a lot more cynical, to me.

The rebuttal sounds fairly serious business though. Also, competing with Violence for parody RPG is always going to be hard.

So, worst system? Shadowrun. No so hot on the rules, like the so cheesy it's good, unironic eighties setting of Cyberpunk more.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-07-28, 12:45 PM
d20. Not because it's an especially bad system, but because it's a) so overexposed, b) people think it's the be-all and end-all of gaming (partially a function of "a"), and c) thinks it's a universal system, which it's not. It's made to portray D&D, and does a passable job at that. Everything else feels forced; the only non-bad, non-D&D d20 games I've ever played are Lone Wolf (Mongoose Publishing) and Stargate SG-1/Spycraft (AEG). Both of which really only use the core mechanic, and change so much else that they're really completely new games rather than d20 ports.While I agree with all your points, I must point out that Mutants & Masterminds is technically a d20 system, and is one of the not only best but most universal systems (for cinematic action, at least) I've ever played.

As for me...I don't really dislike any systems, but GURPS is a major pain to get started in. BESM Tri-Stat, I feel, is done better with M&M (unless you really want HP and MP). And Mage the Awakening is extremely blah fluffwise compared to Mage the Ascension.

Swordguy
2009-07-28, 12:49 PM
While I agree with all your points, I must point out that Mutants & Masterminds is technically a d20 system, and is one of the not only best but most universal systems (for cinematic action, at least) I've ever played.

Fair enough. I disagree, but it's just my opinion. :smallwink:

Nerd-o-rama
2009-07-28, 12:51 PM
Ah, so you have played it. I was hoping from your phrasing that you were just unfamiliar with it. Oh well, different strokes.

Partysan
2009-07-28, 12:53 PM
Hmm, least favorite RPG... the LARP ruleset for World of Darkness. Not just because I'm not a LARPer, but because I think rock-paper-scissors is a pretty silly way to resolve actions.

Oh believe me, I am a LARPer and that is exactly the reason why I hate those rules. They don't have anything to do with LARP in my book.

Zuki
2009-07-28, 12:53 PM
Hm. I'll have to go with 'least favorite out of what I've actually played'. Lemme think here.

I like the gonzo setting and fantasy+cyberpunk Blender that is Shadowrun, but I'm not all that keen on the system. I tend to find point buy character creation a bit too lengthy and tedious--too many choices and I waffle forever without knowing what I want. I don't have feelings about the mechanics one way or the other, but I don't like the way the system feels like it should be this silly dorky guns-are-fun thing, and then you're simultaneously over-planning and calculating and paranoid about everything like its gygaxian dungeon time all over again. I suspect with the right group, it would be more fun.

I don't like that Warcraft/World of Warcraft d20 stuff White Wolf licensed, either. They're handy for people looking to gobble up every last piece of dubiously canonical lore about the setting (I am occasionally guilty of this), but the class design just kinda fell flat. If I was going to tabletop Azeroth, I'd probably use regular 3.5 or 4e with a re-skin and a few tweaks. It still doesn't feel like quite the right system for the setting, though.

I don't like Vampire: The Masquerade or Vampire: The Requiem. I don't have anything against White Wolf's World of Darkness game lines, old or new, but...I don't like vampires. They're not worth the effort to hate, but they're fundamentally not interesting to me as a roleplay concept. (...Now, werewolves, on the other hand...)

I tried Risus once or twice. I wanted to like it. It was silly and you could build all kinds of silly concepts! But I think I misunderstood the rules or was using them poorly, because I couldn't really get what I wanted done. The way using a skill and failing makes it less useful, well...guh.

I can't think of any other games I've played that I had a sufficiently negative experience with to be worth listing.

Tengu_temp
2009-07-28, 12:55 PM
Cyberpunk 2020 - because its mechanics are extremely bad at representing what they are supposed to do, because character creation is awful, and because there's a lot of stuff there that simply makes no sense (a cybernetic hand costs more and causes more humanity loss than a cybernetic arm). I don't like DND 3.x, but it's still a much better game than this thing.

lesser_minion
2009-07-28, 12:56 PM
Exalted kind of scared me really. It sounded like an interesting idea, but I don't think I'll ever play it.

I guess I could just be illiterate, but it seemed pretty difficult to understand - certainly more so than just about any other RPG I've read.

Eldariel
2009-07-28, 12:57 PM
Paranoia was probably the least fun system I've played.

It's sad, because I love the concept, and when Paranoia threads crop on this board I think they're funny as hell, but the actual game just led to everyone sitting around in silence (because saying ANYTHING got you more treason points, so the players eventually stopped talking). The fact that the mission resembled a D&D dungeoncrawl through a train tunnel didn't help.

Seems like a weird mindset. For us it worked out great as the players didn't fear to die and took it for the insane parodia it is just letting loose with little attachment to...anything.

Serious attempts at staying alive really just don't work which is a great excuse to not really worry about dying and rather worry about your secret goal and getting your teammates killed (oh, and the mission too).


To answer the thread though, uh, FATAL?

jmbrown
2009-07-28, 12:57 PM
Like this. It's not. The pointless sex crap (what people call a "rape simulator", which is is) takes about 36 pages of a 900 page document. It doesn't make those 36 pages any better, true, but stuff like this is simply factually incorrect.


I have the pdf. Bought it when the game was originally released. People exagerrate for humorous effect but it doesn't change that the nature of the game is terrible in every way.

And seconds on Rifts. Interesting setting and idea but if I ever want to use "terrible execution" as an example for new writers I'll point them to it.

chiasaur11
2009-07-28, 12:57 PM
Oh believe me, I am a LARPer and that is exactly the reason why I hate those rules. They don't have anything to do with LARP in my book.

Still, Clevinger parodied it excellently.

"You show me something that beats a natural 20, and I'll show you filthy lies!"

Kylarra
2009-07-28, 12:59 PM
Exalted kind of scared me really. It sounded like an interesting idea, but I don't think I'll ever play it.

I guess I could just be illiterate, but it seemed pretty difficult to understand - certainly more so than just about any other RPG I've read.it's in the same subset as the other storyteller games by WW, so if you're familiar with those, then it's easy to understand, if not, then yeah storyteller system can take a bit to get used to.

ghost_warlock
2009-07-28, 01:01 PM
Star Wars: Any system. Every GM I've ever had for a Star Wars game was a major jerkass - doing things like handing out dark side points when my primitive hunter/gatherer character took a trophy from a big monster he managed to defeat in single combat or insisting that my jedi character couldn't have a purple lightsaber because that's the color Mace Windu had and my character wasn't as cool as him (at the time, I didn't even know who Mace was, had only seen the original 3 movies, and just wanted something other than Christmas-colored lightsaber). :smallsigh: Toss in a fair amount of deifying George Lucas and the "sanctity of the canon" when playing games set concurrently with the movies or books and you've done enough to turn me completely off the game. Admittedly, this has nothing to do with the system and everything to do with horrible experiences when trying to play the game. Even so, I never plan to participate in another SW game.

RueQuest: I'm not a big fan of games where die rolls determine every facet of your character at creation. I created a couple characters and that was enough RQ for me.

Legend of the Five Rings: I'm not a fan of wuxia so I only played 2-3 sessons before deciding it wan't worth the time it'd take for me to learn the system as well as I'd otherwise like and become comfortable with actually roleplaying in such a setting.

@V: Duly noted. :smallsmile: Either way, I hated it.:smalltongue:

The Rose Dragon
2009-07-28, 01:03 PM
Legend of the Five Rings: I'm not a fan of wuxia so I only played 2-3 sessons before deciding it wan't worth the time it'd take for me to learn the system as well as I'd otherwise like and become comfortable with actually roleplaying in such a setting.

Just so you know, L5R is not wuxia. It's a feudal Japan simulator. Wuxia is more Chinese in nature.

