Systems - Which do you detest

[Barrok]

I have included a few systems - which do you detest.. and please post up why.

[VoidPointer]

One: There's no poll here.

Two: F.A.T.A.L. takes the cake here. I'm not familiar with any others I truly dislike.

Edit: Well played, Barrok. You're fast indeed.

[Barrok]

thank you kindly - unfortunately the way for the forum posts a poll - you must make a topic up first which gets posted automatically - whilst this is happening you are taken to a separate screen to do all the poll stuff which amalgamates the two ... hmm quite descriptive for me really.

Anyway for me its Palladium - I have tried Heroes Unlimited and looked over RIFTS (which the back story is kind of intriguing) but I really think the system as a whole sucks in a very big way....

Following that I would go for RuneQuest version III by Avalon Hill. I would love to see what the new versions are like (one by Chaosium and the other by Mongoose). I have read that the Chaosium one is much better.

[Niko_Kaze]

Heroes: way too much math for to simple of a system that doesn't really offer anything new.

[Delta]

I was thinking FATAL too. It's so horrible it loops back into funny and then back into horrible again.

[brekkers]

I haven't played that many different systems, so I am just going to throw out the worst of those I've played so far..obviously!

Ad&D 2nd edition... very flawed and weird! We played for a few years, of course, but then we just had to make up our own homebrew!

Among the best though... the original Sovereign Stone system! So easy, and very logical!

- Brek

[Knight of Roses]

Hero System is amazing, if you have the time. It is complex, yes, but complete and amazingly flexible.

I voted for Palladium for the following reasons:

The system is incoherent, badly organized and designed to encourage power gamer over all other styles of play. Some nice art though and even an occasional neat idea.

Kevin Siembieda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Siembieda) is an ass.

[Vivamort]

Anything made by FGU!

Too many mathematical equations to deal with to resolve everything.

[Barrok]

Must admit I second Hero System being really lovely... I love the math involved and the sheer amount of tweaking you can give powers - if I was sat at a table and had to choose a superhero game - I would choose Champions (hero system) but that is personal taste for you

[Niko_Kaze]

My problem is that I've seen similar systems that are much easier to use (BESM for example). While I don't mind the math personally it takes a lot of time and it's hard to get people interested in it when other systems are so much easier with little lost. Palladium, it has some memories for me but I agree that as a whole it's not put together well. 2nd edition and first well while not perfect considering what they are and when they came out I'm willing to say they deserve not to be written off.

[k-raov]

I voted Freeform (which isn't really a system per se). I've just never been able to get behind it. I just feel that there has to be SOME sort of structure to the game. If it doesn't, is it a game? Or does it become just shared storytelling? Who's to say.

wEs

[Norm]

My vote went to cyberpunk, but I'm now thinking was that because of the setting / genre as opposed to the system. Don't like cyberpunk as a concept, and that is enough for me.

A lot of palladium bashing going on here. I quite liked the settings and as an alternative to gurps which I found clunky - yet highly versatile - with a lot of tweaking, then it wern't too bad. Not good, but the group I was with when I played it liked it and it was well handled.

This calls something else into question.

If you play a bad game that's well run, is it better or worse than a good game that is run poorly?

[VoidPointer]

> If you play a bad game that's well run, is it better or worse than a good game that is run poorly?

Far better. A good GM can make the worst system workable (except possibly F.A.T.A.L.), but the best system cannot overcome a terrible GM.

[Knight of Roses]

True, a good GM and group can make any game fun but it is easier to have a fun game when you are not fighting against the system to do so.

Out of curiosity, Norm, what do you dislike about cyberpunk as a genre?

[Norm]

Out of curiosity, Norm, what do you dislike about cyberpunk as a genre?

Just never really bought into the cybernetics thing.

Fantasy - eldritch horrors - the standard staples, but games with cyberpunk overtones does nothing to titillate my taste buds. That being said I enjoyed the Sarah Connor Chronicles, Terminator, vanilla sky and such movies, so maybe I am not a lost cause - well not totally lost anyway.

[VoidPointer]

True, a good GM and group can make any game fun but it is easier to have a fun game when you are not fighting against the system to do so.

Of course. Also, arguably a good GM will not select a bad system. I was only commenting on which bad situation is better.

