Games you thought you'd like and hated and games you thought you'd hate and liked

[DM_Jeff]

I didn't think I'd like Star Wars Saga Edition. I was very wrong, WotC finally got the Star Wars feel to my group dead-on.

Back in the day I remember as a kid thinking "how can a game called 'Car Wars' go wrong?!" It did. My group tried to plow through it multiple sessions until finally realizing we weren't really having much fun.

-DM Jeff

 

[Psion]

I'd say using a level-based system with separate point pools for skills, stats, and special abilities isn't very much like GURPS. ;D

To me, it sounds better. Sort of like I'd house rule GURPS. (I've always found that point systems that put resources into different piles--"siloing" to use the buzzword 'round here--are less prone to abuse and easier to balance than "one big pile of points" systems.)

 

[cmrscorpio]

I thought I'd like oWoD Vampire (only WoD I've played for more than a session) and I gave it the benefit of the doubt for two whole chronicles. What do I hate most about it? The fact that for a system that supposedly allows a player to explore the psyche of a monster, there sure is alot of "you've failed your save, now hand your sheet over to the storyteller so s/he can tell you how you go berserk."

 

[Will]

Psion:
re: siloing... excellent point.

For a while I was really into point buy systems but certain things ... bugged me. After being dragged into D&D 3e and finding it enjoyable, the reason caught on; most point buy systems are formless, where points just go here and there and everywhere, and few people really round out characters because they get distracted by something they want to heap points into.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Well that is a issue with the player not the system. I personally prefer point-systems since for me it creates more realized and less one-dimensional characters. I can put things into what would view as counter-intuitive or create character types that have wide-ranging interests, but no specialization.

For instance in Promethean: The Created I have a Galatea (a Frankenstein-type character that is eerily beautiful and seeks out humans to be loved) I however went against the normal views of a Galatea to make a character that is non-outgoing and secretive as well as physically intimidating which I couldn't do without a point-system.

 

[SpiderMonkey]

Thought I'd like but hated:

Dragonlance Saga. I don't know how many of you remember this one, but UGH. The diceless card system. We were playing in a Ravenloft campaign when this came out, and at the urging of our DM we converted our characters over to this mess. I was excited because I was playing a thief in a game where everyone goes up in level at the same time, and at a glance it looked interesting enough. Suddenly, my formerly-next-to-useless Thief became like unto a god because it was easy to manipulate that system. I thought they'd soup it up when they changed the basic engine for...

...Marvel Saga Rules Terrible. If you were creative enough, you could make any power do any thing. I was so excited for this one to come out, but the critiques above carried over.

Rifts Great concept, and I love the idea of the kitchen sink setting, but the execution was brutal and unbalanced.

Thought I'd hate but really liked

Changeling I couldn't wrap my head around it when I looked at the books, but when a buddy of mine ran it, I had a blast. The clunkiness of the oWoD system was still present, but it was a fun, imaginative game. Under a different Storyteller, the miles may have varied, however.

 

[jdrakeh]

Well that is a issue with the player not the system. I personally prefer point-systems since for me it creates more realized and less one-dimensional characters. I can put things into what would view as counter-intuitive or create character types that have wide-ranging interests, but no specialization.

For instance in Promethean: The Created I have a Galatea (a Frankenstein-type character that is eerily beautiful and seeks out humans to be loved) I however went against the normal views of a Galatea to make a character that is non-outgoing and secretive as well as physically intimidating which I couldn't do without a point-system.

The downside is that even a brilliant point-based character creation doesn't negate GM fiat. The power that point-based character creation gives players is only worthwhile if the GM, during actual game play, honors the choices that the players make. If the GM doesn't honor those decisions by making them a part of actual game play, the value of the point-based character creation is diminished entirely.

 

[Will]

Uh, Promethean isn't a pure point based system and is, actually, pretty much a case example of what I'm talking about.

You have pools in different categories. This helps someone from, say, putting all his points into ability scores and nothing into skills (and so on).

 

[Psion]

Well that is a issue with the player not the system.

Games are cheap. I think its sensible to choose a game based on what works well for you and players you want to game with.

 

[jdrakeh]

Games are cheap. I think its sensible to choose a game based on what works well for you and players you want to game with.

Honestly, part of me thinks that this need to assemble people of like mind and then find a rule set that suits them might be a failing of RPGs, rather than a benefit.

One of the beauties of games like Clue or Monopoly is that they provide a very focused, very static, play experience. When somebody says "Let's play Clue!" you always know exactly what to expect. When somebody says "Let's play D&D!" the actual play experience has very little to do with the rules and nearly everything to do with how the people doing the playing decide to apply them.

The rules of a game like Clue are very focused on providing one and only one type of play exeprience, while the rules of RPGs are (with very few exceptions) largely elaborate variations on simple pass/fail mechanics, rather than procedural rules that govern the flow of actual game play. How the rules are applied in most boardgames is spelled out in absolutes, while how rules are applied in RPGs is largely left up to the best judgement of a single individual (e.g. the DM) or group concensus (in those 'dirty hippy' games).

The benefit of such open interpretation of rules with regard to their application is that it makes more play modes possible. When you buy a RPG, you aren't typically restricted to telling one single story or exploring one single theme. That's good. The downside is that there is no default set of expectations about what actual play will consist of (as the thousands of threads here and elsewhere dedicated to arguing about right and wrong ways to roleplay can attest to). I think that's bad.