Kylarra
2009-07-28, 01:05 PM
Star Wars: Toss in a fair amount of deifying George Lucas and the "sanctity of the canon" when playing games set concurrently with the movies or books and you've done enough to turn me completely off the game.

Yeah I don't like running into canon stuff either, which is why I play in either AUs or KOTOR era.

jmbrown
2009-07-28, 01:13 PM
I just ran across Empire of the Petal Throne in my closet. It's one of my favorite fictional settings in gaming but it's written in such a realistic style with an eye for detail that like 3 people played the game and those that did were super nerds for realism. If you didn't know the book inside and out these people would cast you out of their group or alter your actions to fit in a tightly "canon" within the game's world itself.

I haven't tried out the new ruleset but I'm surprised the game has survived 30odd years with such a small fanbase.

Kurald Galain
2009-07-28, 01:18 PM
Agreement to FATAL, and also the rock/paper/scissors LARP systems.


Alternity (a failed attempt at converting 2E D&D rules In Space! (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitlekt6mtovm4vne?from=Main.InSPACE) with some of the clunkiest mechanics ever)
Older editions of Paranoia, because they actually took the ruleset seriously and enumerated reasons for getting treason points, and put in skill trees and so forth. That's not the point of Paranoia, and I'm willing to bet that's part of where Saph's bad experiences come from. Newer rulesets do it better, even including the much-hated Fifth Edition.
Shadowrun. Decent setting although no match for Cyberpunk; but any system that requires you to bring a cube of 50d6 dice is overdoing it in terms of mechanics.
Mage: the Ascension and Changeling: the Dreaming, both with incredibly awesome settings, boil down to being mostly unplayable, at least in my experience. I suspect it requires a highly special brand of GM to pull it off.
Nephilim. A decent concept of characters reincarnating over the ages, but it does mean that you're expected to write separate backstories (and stats) for each era your character lived in.
Tunnels & Trolls. For being an old D&D ripoff that's not even trying. All the lousy puns in the spell names don't help, either.

ybn1197
2009-07-28, 01:19 PM
I'd have to say Timelords by BTRC. The concept was great but the settings got mired in its own rules.

SirKazum
2009-07-28, 01:27 PM
I'll have to reiterate GURPS (just too much work to do anything, and the fact that my group absolutely adores it only adds to my frustration), and Alternity (though my only experience with it is the free sample adventure / quick rules they provided as a PDF).

And, going with Swordguy's mention of RIFTS mechanics that just don't work, it reminds me of the Illuminati CCG. I won't explain the game, but suffice to say you roll 2d6 to attack other players. The thing is, by personal experience, you'll often have huge modifiers like +20 or -30, depending on which cards you play and how, so the 2d6 roll is completely irrelevant most of the time.

Oslecamo
2009-07-28, 01:29 PM
FATAL. Nothing can justify FATAL.

That's because you don't know that abomination game's original name during design:

4chan b/ the rpg :smalltongue:

As for me, I can't really claim to have played that many table RPGs outside of D&D, so really can't give an opinion.

I would say Exalted, since it's basic idea is that everything should be OVER 9000! You can't sneack in that game, you can walck in such an amazing way that you blind your oponent's brain and they forget you just passed in front of them.

Voshkod
2009-07-28, 01:32 PM
Jeez, there are so many:

d20 in general leads my list, as I think it crippled creativity in the industry for years. Also, it's inelegant.

Mage, Changeling and Wraith - all largely unplayable, though I do have a long running Changeling campaign that works because we throw out most of the rules.

Warhammer Fantasy - perhaps a bias because of a bad DM, but the system seemed very clunky.

Any game with overly complex rules is suspect (unless it's really a wargame in disguise, such as Battletech). Give me simple, clean rules that allow the GM and players to keep the action moving without resorting to dice and I'm happy.

Amber, Houses of the Blooded, ORE (Godlike/Wild Talents/Reign) are some of my favorites.

Terraoblivion
2009-07-28, 01:36 PM
I would say Exalted, since it's basic idea is that everything should be OVER 9000! You can't sneack in that game, you can walck in such an amazing way that you blind your oponent's brain and they forget you just passed in front of them.

You mean like a third level wizard does when he casts Invisibility? :smalltongue:

potatocubed
2009-07-28, 01:36 PM
Champions - Or the HERO system, if you prefer. A huge rulebook of super-complexity that makes building powers nightmarishly difficult, and it doesn't actually do anything any better than Mutants and Masterminds, which is considerably easier.

Fhaolan
2009-07-28, 01:37 PM
World of Synnabar: The *creator* of this game ran a session for me and my friends, and it *still* made no blasted sense. Take D&D, multiply all the numbers in it by 100 for no apparant reason, and have starting characters such as an immortal tiger-man with nuclear-powered nunchucks in the same party as a runt-of-the-litter goblin with a sharpened stick.

And it's billed by the creator as the 'most realistic RPG system EVAH! because I'm a NINJA in RL! Uh... wha?

FoE
2009-07-28, 01:38 PM
Rifts. So many ... bad memories ...

*Vomits uncontrollably*

Voshkod
2009-07-28, 01:39 PM
Champions - Or the HERO system, if you prefer. A huge rulebook of super-complexity that makes building powers nightmarishly difficult, and it doesn't actually do anything any better than Mutants and Masterminds, which is considerably easier.

Forgot about Champions, a.k.a. the ultimate game for min/maxing.

AstralFire
2009-07-28, 01:40 PM
World of Synnabar: The *creator* of this game ran a session for me and my friends, and it *still* made no blasted sense. Take D&D, multiply all the numbers in it by 100 for no apparant reason, and have starting characters such as an immortal tiger-man with nuclear-powered nunchucks in the same party as a runt-of-the-litter goblin with a sharpened stick.

And it's billed by the creator as the 'most realistic RPG system EVAH! because I'm a NINJA in RL! Uh... wha?

Heeheehee. He really is enthusiastic about it all, though. Was he a nice guy?


d20 in general leads my list, as I think it crippled creativity in the industry for years. Also, it's inelegant.

I don't know about that. d20 certainly dominates the industry, but its prominence also rebooted the entire industry significantly, and I know a lot of people who branched out into other RPGs specifically because of d20 trying to make an emulation of something besides D&D, usually failing, and a search beginning for a system that does it better. And I mean people who, by themselves, would not have been inclined to look for a way to tabletop being Indiana Jones in an entire Indiana Jones world.

P&P games, even in their most simplistic forms, require a lot of thought and creativity compared to a lot of other hobbies that are directly related to it. It's also inherently difficult to monopolize. I would suggest that anything that benefits any one company on the market benefits all of the rest to a lesser degree.

Voshkod
2009-07-28, 01:42 PM
I don't know about that. d20 certainly dominates the industry, but its prominence also rebooted the entire industry significantly, and I know a lot of people who branched out into other RPGs specifically because of d20 trying to make an emulation of something besides D&D, usually failing, and a search beginning for a system that does it better. And I mean people who, by themselves, would not have been inclined to look for a way to tabletop being Indiana Jones in an entire Indiana Jones world.

Fair point; perhaps the inelegance of the system has blinded me to that. It's just so damn clunky that it annoys me to see games that once had somewhat more elegant or simple systems move to d20. Paranoia, Cyberpunk, Traveller. . . .

jmbrown
2009-07-28, 01:46 PM
I'm not familiar with Exalted but apparently you can punch someone so hard they turn into a duck.

Umael
2009-07-28, 01:48 PM
The trouble with this thread is that there are a lot of games out there that have died because the system sucked so back... and then they get forgotten.

Then you have people naming games that other people adore.

*shrug*

To each their own, I guess.

Me, I don't like 1st & 2nd edition D&D, although I loved it at one point in my life. But 3rd edition brought back the magic.

I played a lot of oWOD LARP (Vampire, Mage, Changeling), and enjoyed myself... but I also hated the system.

I don't "get" Exalted... or Scion... but I've played them and will play them again (because my friends like them).