Which makes me wonder if someone could run a good FATAL game. I suspect not, but who knows? Who has TRIED?

[Niko_Kaze]

Well some systems come down to the DM too. I've had a good D&D DM that couldn't handle WOD even though he knew the rule well, and our WOD GM couldn't handle Palladium, but the one guy that couldn't handle anything else ran a very good shadowrun game, and that's one system that's all sorts of bad in my book (the SYSTEM not the genre or fluffy or even cyberware/ etc al. Just the mechanical part).

[mexal]

There is no system I really detest - the bits that don't work for me get modified!

But what I dislike is a system where the rule mechanics intrude, rather than simply being a tool for task resolution. Fireborn, for example, had a combat system so complex that you had to write out your actions for each turn or you'd never keep track of what was happening...

And as for systems which insist on a huge process (rather than just an appropriate die roll) for something that should rely on role-play rather than the dice... Spycraft 2.0 was one such, you could complete an entire infiltration of the enemy base by die rolling without any actual game play at all. At least they had the sense to modularise it and suggest that in any situation you could either use the mechanics or play it out properly, the idea being you rolled dice for the elements of the game that didn't interest you much and played out the bits you found fun.

[Sunfist]

Among the best though... the original Sovereign Stone system! So easy, and very logical!
You might be the only other person I know that knows that system.

I started a campaign out in that system, but switched to D20 SovStone when Sovereign Press did. That original system was great, though!

[Sunfist]

Oh, and I picked "Freeform", though I haven't played every system in the list.

[Niko_Kaze]

I've seen sovereign stone, and liked the look of it, but none of the locals play it and I didn't have the extra money to invest in a system that I didn't know if I would use.

One thing I don't like about cyberpunk is how your key skill decided how much money you start with.

[Scorch]

I haven't played/heard of a good deal of things in the list, so F.A.T.A.L. got my vote. Never have I seen a system that's so stupid, Im not even going to read up on it anymore, I hope it stays in the RPG graveyard.


Secondly, WHO VOTED FOR PARANOIA!!!!!:angry::angry::angry:

Show yourself. And be prepared for termination for herecy against the computer!

[Sunfist]

I've seen sovereign stone, and liked the look of it, but none of the locals play it and I didn't have the extra money to invest in a system that I didn't know if I would use.
Well, the original Sovereign Stone is long, long gone. It was made by Sovereign Press. Sovereign Press then changed it all over to d20. Then, Sovereign Press became Margarett Weiss productions. MWP eventually sold the rights to Sovereign Stone to White Silver Productions, who put out a revised d20 SovStone (which was really, really great, by the way).

Finally, they pretty much quit making Soverign Stone and started working on the fabulous, super-great Chronicles of Ramlar.

The end!

[Niko_Kaze]

I haven't played/heard of a good deal of things in the list, so F.A.T.A.L. got my vote. Never have I seen a system that's so stupid, Im not even going to read up on it anymore, I hope it stays in the RPG graveyard.


Secondly, WHO VOTED FOR PARANOIA!!!!!:angry::angry::angry:

Show yourself. And be prepared for termination for herecy against the computer!


I didn't but I'll claim I did for the termination. I'm over due for one anyway.

[Scorch]

Ahh well good enough for me :)

*ZAPZAPZAP*

[brekkers]

Well, there is actually two versions of Sovereign Stone, the original (and very cool) system, and the newer (and very less cool) system, which is just an adaptation of the d20 system, and why do I say less cool when I am such a great fan of the d20 system?

Basically, I was part of the playtesting crew back in the day, before the first Sovereign Stone system was released, and we had some very cool moments of play.

But then, a year (or two) after its release, the dnd 3.0 came out, and even though they all (Margaret Weis, Larry Elmore and the guys who created Sovereign Stone) called them Weasels of the Coast, they still...got aboard! To survive...of course!

I guess, if you happen to find one of the original Sovereign Stone books, its somewhat of a curiosity, not sure where mine are...though I have all the novels on my shelf! :)

- Brek

[Cannibal Monkey]

I've never made any secret of it, I simply cannot stand D&D. I had a fantastic GM running a game of it once, and it still agonised me every second of every game.

