What is, in your opinion, the single WORST RPG ever made, and why is it so bad?

[Divine2021]

Please. No admonishment for the screeds @Celebrim has put forth? His take on Mouse Guard is abysmal. His assessment of the entirety of the fandom of PbtA and Blades in the Dark is about as lousy as it gets. And the idea that GURPS has never led to long standing games? I don’t even like GURPS, but that’s clearly ridiculous.

They’re awful takes. He said what he said and I’m responding to it.

Listen, I’m going to block you, because you’re not the type of person I want to engage with on the internet. But before I do, I want you to know this: you’re embarrassing yourself. You are coming across as a clown, and an entirely unserious person for getting this worked up about someone else’s opinion.

 

[pemerton]

I have started to wonder if Powered by the Apocalypse is the current version of this. It's discussed ad nauseum in RPG design threads, and the Wikipedia page claims there a hundreds of published games that use the system. But VTTs seem to report its market share below 1%, and I've never personally seen or heard about anyone running a campaign (admittedly, the internet discussion about it always leaves a very bad taste in my mouth, too).

I can report that I have met people who run and play Apocalypse World, Dungeon World, Stonetop and other PbtA-ish games. Some of them post on these boards: @Campbell, @Manbearcat, @hawkeyefan, and others.

I've run Agon 2e, which is PbtA-adjacent, and as I've often posted about run Classic Traveller in a manner heavily influenced by Apocalypse World.

Please. No admonishment for the screeds @Celebrim has put forth? His take on Mouse Guard is abysmal. His assessment of the entirety of the fandom of PbtA and Blades in the Dark is about as lousy as it gets.

That particular poster has me blocked. But the suggestion that Mouse Guard is the worst RPG ever published is bonkers. It's system is a derivative of Burning Wheel, which is an amazing FRPG; and it itself is the inspirational chassis for Torchbearer, which is another amazing FRPG.

Both BW and TB deliver, in play, exactly what they promise on the label. I'd be gob-smacked if Mouse Guard isn't the same.

 

[MNblockhead]

Gamma World

The idea was cool, but the gameplay was just "meh" for me.

I would love to find an old copy to see how it holds up for me. I LOVED gamma world back in the 80s. But there were a lot of games I played in the 80s that I would have no interest or patience for now, including AD&D.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Well, I think that replying to someone and then blocking them is against the board rules, as is calling someone a clown and telling them that they’re embarrassing themselves when what they were responding to was way more out of line… but so be it. I don’t care if people like or don’t like the games I do… but to say that anyone who likes game X is a Y… that’s absolute nonsense and deserves to be called out. I’ll gladly be blocked by anyone who wants to criticize the latter and defend the former.

The fact that same person can use this thread topic as an excuse to rant about the motives of an entire group of people who play certain types of games, and who can offer all kinds of misguided takes on other well-liked and longstanding games, while in another post unironically saying that we should try to “differentiate between actual bad mechanics and mechanics we simply don’t like”… gimme a break.

 

[MNblockhead]

Thread cap in 3...2...1....

 

[hgjertsen]

Thread cap in 3...2...1....

Sure hope not! Back on topic, I think a really bad mechanic, not specific to any given RPG, but maybe more of a general complaint, is when there is a huge number of prerequisites for the use of a feature. This is obviously something there needs to be a good balance of though, because having every ability be completely atomized leads to builds, even emergent ones, feeling less satisfying, while the opposite makes you feel super stressed out trying to build towards anything in systems with leveling because missing out on one feat could screw you over five levels later.

 

[Autumnal]

So, I have a very good friend who is an excellent negative indicator for me - any campaign she likes, I know I should not play in. Her goals in play do not align with mine, to the point where we would be constantly chafing over the differences.

I have a second friend who runs games, and he's repeatedly said that one of these days, he'd like to invite me to play. But, he runs games the first friend really likes, so I don't really get enthusiastic about his games.

I’m that way with some of my best friends, too. We can talk about games and often have a great time, but shared play is a thing that shouldn’t happen.