I love L5R... but I have to admit that some GMs can easily ruin it for me just by playing the world as it is designed... and as much as I love the setting, sometimes I take a step back and want to thwap the cultural mindset. I also disagree with the soap operatic tone in the canon world as the game progresses.

But the winner... Paladium. Just... no. Bad experience, didn't understand the system, wasn't keen on learning, I have better things to do with my time.

The Rose Dragon
2009-07-28, 01:48 PM
I'm not familiar with Exalted but apparently you can punch someone so hard they turn into a duck.

Duck? I don't remember. You can, however, punch someone so hard they lose all capacity of learning new things.

Or you can punch the air to be granted five options for your fate.

Or you can punch someone and steal their dreams forever.

Make no mistake, though: Exalted is a great game.

Indon
2009-07-28, 01:55 PM
Duck? I don't remember.

Citrine Poxes of Contagion style is pretty much free licence to punch someone to inflict any wacky effect you can come up with, though duck transformation sounds more like a Wyld-oriented Shaping effect.

bosssmiley
2009-07-28, 01:56 PM
I'm not familiar with Exalted but apparently you can punch someone so hard they turn into a duck.

How is this not a selling point? :smallconfused:

Wraethulhu (http://jrients.blogspot.com/2005/07/wraeththu-report.html)
FUZION System - take 2 decent systems and create a miscegenetic horror from them ??? Profit
*WoD - screw dice pools, screw splatbook sprawl, screw game fiction, screw snidey goth players, screw WW's pecking at the reset button like one of Skinner's pigeons
Spacemaster - Rolemaster tries to do Cyberpunk: fails extra hard
D&D Players Option (2.5E) - from the TSR 'circle the drain' era
LUGTrek - *fap fap fap fap* went the Trekkies. FGSFDS went everyone else.

Kylarra
2009-07-28, 01:57 PM
Duck? I don't remember. You can, however, punch someone so hard they lose all capacity of learning new things.

Or you can punch the air to be granted five options for your fate.

Or you can punch someone and steal their dreams forever.

Make no mistake, though: Exalted is a great game.
Technically you could flavor a touch attack/Somatic component in D&D to do most of those things too. :smalltongue:

Reducing things to absurdity works both ways!

Kurald Galain
2009-07-28, 02:01 PM
I'm not familiar with Exalted but apparently you can punch someone so hard they turn into a duck.

That would be a foul blow...

Gecks
2009-07-28, 02:02 PM
I have to also jump on the Rifts hatred bandwagon. I went to university with a few folks who were very much in love with that system, but I don't ever remember enjoying even one game with that system, and it certainly wasn't the players or the GM who was the problem.

I also bought some cheap 2nd copies of the Ninja Burger RPG a while back. Though I admittedly never played it, reading through, it sounded pretty terrible, even for a beer and pretzel rpg.

I am kind of surprised at the Gurp hatred being shown, though; I haven't tried the new edition, but I always found, despite the extended and occasionaly convoluted character generation, the actually gameplay was super-smooth and logical, although that may have been more a result of steering clear of the high-tech/Gurps vehicles type suppliments.

Kylarra
2009-07-28, 02:03 PM
That would be a fowl blow...Fixed for you.

HamHam
2009-07-28, 02:05 PM
BESM d20. The system is completely broken. Trying to get the HP of characters and monster to match up to what damage may be being dealt via special attacks and stuff is futile, same for attack bonuses versus AC, and then you have stuff like grapple which you can make yourself ungodly at using maybe 10 points...

Star Wars RCR. Force abilities as skills... critical hits going straight to wounds... the system is just a huge headache compared to Saga.

Indon
2009-07-28, 02:06 PM
Technically you could flavor a touch attack/Somatic component in D&D to do most of those things too. :smalltongue:

You don't need to flavor. You can administer most touch attacks as unarmed strikes - you just need to beat normal AC rather than touch AC, so it's not generally optimal.

Jack_Banzai
2009-07-28, 02:06 PM
I have played every iteration of Shadowrun (including the video games and Shadowrun DMZ believe it or not) and though I am in love with the setting, the rules set has always sucked. In every version. Suck, suck, suck. It sucks.

Exalted. Oh, Exalted. Exalted is terrible. Either you totally own or you are lame. There is no middle ground.

Artanis
2009-07-28, 02:07 PM
I like Exalted. Even if you hate the entire premise, setting, and even mechanics, it deserves respect for giving mechanical bonuses for putting effort and creativity into RP.


As for least favorite, I haven't played a system I really hated yet, but then again, I haven't played nearly as many systems as most of the people on this board. Of those that I've played, my worst experience came in 2e DnD. I wound up avoiding PnP RPGs for five years after that campaign.

The Rose Dragon
2009-07-28, 02:08 PM
Exalted. Oh, Exalted. Exalted is terrible. Either you totally own or you are lame. There is no middle ground.

Actually, the default premise is you just own. What may happen is that you run into someone who owns harder than you.

Kylarra
2009-07-28, 02:10 PM
You don't need to flavor. You can administer most touch attacks as unarmed strikes - you just need to beat normal AC rather than touch AC, so it's not generally optimal.Learn something new every day. Thanks.

Gnaeus
2009-07-28, 02:10 PM
4.0 For lack of character creation options or a magic system.

Indon
2009-07-28, 02:10 PM
Actually, the default premise is you just own. What may happen is that you run into someone who owns harder than you.

And they will subsequently totally own you?

Admittedly, it is kind of tricky to make a good straight-up combat challenge in Exalted. It's best to throw in external, complicating factors.

mikeejimbo
2009-07-28, 02:11 PM
Fixed for you.

I was going to post something poignant, but Kylarra just won the thread. I can no longer contribute anything better.

Superglucose
2009-07-28, 02:13 PM
Mass Effect:

Never have I ever felt so railroaded in all my life. Sure, RPGs on computers sort of have to be railroaded to some extent (hell, pretty much ALL RPGs have to be railroaded at least a little bit) but ffs don't give me three dialogue options when each of them have the same result. The one choice you really get to make in the game is the choice between a human-lead autocracy or a human-lead Roman style republic. Are you serious? You're giving me the choice between humanity stomping on all the other species, or, for a change, humanity stopming on all the other species?!?! No thanks. Everyone babbles on and on about how great Bioware is, but I have a wake up call: Mass Effect sucked. Bioware's games are mediocre. KotoR was not as good as KotoR 2 and Jade Empire was just "ok." Their plotlines are completely uninspired (seriously? the big twist is that I'm the evil villain? All our enemies are kick-the-puppy? Even the "moral ambiguity" sections in Jade Empire and KotoR and ME were boring and uninteresting), their characters blow (ugh, anyone else remember Carth? No one memorable from Jade Empire, and half of the idiots in ME were just that: whiny idiots), and the writing is flat out mediocre. Nothing interesting or inspiring at all out of the whole bunch.

Besides, ME's system had extremely limited capabilities. It's like... they took the idea of purchasing abilities from Jade Empire, but made it boring and linear with no branching paths so every character feels exactly the same. They took the idea of upgrading your weapons from KotoR... not KotoR 2 where it didn't totally suck, but from KotoR. They also seemed to make a conglomerate of all mediocre sci-fi when designing the universe and claimed it would be "wide open" when actually the overworld was as small as Fable.

*breathes*

On that note, I'd like to add that Jade Empire and KotoR were good. Much better than ME.

Terraoblivion
2009-07-28, 02:13 PM
Admittedly, it is kind of tricky to make a good straight-up combat challenge in Exalted. It's best to throw in external, complicating factors.

Which is in fact a design goal. They wanted combat to be about looking cool doing impressive stuff in an interesting locale. Just meeting up in the middle of an empty field and pounding each other would be dull.

Kurald Galain
2009-07-28, 02:14 PM
Fixed for you.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/texplainthejoke.jpg (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Ptitle0t9r68ih?from=Main.DontExplainTheJoke)

Duh.

