How happy are you with your regular ruleset?

[grimmgoose]

Man, we have different experiences. I loathed CoC 7e as a ruleset.

Yeah, we just had different experiences. We found it simple, intuitive, and it disappeared at the table - which, to me, is the most important thing a system can do.

We're a pretty beers-and-pretzels table, so we had none of the issues you described. Instead, that system led to stories that we still talk about today. I absolutely loved the "Pushed Roll" mechanic, the Normal/Hard/Extreme successes, bonus/penalty dice. It was fun and easy to adjudicate as a GM. I'm sorry you had a bad experience with it.

 

[MintRabbit]

I run a lot of different games but I think the majority of the games that I participate in are Forged in the Dark. A few things I enjoy about it:

• collaborative world-building. Takes a lot of pressure off of my shoulders and encourages the players to really cement themselves in the world.
• The Position & Effect conversation. Players have final say over how exactly they approach a problem, but I get to decide how difficult the problem is and how bad the fallout will be.
• Resistance. Players have the ability to improve their chances and resist harm, so I'm able to present them with consequences, but they can choose how those consequences manifest (Harm vs. Stress, for example).

I'm also really enjoying a lot of the settings and genres that have been published in the FitD sphere.

 

[Edgar Ironpelt]

My recent/current game is my "Brotherhood of Rangers" campaign, D&D 3.5e where all the PCs are gestalt-rangers and where I try to keep my tendency to write house rules on a short leash. I wouldn't be happy with 3.5e when running some other campaign without adding significantly more house rules.

The three biggest intractable annoyances I have with the rules are (1) the cost structure for magic items encouraging a proliferation of smaller items instead of a few big cool items, (2) the grapple rules, and (3) Damage Reduction that's hard to balance without making it either a You Can't Win button against the PCs, or else something meaningless.

 

[Wolfpack48]

My recent/current game is my "Brotherhood of Rangers" campaign, D&D 3.5e where all the PCs are gestalt-rangers and where I try to keep my tendency to write house rules on a short leash. I wouldn't be happy with 3.5e when running some other campaign without adding significantly more house rules.

The three biggest intractable annoyances I have with the rules are (1) the cost structure for magic items encouraging a proliferation of smaller items instead of a few big cool items, (2) the grapple rules, and (3) Damage Reduction that's hard to balance without making it either a You Can't Win button against the PCs, or else something meaningless.

Great input -- be sure to vote in the follow poll here as well

What criticisms do you have for current or previously used systems?

This is the third in a series of polls gauging the overall temperature of the community and how well they are enjoying the games they play. Thanks for all the great responses so far, they have been incredibly enlightening! This third question drills down and expands on some of the previous...

www.enworld.org