 

[not-so-newguy]

I played in a con game run by one of the writers, and it was phenomenal, evoking Dark Souls perfectly without just copying a section of the game.

hmmm, I've never played the video game so I can't really provide that kind of experience. Maybe I can reskin it and try to pass it off as something new. (Hey guys, want to play this new rpg called Sark Douls?)
Eh, shennanigans for another day perhaps.

 

[MNblockhead]

I wonder how VTTs affect one's feelings for a game. I know that if I had to run Warhammer Fantasy 4e completely pen and paper, I would not care as much for it, mainly due to the crunchy combat rules. But since the official game systems for it in Foundry helps with a lot of the mechanics, I'm really enjoying it.

When the WotC VTT comes out, and if MCDM release their VTT, we'll have two VTTs designed for a specific system, which--in theory at least--will fully support all of the games mechanics. If done poorly, it could make the experience too much like a video game, but done well, it really speeds up combat and character generation and allows for much more crunchy rules without requiring large learning curves.

I'm also following the development of Crucible closely. It is a game system being created by Foundry and is designed specifically for VTT play. I really enjoyed the play tests, which focused entirely on combat. Will have to see how engaging the rules are outside of combat. A system like Crucible, I expect would seem like terrible rules for anyone wanting to run them by pen and paper.

I'm wondering how other systems that people complain about for being overly complicated and difficult to learn would fare if those rules were handled by a VTT.

Another example that comes to mind is DCC. One thing the keeps me from running DCC is the dependence on tables. It is like someone said, you know what was great about AD&D? All the tables you had to reference! Every spell in DCC is its own subsystem. And it is wonderful, but also a pain. But when all the tables are in a VTT and the rolls are automated, it is great. They don't get in the way. You get all the flavor without time wasted flipping pages.

Then there are games that work the other way. Alice is Missing is one example. Playing it with the official materials on Roll20 is still fun, but you don't need a VTT to run the game at all and playing it in person it a much more powerful experience. I feel the same about games like Dialect, Dread, InSPECTREs, Grim and other games that have light rule systems designed to build interesting in-person experiences.

 

[aramis erak]

Well, I don't think you can call OD&D the "worst" RPG ever made for a very simple reason; as you acknowledge, it's the first.

Largely irrelevant...

So without it, we wouldn't have all the other TTRPGs (both good and bad) for people to ... um .... release upon.

Unprovable. RPG-like minis gaming was on the rise in many groups; if it hadn't been Arneson and Gygax, it could have wound up arising out Tolkienizing any 1:figure:soldier wargame. Or from the warped minds of Cali, better known as The Chaosium, as they were looking for a way to better explore Stafford's Glorantha (which originates in a late 60's wargame). Or from the SCA, which, while not a LARP, per se (no character sheets, no competency simulation mechanics), definitely spawned a couple LARP-like spinoffs in the 70's... It only takes a short wargaming hop for a LARPer to reinvent TTRPG.
A number of character per token games were in development - and came out in the early 70's. Most important to D&D is AH's Outdoor Survival. Add a GM and relax the restrictions, and it's an RPG.

The thing is, RPGs can spin off from any number of sources... it's a matter of just that Gygax had the connections and Arneson the ability to explain it to Gygax... (Too bad he didn't shop it to Flying Buffalo or SPI...)

Original D&D was a bad job editing and layout for the time; if you don't believe me, check out any of the 1965-1972 games from Avalon Hill, or 3M, or SPI, Or even the layout and editing of Strategic Review, by TSR themselves. Or Chainmail. Chainmail is FAR better written than the core. Or the Dahlun Manuscript, for that matter.

RPG's could have arisen from the nascent LARP scene (which isn't really tied to D&D, since LARPing really starts after the SCA becomes two kingdoms and has disaffected former members... late 1960's... and some wanted to gamify it all.

Likewise, ROTC brought minis gaming to many state colleges. This, technically, is how it got to Arneson.
Kriegspiel, especially Frei Kriegspiel, was common on many US university campuses, due to exposure within NROTC.

All it takes is 1:1 wargames, which outside campuses were also starting to get some play time, and you just need to combine either Model UN or Model Senate, or either of the 1960's games, Mr President with Frei Kriegspiel to have simulationist character roleplay.... You need the FK for the "not covered by rules" freedom, especially for underhanded tactics. Or, with Outdoor Surival.