AstralFire
2009-07-28, 02:14 PM
As for least favorite, I haven't played a system I really hated yet, but then again, I haven't played nearly as many systems as most of the people on this board. Of those that I've played, my worst experience came in 2e DnD. I wound up avoiding PnP RPGs for five years after that campaign.

I have played only two systems: D&D 3E and d20 modern.
I have DMed five systems: D&D 3E, D&D 4E, my own system, Star Wars Saga, Star Wars RCR.
I have studied a number larger than that. But anyway, your practical experience is probably better than mine. :D


Mass Effect:

Never have I ever felt so railroaded in all my life. Sure, RPGs on computers sort of have to be railroaded to some extent (hell, pretty much ALL RPGs have to be railroaded at least a little bit) but ffs don't give me three dialogue options when each of them have the same result. The one choice you really get to make in the game is the choice between a human-lead autocracy or a human-lead Roman style republic. Are you serious? You're giving me the choice between humanity stomping on all the other species, or, for a change, humanity stopming on all the other species?!?! No thanks. Everyone babbles on and on about how great Bioware is, but I have a wake up call: Mass Effect sucked. Bioware's games are mediocre. KotoR was not as good as KotoR 2 and Jade Empire was just "ok." Their plotlines are completely uninspired (seriously? the big twist is that I'm the evil villain? All our enemies are kick-the-puppy? Even the "moral ambiguity" sections in Jade Empire and KotoR and ME were boring and uninteresting), their characters blow (ugh, anyone else remember Carth? No one memorable from Jade Empire, and half of the idiots in ME were just that: whiny idiots), and the writing is flat out mediocre. Nothing interesting or inspiring at all out of the whole bunch.

Besides, ME's system had extremely limited capabilities. It's like... they took the idea of purchasing abilities from Jade Empire, but made it boring and linear with no branching paths so every character feels exactly the same. They took the idea of upgrading your weapons from KotoR... not KotoR 2 where it didn't totally suck, but from KotoR. They also seemed to make a conglomerate of all mediocre sci-fi when designing the universe and claimed it would be "wide open" when actually the overworld was as small as Fable.

*breathes*

On that note, I'd like to add that Jade Empire and KotoR were good. Much better than ME.

While I enjoyed Mass Effect lots, Jade Empire some, and KotOR meh - I am glad to see someone else who is skeptical of Bioware's awesome writing ability.

mikeejimbo
2009-07-28, 02:15 PM
OK, fine, I'll say something.

I don't really like Exalted. It's not that I don't like the mechanics... I just wish I knew what they *were*. I can't seem to find them in the book past all the setting stuff. I was reading something about different kinds of celestials and I thought "This is a lot of stuff. I think I'll skip to character creation" and I couldn't find it.

From what I know about the setting, I don't really like it, either, but that's purely based on tastes.

jmbrown
2009-07-28, 02:15 PM
Of those that I've played, my worst experience came in 2e DnD. I wound up avoiding PnP RPGs for five years after that campaign.

Ah, the long gone TSR/Gygaxian era where magic aged you or kicked you in the balls after casting, you weren't expected to reach 20th level, each class had their own progression chart, playing as anything other than human severely limited your progression, female non-humans had 2-3 less strength than males, and every. monster. was. out. to. get. you.

The Keep on the Borderlands; a DnD module for parties level 1-3? My ear. One encounter had 18 rats with a 25% chance of inflicting a disease that automatically killed you 1d6 days later.

The recommended party for level 1 characters in T1 The Village of Hommlet was 9 people! The adventure ended with a showdown between an ogre, tons of zombies, man-eating frogs, and bandits manning the arrow slits.

I have no idea how anyone enjoyed early DnD. I still play 2E with my friends for laughs and we even had a recent game of 1E which ended in a TKO at the third encounter. This was before we picked up the additional splat books which added crap like fumble charts (you slip and impale yourself on your sword, roll a new character) and wild magic.

I will say that I loved the villains guide. It was very well written.

The Deities and Demigods books were also fantastic. Gygax loved researching religion and he statted out a bunch of real world gods and legends.

Kylarra
2009-07-28, 02:16 PM
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/texplainthejoke.jpg (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Ptitle0t9r68ih?from=Main.DontExplainTheJoke)

Duh.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/tvtropeswillruinyourlifeirothtin.jpg (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TVTropesWillRuinYourLife)

Indon
2009-07-28, 02:17 PM
Which is in fact a design goal. They wanted combat to be about looking cool doing impressive stuff in an interesting locale. Just meeting up in the middle of an empty field and pounding each other would be dull.

...is that in response to what I said?

Mikee - The first two chapters of the books are full of setting information. Character information is a few pages into the start of the third chapter.

PLUN
2009-07-28, 02:18 PM
No one memorable from Jade Empire

Sir Roderick Ponce Von Fontlebottom the Magnificent Bastard does not approve of this statement.

Belobog
2009-07-28, 02:18 PM
Duck? I don't remember. You can, however, punch someone so hard they lose all capacity of learning new things.

Or you can punch the air to be granted five options for your fate.

Or you can punch someone and steal their dreams forever.

Make no mistake, though: Exalted is a great game.

I've always liked the one where you punch them so hard that they lose all ability to differentiate people, leading up to everyone looking like their wife/brother/brother's cousin/future son/that guy they met at a bar once.

On that note, I've had the pleasure of avoiding most utterly unplayable systems, but out of all that I've seen, Exalted is the only system that I need to keep referring to the book to remind myself of the basics. L5R looked to be worse in that regard, though.

Terraoblivion
2009-07-28, 02:20 PM
It was, Indon. Just the thread moved so fast that several new posts that had come before i finished it. And then several more while i edited it to quote your post. This is kinda mad, really.

Fhaolan
2009-07-28, 02:23 PM
Heeheehee. He really is enthusiastic about it all, though. Was he a nice guy?


Actually, yeah, he is a nice guy. He does his best to create games, and scrape up enough money to pay the people working for him. He's just a few sheaves short of a bale, which is pretty much what you *have* to be in order to try to make a living off of games. :smallsmile:

Indon
2009-07-28, 02:25 PM
It was, Indon. Just the thread moved so fast that several new posts that had come before i finished it. And then several more while i edited it to quote your post. This is kinda mad, really.

Heh.

As far as encouraging locales go, I much prefer incentives like the stunt system rather than a system with functionality that has difficulty without the feature.

Not that I don't like Exalted combat - I think it models the genre they were going for (really high-power Wuxia/shonen) very well, and you can make it more generically RPG-like with a couple quick houserules to the soak system.

AstralFire
2009-07-28, 02:25 PM
Actually, yeah, he is a nice guy. He does his best to create games, and scrape up enough money to pay the people working for him. He's just a few sheaves short of a bale, which is pretty much what you *have* to be in order to try to make a living off of games. :smallsmile:

That's what I thought. I always got the impression that he really just loves games and is slightly crackpot. I have a hard time being too mean about Synnibar for that reason.

mikeejimbo
2009-07-28, 02:26 PM
Mikee - The first two chapters of the books are full of setting information. Character information is a few pages into the start of the third chapter.

I'll take a look at it then. One of my DMs eventually wanted to run Exalted someday. I think I would like the setting as long as the mood was kept light, and this DM is good at that.

Artanis
2009-07-28, 02:31 PM
I have played only two systems: D&D 3E and d20 modern.
I have DMed five systems: D&D 3E, D&D 4E, my own system, Star Wars Saga, Star Wars RCR.
I have studied a number larger than that. But anyway, your practical experience is probably better than mine. :D

I've played DnD 4e, DnD 3.5e, Exalted, Heavy Gear (and Jovian Chronicles), three or four sessions of BESM, and the ill-fated DnD 2e campaign I mentioned. I haven't DMed any :smallwink:



I don't really like Exalted. It's not that I don't like the mechanics... I just wish I knew what they *were*. I can't seem to find them in the book past all the setting stuff. I was reading something about different kinds of celestials and I thought "This is a lot of stuff. I think I'll skip to character creation" and I couldn't find it.

