Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jdrakeh" data-source="post: 4439826" data-attributes="member: 13892">Somebody started this thread over on RPGNet and I found it interesting, but I can't post there, so I figured I'd give the same thing a go here. Basically, what I'm asking for are examples of games that you played for one session before they folded (and, ideally, why they folded during or after that one play session). To be clear, I'm not merely asking about games that you dislike (we all have plenty of those, I'm sure), but games that you actually had an interest in, attempted to play, and were utterly underwhelmed by to the point that you never played them again (or did, but were similarly thwarted during the first session). I'll give a few examples of games that didn't survive 1st contact for me (or the people I was playing with): <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Dogs in the Vineyard - For me and my players, this looked really good on paper but ended up producing an unremarkable actual play experience that did not differ much from any traditional game system with gunslinger PCs (from Boot Hill to Deadlands), except that it took much more effort to achieve. Although it gave the PCs a larger degree of narrative control, our group had long since discovered that this can be achieved without actual game mechanics, so long as the GM is willing. As far as I know, none of us ever picked up the game again (not because it was bad, mind you, we simply found other "western" RPGs more to our liking). </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Rifts - This 'never again' is probably due to the GM allowing players to create any character that they wanted from any sourcebook without framing the campaign in any kind of context past "You all meet on a field to seek adventure!" <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" /> This was a really bad idea. I'm open to the idea that the game might be great with a GM who is willing to reign in the system and provide some kind of a context for the game beforehand, but this "Anything goes! Whatevah!" experience scared me away from the game for more than a decade.</li> </ul></blockquote>

Verification