[Scorch]

That's ok it's not to everyone's liking. As long as there is an RPG out there you do like then I have no quarrel with you good sir knight :D

[Sunfist]

Well, there is actually two versions of Sovereign Stone, the original (and very cool) system, and the newer (and very less cool) system, which is just an adaptation of the d20 system, and why do I say less cool when I am such a great fan of the d20 system?

Basically, I was part of the playtesting crew back in the day, before the first Sovereign Stone system was released, and we had some very cool moments of play.

But then, a year (or two) after its release, the dnd 3.0 came out, and even though they all (Margaret Weis, Larry Elmore and the guys who created Sovereign Stone) called them Weasels of the Coast, they still...got aboard! To survive...of course!

I guess, if you happen to find one of the original Sovereign Stone books, its somewhat of a curiosity, not sure where mine are...though I have all the novels on my shelf! :)

- Brek
I still think the revised d20 version that White Silver put out was just great. It had some awesome ideas in it.

I have all three books: Original SS, 3.0 SS, and Revised SS.

[brekkers]

To be honest, I've never actually read any of the sovereign stone d20 books, for a long time I was just so angry they turned against their own cool system...

- Brek

[Sunfist]

Oh. Well, they were actually pretty good.

They through out the D20 magic system completely, for one, which I enjoyed. (They basically used something pretty damn similar to the original.)

Yes, they went back to classes, but the classes were fun. Their Mounted Warrior, Soldier, and Archer classes were just great - especially in Revised. In fact, I put all three of those classes into every D20 game I ran after that.

[Niko_Kaze]

You know, they didn't "turn against their own system". I imagine they still use it at home. However there is nothing wrong with trying to turn a buck. After all that is why it was released in the first place. If it is for sell it's not art. It's not a great and glorious ideal. It's something to make money. Real art, Real ideals or concepts are kept or given for free, not sold. We in the western culture seem to have this idea that if someone changes something from its original form to make money or indeed for any reason they are not being true to the original and deserve scorn. That's nonsense, everything either changes and grows or dies. If you used any system the same way everytime it you would soon leave it as it is boring and it would die, same thing applies here. The designers deserve some respect for doing what was nessecary to keep their ideas and concepts alive and growing into new things. With 4e out they may decide to try and revamp the original, but even if they do it will not be the exact same, as they have new ideas to apply, this is not heresy but honest grow and should be viewed as such.

[Sunfist]

You know, they didn't "turn against their own system". I imagine they still use it at home. However there is nothing wrong with trying to turn a buck. After all that is why it was released in the first place. If it is for sell it's not art. It's not a great and glorious ideal. It's something to make money. Real art, Real ideals or concepts are kept or given for free, not sold. We in the western culture seem to have this idea that if someone changes something from its original form to make money or indeed for any reason they are not being true to the original and deserve scorn. That's nonsense, everything either changes and grows or dies. If you used any system the same way everytime it you would soon leave it as it is boring and it would die, same thing applies here. The designers deserve some respect for doing what was nessecary to keep their ideas and concepts alive and growing into new things. With 4e out they may decide to try and revamp the original, but even if they do it will not be the exact same, as they have new ideas to apply, this is not heresy but honest grow and should be viewed as such.
Oh, I agree completely. I mean, the world was unchanged and what really mattered was the world.

In the campaign that I ran, basically I ran a storyline that was happening at the exact same time as the last two MW and TH Sovereign Stone books. It was a blast!

I mean, if anything, they "turned against" themselves when they freakin' sold the entire rights to it! I mean, really.

Of course, now they are making bank of franchises, so (MWP is making Firefly RPG, BSG RPG, etc.)

[brekkers]

However, they did turn against their own ideas, and they knew it, and were sad about it, trust me, we talked about it, a lot, and you know what, in the end that was what killed it for them. Afterall, they did sell the world to someone else.

But as you say, they did it to earn cash, and if thats an ideal to strive for, then...they succeeded, but money aint everything!

Its not that I liked the world a lot (Loerem was it?), but the system was brilliant, mostly for its simplicity and effectiveness, I would have loved to adapted it to other worlds.