Yeah, the Exalted rulebook is not laid out particularly well, to put it mildly. Everything you need is buried to various degrees in chapters 2-5 and 8.

theMycon
2009-07-28, 02:33 PM
As much fun as it can be...

Paranoia is just depressing. It's my life, except that I don't need to care about the consequences and there's less paperwork. And most people are too busy to be out to get me.

Matthew
2009-07-28, 03:01 PM
Bad systems do not necessarily correlate with bad experiences, but in general I steer away from games that look "bad". These days, I guess D20/3e/4e are amongst my least favourite RPGs, not a big fan of the various World of Darkness iterations either, but Exalted looks quite fun.

Lost Demiurge
2009-07-28, 03:07 PM
Not many make this list for me. Even the crappiest games can usually be good for a night's enjoyment, at the very least. Still, I can think of a few...

D20 Deadlands and D20 Legend of the five rings: Crappy attempts to cash in on WOTC's cash cow. Full of suck, and scorned by players of the original games for good reason.

RIFTS: Palladium's system is wonky, and Rifts is the wonkiest pile of crap of them all. I like TMNT, After the bomb, and Splicers enough that I'd run them (After reworking the mechanics a bit), but Rifts I have NO use for, reworked or no.

World of Synnibar: Yeah, it's awful. Fun read, though, so I don't QUITE hate it. I'd just never run or play it.

Racial Holy War: Never played this one, don't own it. Wouldn't want a copy if you paid me to take it. It's tied with FATAL for most disturbing game ever.

World of Darkness LARP: Oh gods... Don't get me started. It's a huge pile of suck, and it attracts ***holes.

D&D 2nd edition: This was all I had growing up. It was cool then, but I grew to hate it. I will NEVER go back... So clunky, so annoying.

Champions: It gets props for being one of the first true superhero games, and for being able to make ANY type of character you want with it. But my gawd, it's full of math, and fiddly point values, and combat manuvers, and active power points, and gah. Just gah.

Wraethru: Gih. The authors of this game are total jerks, too. Stupid rules, stupid and somewhat disturbing take on the setting. I don't even own a copy. I refuse to give them money for what they did.

Werewolf the Apocalypse: Oh look, a preachy game where the characters are overpowered furry demigods, whose society completely justifies just about any destructive, jerkish thing they want to do.

Big Eyes, Small Mouth: Freakin' impossible to balance. Tried to run it, tried to play it, very unhappy with the results each time. Even the D20 version didn't scale well. Screw this, I can do better anime games with M&M.

The D20 World of Warcraft game to date: Did the developers even play the damn game? Seriously, it was a BAD conversion. Only the later sourcebooks had a useful feel to them, the core books were crap. If I ever run a WoW game, I'm doing a 4E conversion (That'll take me all of a day or less to whip up), and calling it a night.

potatocubed
2009-07-28, 03:13 PM
D20 Deadlands and D20 Legend of the five rings: Crappy attempts to cash in on WOTC's cash cow. Full of suck, and scorned by players of the original games for good reason.

I'd like to add d20 7th Sea to this list.

Doc Roc
2009-07-28, 03:16 PM
Mine is:
World of Darkness
RIFTS
FATAL
Gurps

And yes, I do love things, just not your things.

Comet
2009-07-28, 03:38 PM
Of the ones I've played, I'm gonna have to go with GURPS here. Not because it is not "good" as a system, just because it feels too rules-heavy. I tend to dislike games that take the simulator approach. Flavour is where it's at, baby!

Speaking of flavour, Cyberpunk 3.0 makes me cry a bit. It's just kinda ugly and uninspired.

jmbrown
2009-07-28, 04:07 PM
Racial Holy War: Never played this one, don't own it. Wouldn't want a copy if you paid me to take it. It's tied with FATAL for most disturbing game ever.

As terrible as hate groups are, I find it incredibly hilarious that they spend their energy hating people by creating an RPG.

It seems so farcical like something an Onion reporter pretending to be a hate monger would do.

arguskos
2009-07-28, 04:50 PM
Huh. Least favorite RPGs?

Exalted: I dislike the premise of "you are so freaking awesome, go do awesome things, you awesome people you". Perhaps the group I played it with contributed, but really, the mechanics bothered me, the flavor was unlikable, and the tone wasn't that fun for me.

Scion: Mostly, I don't like Scion for the mechanics. Really, it's not bad flavor-wise (children of gods has potential to be pretty damn neat), but I just disliked the mechanical aspect.

GURPS: It does everything, and does it all poorly. When it takes a week to stat out your spaceship, I am no longer interested. >_<

FATAL: Because I've read the rules, and it was painful. Never again.

D&D 4th: It's just not my game. I tried it once, found it not to my liking, and walked away. Hard to define why though, something about the feel of the game.

Jerthanis
2009-07-28, 05:02 PM
Mage: The Awakening. I know, it's not THAT bad, but I'm limiting myself to games I've played, and this game has nothing going for it but good action resolution mechanics. The fluff, setting, and politics are all vague and uninteresting. Every time I play or run it I just keep ramming straight into a wall of "There's nothing to DO!" I consider it the largest waste of money I've spent on an RPG, because the only games I played that were worse I didn't end up spending any money on.

BESM d20 was pretty damn bad. Class progressions that didn't make any sense (ninja could teleport at level 7, but had to wait until level 20 before they could stick to walls. Gun Bunnies got Two Weapon Fighting at level 20. Samurai got Improved initiative like, seven times, but gained no advantage for acting first), intelligence being the most powerful stat (to the extent that none of the other stats mattered, since combat and magic resolution was handled through skill + stat, and skills scaled up faster with a higher intelligence) and basically just completely wonky powerscales and characters weren't even easy to customize. Considering the fact that BESM 2nd edition and 3rd edition were both among my favorites at one time or another, and I maintain 3rd edition is actually a really good Generic Universal RPG, BESM d20 was just awful.

Monte Cook's World of Darkness. In a world where people are unaware of the supernatural, a supernatural event has destroyed hundreds of thousands of square miles of Midwest, and is basically transmuted into hell itself (most residents didn't notice A-ZING!), Vampires, Werewolves and Demons want to kill the humans who unconsciously kept the universe whole. Vampires are stronger than Werewolves (physically, for less cost, faster activation and with a longer duration). Mages are just immortal, since there was no limit to the durations of their improvisational magic, so they can take an afternoon off and raise all their stats forever. It was a nightmare of mechanics with nothing unique or interesting about the setting that made it worth playing.

Abberrant was a least-favorite system until someone slapped me about the face and neck and told me I had misread most of the rules front to back, now I wish I hadn't thrown that hissyfit and gotten the ST to back down on running it that one time.

Lost Demiurge
2009-07-28, 05:04 PM
I'd like to add d20 7th Sea to this list.

Ah, how could I forget that? Yeah, it sucked golf balls through a garden hose.

Friv
2009-07-28, 05:09 PM
Fun Story - I ran a Changeling: The Dreaming game for four years. We had vast amounts of fun, but I was still having to apply new houserules almost every week right up to the last session every time we ran into a spot in the rules that made no goddamn sense. So yeah.


Still, my top two picks:

1) RIFTS. Oh, god, Rifts. I mean, this pretty much applies to every Palladium game, but Rifts is the ur-example.

2) James Bond 007, by Victory Games. All I'm saying is that any game that requires you to spend 9000 character points at creation, and then you have to spend points on your height, weight, and gender, and individual traits range from 25 to several hundred points in value... well, I doubt many people get to the actual gameplay and discover that it uses a multiplication table.

*EDIT* Although playing a game where you have to spend points to not be smoking hot is kind of entertaining.

AstralFire
2009-07-28, 05:14 PM
2) James Bond 007, by Victory Games. All I'm saying is that any game that requires you to spend 9000 character points at creation, and then you have to spend points on your height, weight, and gender, and individual traits range from 25 to several hundred points in value... well, I doubt many people get to the actual gameplay and discover that it uses a multiplication table.

*EDIT* Although playing a game where you have to spend points to not be smoking hot is kind of entertaining.

What was the rationale?

Friv
2009-07-28, 06:10 PM
What was the rationale?

Surprisingly straightforwards, considering the rest of the game. It went like this.

You are playing a James Bond game. Therefore, you are a spy.

Anything that makes a spy more memorable gives him Fame points. Once you have a certain number of Fame points, everyone knows who you are and you have to retire. Therefore, anything that makes you more memorable means your career will be shorter.

Being attractive makes you memorable, therefore not a good thing.

Other things you don't want to be if you want a long career - very tall or short, a woman (fewer women spies means more fame when you do things), scarred, or successful on your missions. Because beating villains gives you fame, and then you have to retire, and... *shakes head*

Artanis
2009-07-28, 06:19 PM
So if you win, that makes you lose? :smalleek:

What. The. ****.

Voshkod
2009-07-28, 06:26 PM
So if you win, that makes you lose? :smalleek:

What. The. ****.

Isn't that the whole concept behind Wraith?

AstralFire
2009-07-28, 06:27 PM
Surprisingly straightforwards, considering the rest of the game. It went like this.

You are playing a James Bond game. Therefore, you are a spy.

Anything that makes a spy more memorable gives him Fame points. Once you have a certain number of Fame points, everyone knows who you are and you have to retire. Therefore, anything that makes you more memorable means your career will be shorter.

Being attractive makes you memorable, therefore not a good thing.

Other things you don't want to be if you want a long career - very tall or short, a woman (fewer women spies means more fame when you do things), scarred, or successful on your missions. Because beating villains gives you fame, and then you have to retire, and... *shakes head*

This makes a bizarre kind of sense, though they completely neglected to mention the benefits of being charming.

Friv
2009-07-28, 06:39 PM
So if you win, that makes you lose? :smalleek:

What. The. ****.

Actually, on double-checking the rules, I wasn't entirely accurate.

You gain 5 Fame for killing people, 10 or 20 fame for killing important people, 3 fame for taking part in a mission whether you win or lose, and 20 fame for becoming a '00' agent. Being attractive gives you up to 50 starting fame, as does being extremely tall, short, skinny, or fat. There's no actual rule for how much fame makes you unplayable, but it's vaguely suggested to be around 200ish. You can spend a lot of experience to reduce your Fame.

The Rose Dragon
2009-07-28, 06:41 PM
You can spend a lot of experience to reduce your Fame.

So the more experienced and successful you get, the less well known you are.

That makes sense to me.

mistformsquirrl
2009-07-28, 06:51 PM
FATAL. Nothing can justify FATAL.

Agreed.

Crappy rules? Check.

Offensive as all hell? Check.

Practically braindead concept to begin with? Check. <x.x> I read over the rules in-part - that was enough to convince me that if RPG gaming could lead to the corruption of the soul - that game was the portal by which it is done.


----

I'm also not a fan of Call of Cthulu. It's the combination of a hopeless situation along with characters not being particularly powerful.

One or the other I can find pretty cool to roleplay. Together? Frankly it feels like a waste of time. Nothing I do will change the outcome; most likely my character will die before that happens anyway.

Obviously some people love it, and that's cool <^_^> it's just not for me.

---

Other than that I can't actually think of any RPGs I actively dislike. The games I've played (oWoD, SWd20 and SAGA, d6 Star Wars, Shadowrun 3e, D&D 2e, 3.0e, 3.5e, and 4e) I've liked in their own way. They all have quirks; some really really IRRITATING quirks... but typically the settings are enjoyable, and as long as the DM is on top of things, the rules don't become too much of a problem.

Still want to try Exalted; haven't done that yet and I don't' know a whole lot about it yet. Scion also looks pretty cool >.> (Read the book in a store hehe <'x'> love the description of the Scion of Thor who's gift from Thor was... a HUGE oversized revolver! <,<)

I guess ultimately for me, there are two requirements for me to enjoy an RPG -

1) Setting. This is the absolute biggest thing - if your setting is interesting, I will go through some of the most insane rules ever to play >.> (I admit though, the more I like your setting, the more I will modify it; I'm weird like that. But hey, it just makes me even more loyal to that setting anyway <.<)

2) The rules themselves must be playable without me tearing my hair out. They don't have to be great - they can even have some really stupid parts; but you can't leave me going "wait, what?" too often. Otherwise I'll just steal your setting and put it in another rule system I do like >.>; If I'm not too lazy anyway.

Umael
2009-07-28, 07:01 PM
I find it interesting the reasons people give for disliking some games which I actually enjoy.

For example, Tunnels & Trolls - not the best system, but good for a light-RP game. Besides, I learned improper fractions about a year ahead of the other kids in school because of my interest in the game.

Champions - again, what bothers some people (lots of math) doesn't bother me. My math skills improved by being able to create characters for the game.

d20 Rokugan - I have an interesting reason for liking the game, and in fact, one of the best campaigns I ever ran was d20 Rokugan. I did this because I wanted to get people to play a Rokugan game, but after playing d20, no one was ready for a jump from d20 to d10 roll-n-keep. d20 Rokugan gave me the setting without changing the mechanics.

Of course, I have to add that my (positive) experiences with Champions and Rokugan were shaped by the role-playing, not the system...

Artanis
2009-07-28, 07:09 PM
Still want to try Exalted; haven't done that yet and I don't' know a whole lot about it yet. Scion also looks pretty cool >.> (Read the book in a store hehe <'x'> love the description of the Scion of Thor who's gift from Thor was... a HUGE oversized revolver! <,<)

I guess ultimately for me, there are two requirements for me to enjoy an RPG -

1) Setting. This is the absolute biggest thing - if your setting is interesting, I will go through some of the most insane rules ever to play >.> (I admit though, the more I like your setting, the more I will modify it; I'm weird like that. But hey, it just makes me even more loyal to that setting anyway <.<)

2) The rules themselves must be playable without me tearing my hair out. They don't have to be great - they can even have some really stupid parts; but you can't leave me going "wait, what?" too often. Otherwise I'll just steal your setting and put it in another rule system I do like >.>; If I'm not too lazy anyway.

1) Exalted has a really interesting setting which I really like. It's also quite open to being modified, practically asking you to do whatever you like with it and leaving lots of open spaces to insert your own stuff into it.

2) Exalted uses the Storyteller system, so if you've played WoD, you'll have no trouble with Exalted.

SirKazum
2009-07-28, 07:09 PM
Otherwise I'll just steal your setting and put it in another rule system I do like

That's often a very attractive choice. So many RPGs have an awesome setting and/or concept but a really poor system...

Anybody remember seeing a Geocities page, a few years back, one which had a brown background and a picture of a skeleton back on the top, which had a long and rambling homebrew RPG system that made absolutely no frickin' sense at all? When people say FATAL, I keep mistaking it for that one - though I know they're not the same, I've actually seen the FATAL PDF. But the one with the skeleton bat is the strongest contender for "world's worst RPG" I can think of - if only because it's impossible to navigate a single paragraph without making a couple Sanity checks, much less figuring out even the bare basics of how to play this thing. I'm pretty certain the author has enough mental disorders to keep Freud occupied for a long while...

erikun
2009-07-28, 08:49 PM
Star Wars d6 - Oh god, the pain. I guess the system itself could work, but the way we played, there were only two skills you needed - Dodge to avoid getting killed, and Blaster to kill them first. Getting shot resulted in a high damage roll against your Stamina, and rolling 15+ (which was frequent) was instant death. Literal rocket launcher tag at times, and my A-Wing Pilot sporting a 9D Blaster skill, 8D Dodge and only 4D Piloting felt rather silly at times.