- Brek

[Niko_Kaze]

Why don't you then? The information is out there, the books are still available, so use them. It's not like a system goes 'obsolete' and just doesn't work anymore. I play d&d 3.5, I also still play 2ed. I also play old and new WOD. If you have the information you have the power to use that information. These aren't windows updates or something where you can never go back to a system that works well.

I'm not saying money is an ideal to strive for but it can help in the striving for ideals, if it keeps you fed, clothed, sheltered and supplied for the journey. It's a lot easier to work on higher concepts when the lower ones are covered, just ask Abraham Maslow.

[brekkers]

Because at the moment I am playing d20 Modern and working on my own campaign setting... Crown.

Luckily, I dont have to sell my soul to keep myself fed, clothed and sheltered, which means that I pretty much have the freedom to do whatever I want.

- Brek

[Sunfist]

Man, you're pretty smug about all this. Jeeze.

[brekkers]

What are you talking about?

If you like the Sovereign Stone world, thats fine by me, I just wanted to clearify that it was, basically, the system I enjoyed. Is that ok by you? :)

Also, I dont think that you should just make something with the intent of making money, you should enjoy what you are making, and if you earn money on it, hey, thats cool.

But, you know what, thats the last post by me on the subject, before this gets ugly.

- Brek

[Niko_Kaze]

Enjoyment is the name of the game. So, is this crown you're developing a whole system or just a setting (like anything is 'just' a setting)?

[brekkers]

Its basically just a d20 city setting, its published too, but I haven't earned a single gold piece on it, but thats ok by me, I didn't do it for money. I have plans of making an adventure path for it, but we'll see, creating adventures is not what I do best.

- Brek

[mexal]

Where is it available from, and would you like it reviewed on RPG Resource?

[vithgard777]

Mage:Ascension has to be the absolute worst game ever created. I found the mash of rules repugnant to any type of system. I just could not see any use of the system as it didnt truly work any new ground, and filled in few gaps in existing games. Over all, a system I feel should never have been created.


Sorry if I sound a bit harsh, I spent 50 bucks on a couple books and found I couldn't use them in any way.

[Ronin84]

I voted other, because Rolemaster was not included, I have never liked that game and though their "color" material was always an interesting read I thought the game was WAY over complicated.

Now HARP I would throw in the same boat as Rolemaster for the same reason BUT their color material does not seem to be on the same level as ICE's was.

Hope that made sense...

[Mask]

I can't really vote simply because I've never played with a system I didn't like. Mostly, that's because I've not played that many systems, to be honest. However, I'm interested in something...
D&D 4E is the most unpopular game on the list (other than "other") yet I haven't seen anyone mention it (other than CM, and we all know he hates all D&D, non-specifically). I'm curious about this.

[VoidPointer]

Well, myself I haven't played it, but most of the complaints I've heard are about how many of its rules, especially for skills, have been really, REALLY simplified, and non-combat aspects of the game seem to have been ignored. A lot of its detractors seem to think it's been simplified for the computer/console gaming crowd, and that the rules have too many gaps that require DM fiat (which a lot of people like, but it can be argued that you're not paying for books in order to make things up). Me, I'm not sure, but that's what I've heard.

Bear Lore, though, is flat-out ridiculous. A DC 20 check to know that bears attack with their claws?

[Niko_Kaze]

HA! shows what you know! Bears attack with their ears! *has rolled a fumble in bear lore*

Seriously my main complaint on 4th is its complete lack of imagination and vision. Everything and everyone uses the same generic system in the same way. I've seen 8 and 16 bit video games with more imagination and variety (heck even Final Fantasy: Mystic Quest was better than this power system).

Other than my loathing of the power system? 4th ed looks nice. Good artwork, nice concept support (and I believe the "missing" classes will get added back in with time), interesting monster ideas (with the group/elite/solo idea), and an attempt to make the game playable at every level with less chance of quirks and complete randomness completely killing everything off.

[Grumpy Old Man]

4e, don't really detest it but half the fun of a character is the work you put into it and this just seems to take the challenge out of it. Besides I like all my character classes.

[Azireal]

4th edition, Because it makes all classes more generic and less of a class as a job that you do differently than another person.

I feel (this is personal to me, and I know it is unreal but it is what i percieve) that a fighter is only different from a mage, becasue warriors wear armor and wizards cast some spells...