D&D 3.5 edition - Sorry, but the system is terribly annoying. Half of the classes either don't function and intended or don't function as advertised, and it is incredibly easy to build a character who ends up being worthless simply because you picked whatever you felt was appropriate thematically. The skill system and spell selection means you either bypass a challange (because you either had max ranks in the skill, or a spell to get past it) or fail at a challange (because you had no ranks in the skill and didn't have the spell prepared). There really isn't much middle ground, even with half ranks.

D&D 4th edition - This is really less a problem with the system itself, and more a problem with WotC's marketing design. I can appreciate supplements which add to the options available for a class, but I don't appreciate intentionally withholding options so that you can sell 2-3 more books. I assume with every other RPG I buy that the main rulebook holds the options intended for basic level play, and I'm not holding you to any different standards, Wizards. >.>

I honestly haven't read FATAL, although I have the PDF.

ZeroNumerous
2009-07-28, 08:58 PM
It's sad, because I love the concept, and when Paranoia threads crop on this board I think they're funny as hell, but the actual game just led to everyone sitting around in silence (because saying ANYTHING got you more treason points, so the players eventually stopped talking).

Your group straight up played it wrong. Paranoia is not a game to play if you care about your character.

mistformsquirrl
2009-07-28, 09:09 PM
@Artanis - <^_^> This is good to know. Thank you!

wadledo
2009-07-28, 09:09 PM
I haven't 'Played' a system I significantly dislike yet, aside from those somewhat annoying little fan made systems that try so, so very hard and fail so, so very miserably.

A complaint I have with exalted is that 2 years after buying the core book, I'm still having difficulty remembering how to calculate my defenses, and I still have no clue how to deal with my mental defenses, not that it ever comes up.

Cheat sheets are cool too white wolf, cheat sheets are cool too!:smallfurious:

Saph
2009-07-28, 09:48 PM
Your group straight up played it wrong. Paranoia is not a game to play if you care about your character.

It wasn't about caring about the character!

The thing was, the DM was carrying a pad of paper, and every time anyone said anything that might be interpreted as "treasonous" (ie, every time they said anything with more linguistic content than "Hi!") he'd shake his head sadly and write down a treason point next to your name, telling you what you did wrong. Any kind of discussion was guaranteed to get you treason points. Saying anything negative got you treason points. Commenting on what was going on got you treason points. Do you know how much it kills conversation to have someone looking over your shoulder writing down everything wrong that you say?

Eventually, the negative reinforcement ensured that nobody said anything except for the most basic factual sentences. So we ended up sitting around in silence. I actually started going out of my way to do stupid things, just to try and get something amusing to happen, such as:

* My character was a pyromaniac with the (illegal) mutant power to set things on fire. I used this whenever I could get away with it. After about three tries, I roll badly on my mutant power check, get a headache, and now my power's weakened and hard to use for the rest of the session. (So the game system is actually making it DIFFICULT for me to get myself killed for treason?)

* Picked the biggest and most unsafe-looking weapon out of the R&D stockpile that we got given. Turned out to be some sort of lightning bazooka. The stupid thing ran out of power after about three shots. I was expecting it to blow up or something.

* I kept getting wounded, and whenever this happened I'd use the R&D Doc Robot to get myself healed. Worked fine each time. After the second time I'd been healed up with no problems, someone else decided to give it a try. His head exploded. Could have been funny, but everyone was so bored by then that went down like a lead balloon.

I didn't die once, despite playing my character with the wisdom and self-preservation instincts of a lemming.

- Saph

Umael
2009-07-28, 10:13 PM
In regards to Star Wars d6 - has anyone tried Star Warriors? Basically, it's the tactical simulated to Star Wars d6, allowing your ships to be more than simple "Roll Piloting... Roll Gunnery...". It can be played as stand-alone (as a board game) or with Star Wars.

In regards to Paranoia... um... maybe it's just the setting... but I really can't seem to get the interest to care much about it. I know it's supposed to be played as humorous... but if I play a humorous game, I would prefer it to be something like Toon or Teenagers From Outer Space.

lvl 1 fighter
2009-07-28, 10:43 PM
I liked Alternity back in the day. Course, I like GURPS too, so that might explain it.

As far as worst system - anyone ever hear of a game called HOL? Otherwise known as Human Occupied Landfill? I never actually got to play a game although I've always wanted to. The rulebook is hands down the funniest RPG book I've ever read.

Damage is rated on something like a Pain/Anguish scale. I dunno. The first book (of two) didn't even give you character creation rules. Those came out in the second book, Buttery Wholesomness, and involved lots and lots of chart rolling. I made a character once and ended up with a character that had a Monkey Uncle from Saturn that had God's Wallet. Or something equally ridiculous.

These are some of the skills in the game.
- Making Sharp Things Go Through Soft Things That Scream and Bleed
- Operate Starship and Chew Gum at the Same Time
- Whining Until You Get What You Want

Actually, just go the wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hol_(role-playing_game)) and laugh. Grab a copy of the rules if you can. It's hilarious. And if you actually manage to play a game let me know how it is.

edit: I forgot the best things about the rulebooks. They are done entirely by hand. Awesome.

Vortling
2009-07-28, 10:51 PM
My personal least favorite is D&D 4e, but even that isn't much hate so much as lethargic loathing. All the other systems I've played I've enjoyed, though that list isn't terribly large. I've yet to play a White Wolf system of any variety and haven't tried Paranoia, Call of Cthulu, or Amber all three of which I suspect I wouldn't enjoy much.

ZeroNumerous
2009-07-28, 10:59 PM
Do you know how much it kills conversation to have someone looking over your shoulder writing down everything wrong that you say?

Sounds like a fault on your part and the DM. You're supposed to die in Paranoia. Everything you do is supposed to be treason. It's intended to be utterly ridiculous and played for laughs. It's something you pick up when bored, crank out a guy in ten minutes and screw around for half an hour doing hilarious and deadly things.

Your entire group took the game far too seriously it sounds like.

Saph
2009-07-28, 11:06 PM
Sounds like a fault on your part and the DM.

*bow*

My deepest apologies for playing the game wrong, oh wise one. Clearly, it's our fault rather than that of the system. I'll be sure to submit my planned actions to you for approval in future, so that we can all benefit from your omniscience. :smallamused:

Morandir Nailo
2009-07-28, 11:12 PM
Shadowrun. Ye gods, how I hate that game. Part of it is my distaste for cyberpunk as a genre; I'm just not interested in a futuristic dark dystopia run by megacorporations. Feels too much like reality.

My problem with the actual game, however, is the initiative system. I can't stand the fact that the jacked-up Street Samurai with a gazillion cybernetic implants rolls a 51 for initiative, and that means that he goes on 51, 41, 31, 21, 11, and 1, while my Elf thief goes on 9. And that's one combat round. Gah. I played this game once. I knew I'd never play again when combat was going so slowly that my gf and her friend were taking naps in between their turns.

Mor

Ograbme
2009-07-28, 11:42 PM
My vote goes towards any system with both (modern)guns and hit points. Those don't mix.


The thing was, the DM was carrying a pad of paper, and every time anyone said anything that might be interpreted as "treasonous" (ie, every time they said anything with more linguistic content than "Hi!") he'd shake his head sadly and write down a treason point next to your name,


87% of dice rolls and note scribbling behind a Paranoia GM's screen is bull****.

Jokes
2009-07-28, 11:46 PM
So far it's D&D 3.5. I got into the game too late and as such never bothered to learn everything about the game, just enough to get by. I certainly don't hate it, I like the customisability over 2e, but the number of options and "poor character choices" leaves me wondering why bother? I would certainly not be able to run a game.

@Saph- Gonna say it's totally the GM's fault on that one. If anything, he should be rewarding you for slipping Treason into statements that go by un-noticed. Alerting everyone to Treason is what the players are supposed to do, not the GM. If the debriefing always ends up in a long winded Witch Trial about 'you said this,' then yeah, it's gonna get boring. You shouldn't get punished for saying "everyone" instead of "everyclone" for a first time group, for instance.

Knowledge of the above statement is Treason.


Your entire group took the game far too seriously it sounds like.

It depends on the play style. Sounds like the GM wanted to play Zap and the players wanted Dark or Classic.

VirOath
2009-07-29, 12:01 AM
*bow*

My deepest apologies for playing the game wrong, oh wise one. Clearly, it's our fault rather than that of the system. I'll be sure to submit my planned actions to you for approval in future, so that we can all benefit from your omniscience. :smallamused:

Just remember to smile! Friend Computer reminds you that Happiness is Mandatory!

Belobog
2009-07-29, 12:02 AM
The thing was, the DM was carrying a pad of paper, and every time anyone said anything that might be interpreted as "treasonous" (ie, every time they said anything with more linguistic content than "Hi!") he'd shake his head sadly and write down a treason point next to your name, telling you what you did wrong. Any kind of discussion was guaranteed to get you treason points. Saying anything negative got you treason points. Commenting on what was going on got you treason points. Do you know how much it kills conversation to have someone looking over your shoulder writing down everything wrong that you say?

Eventually, the negative reinforcement ensured that nobody said anything except for the most basic factual sentences. So we ended up sitting around in silence.

See, that's when the DM is supposed to accuse everyone of 'conspiring with telepathic communist mutants against the interests of happiness'. They have to be having conversations in their heads. Otherwise, why wouldn't they talk? :smalltongue:

In all seriousness, bad experiences happen, especially when people don't know what to expect. Not anyone's fault, but stuff like this probably accounts for a fair part of this thread. Though, it's a problem I wish my group had. Getting them to run anything new is like pulling teeth.

Skeppio
2009-07-29, 12:16 AM
I honestly haven't read FATAL, although I have the PDF.

Delete it now, before you expose yourself the abomination known as FATAL. The only thing more depressing than the game's existence is the knowledge that Byron Hall, the creator of such a vile product, honestly believes it to be completely superior to any RPG ever made and believes that it should be embraced as mainstream entertainment. FATAL is the single worst 'game' ever created. It's on par with Racial Holy War, except RaHoWa is literally unplayable, so there's no threat of actually playing it for any length of time.

Ninetail
2009-07-29, 12:29 AM
Champions - again, what bothers some people (lots of math) doesn't bother me. My math skills improved by being able to create characters for the game.


HERO is an amazing system. It's universal, it's powerful, it's robust, and it's more or less uniform, which is a tougher combination to achieve than one might expect. That it was initially designed in the early 80s is impressive; it outperforms many systems that are more modern (and therefore have the benefit of an established body of work to draw upon in their design).

That said, it is a difficult system to pick up. It's not that the math is hard to do; it's not, not compared to what some RPGs of its generation, or even later, made you go through. It's that it's so arcane. The explanation of Real Points vs. Active Points alone can be maddening for a new player.

I love the system, but it's easy to see why people wouldn't like it: the buy-in is heavier than a lot of systems, especially more modern systems. Even something like 4e, which is rules-moderate at best, is pick-up-and-play compared to HERO.

On topic... yeah, Palladium, especially Rifts. All the disadvantages of HERO, but while HERO is a rather elegant system once you grasp it, Rifts remains a chaotic mess.

Fhaolan
2009-07-29, 12:35 AM
Delete it now, before you expose yourself the abomination known as FATAL. The only thing more depressing than the game's existence is the knowledge that Byron Hall, the creator of such a vile product, honestly believes it to be completely superior to any RPG ever made and believes that it should be embraced as mainstream entertainment. FATAL is the single worst 'game' ever created. It's on par with Racial Holy War, except RaHoWa is literally unplayable, so there's no threat of actually playing it for any length of time.

Concur.

A friend of mine once went and saw Battlefield Earth in the theater. He returned saying that he no longer can have children because watching that movie had damaged his DNA to the point that he was considering sterilization to prevent horrors from being unleashed on mankind.

I had a similar reaction to F.A.T.A.L.

Delete it, and then use a magnet to erase the hard drive, just in case.

:smallbiggrin:

Dracomorph
2009-07-29, 03:41 AM
Man, I've only got like 5 systems that I ever bought into enough to understand, and I find myself unable to really hate any of them.

I mean, Exalted is ridiculous, in a wonderful way.

DnD 3.x was the first system I played, and I still buy splatbooks just to read them. I guess it's possible I'm just emotionally invested, but I remember the one time we tried to play 2nd ed way back in 5th grade. Now THAT was horrible; nothing made any sense at all!

I played Shadowrun 3rd edition with my friends a few times; we always died horribly and it was always freaking awesome anyway. I liked it so much I bought the 4th ed when it came out, and even though I've only had one session with it, I like it almost as well as 3rd. We still die a lot, because it's hard to think right, but we have fun doing it.

I bought DnD 4.0 to try it out, and found it meh. It's freakin' sweet as a wargame, but that's just not all I want to do with pnp.

My real gripe is with GURPS 4e, not because I have any big issues with it, but because I can't find anything but the basic set: characters book. For whatever reason, the local game shop can't even order them!

But I'm kind of weirded out by the dislike of Shadowrun in this thread. Not offended, mind you, just weirded out. I can see disliking it because of the setting, or for a few specific things like decking and rigging, but it's odd to see someone complaining about it because it uses d6's.

Edit:

KotoR was not as good as KotoR 2 and Jade Empire was just "ok."

It's possible I would have agreed with you on the KOTOR/KOTOR2 thing if they had actually bothered to finish KOTOR2. Seriously, I felt like half the game was missing when I beat it.

Kurald Galain
2009-07-29, 05:28 AM
(So the game system is actually making it DIFFICULT for me to get myself killed for treason?)

* Picked the biggest and most unsafe-looking weapon out of the R&D stockpile that we got given. Turned out to be some sort of lightning bazooka. The stupid thing ran out of power after about three shots.
To my best knowledge, neither of that is in any edition of the game system, no. Indeed, part of the point of Paranoia is that things (or for that matter, people) blow up when you roll a fumble, and that you're going to roll a lot of fumbles.

I think you'd enjoy the game if you gave it another shot.

Saph
2009-07-29, 05:50 AM
Well, maybe. I do get the impression that Paranoia is harder to make work than other systems, though. Death is easy, comedy is hard.

mikeejimbo
2009-07-29, 07:02 AM
My real gripe is with GURPS 4e, not because I have any big issues with it, but because I can't find anything but the basic set: characters book. For whatever reason, the local game shop can't even order them!

There's always the internet. Or e23 if you like PDFs.

I like GURPS, and I don't mind that it takes a lot of thought to stat out things. I love doing that. I know a lot of people say it's really rules-heavy too, but all the rules are optional on the part of the GM, essentially.

warmachine
2009-07-29, 07:23 AM
As we're excluding FATAL, Babylon 5 (Mongoose version). Some rules bugged me, such as Minbari getting +2 strength, -2 charisma and their favoured class (for the religious caste) being Diplomat. Far more importantly, it failed to capture the essence of the series. The show was space opera where the characters were involved in galaxy changing events and major conspiracies with examinations of foreign cultures and crisis with dangerous devices as quiet interludes. Howeer, the published modules were script-driven, not faction-driven, and the events inconsequential. The PCs fought but never really changed anything. It was D&D in space.

That it used d20, not even d20 Modern or Future, as its system just emphasised the combat. When the Minbari splat book created Shadowsouled Minbari, a sub-race not shown in the show and unneeded with the known factions, this confirmed the authors couldn't think out of D&D in space and didn't understand the show at all.