Games you were turned off of and why

[Coplen]

3) There are optional rules for having demihumans have experience point penalties instead of class level limits.

Boy, did I hate them rules. I'm not into rules capping demihuman levels. Always made me think that the demihumans were retarded.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Boy, did I hate them rules. I'm not into rules capping demihuman levels. Always made me think that the demihumans were retarded.

Yeah, that never made sense to me. I couldn't even see any form of game design logic behind it at all, so I simply ignored it in my game. Of course knowinga thing or two about actual fights, I shortened the combat round to six seconds immediately after starting to play 2nd edition. There were some who called me a heretic and refused to play in my game for not following the RAW, but I was vindicated when 3E was released.

 

[coyote6]

AD&D - got tired of it, got to dislike it.

Marvel Super-Heroes - the TSR game. This was a "bad first experience", where experience with a bad GM led me to a lack of interest in the game, so I never got into it. Too bad, really.

I don't know if I should count Hero or not - I got tired of it, but I don't dislike it. I'm just not interested in GMing it (I'd play it, though).

That's about it for games that turned me off. There are plenty of games that never interested me (RIFTS, etc.), and other games that didn't interest me strongly enough to play extensively (Vampire); but the only ones that I'd say "turned me off".

I had problems with SR's game mechanics (up through early 3e, anyways), but I liked the setting enough to deal with it for a while. Others in my group really didn't like it, though, so we eventually gave it up. But I'm quite interested in trying SR 4e (I got to play it at GenCon SoCal, and it was a blast).

 

[mythusmage]

... Metropolis has been converted to D20 and released by Necromancer Games ...

That would be Necropolis.

Than again, Fritz Lang's Metropolis would make a good Dangerous Journeys: Changeling sourcebook.

 

[Darrin Drader]

That would be Necropolis.

Than again, Fritz Lang's Metropolis would make a good Dangerous Journeys: Changeling sourcebook.

D'oh! Typos.....

 

[harmyn]

GURPS: Linear is heroic; bell curve is bland.

Really - it does not get much more fundamental than that.

Heroic isn't Linear. Heroic isn't a bell curve. Heroic is a state of mind. Frodo and Sam were heroic. Odysseus was heroic. Conan had his moments and the Seven Samurai were all heroes. Harry Potter fits the bill too.

Heroic deed and action comes in all shapes and sizes.

If you have trouble with playing a fully realized and competent character at the beginning of the game I feel for you (that would be GURPS). You may not like the rules, you may not like their skill resolution, fine. But that has nothing to do with being heroic.

You can easily be heroic in D&D too, it is a game of great fantasy.

Sorry to interject and harrass again. You can be repelled by a a system, by a setting, but to claim that you cannot be heroic in an RPG, just about any RPG is incorrect. You can even be heroic in V:TM, its just not typical of the games that are run in it. Heroism is an act of will and commiting to a decision, not a die roll.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

 

[hellbender]

Really?

That's...sad, that you are driven to a state of violent mental agitation when a few people disagree with you, particularly when more people share your taste in game systems than don't. It seems profoundly intolerant.The operators of ENWorld don't share your point of view on this, running a message board and game store that cater to a variety of different gaming interests.

If I may paraphrase you, get it over with and get over it, ENWorld has moved on...D&D moved on, and so have I - from 1e to 3e and on to Castles and Crusades and Conan RPG, should the jones to play a fantasy RPG overtake me at some point in the future.

The topic of the thread is, "Games you were turned off of and why": I was turned off by 3e Dungeons and Dragons for the reasons I outlined - a few other posters also listed 3e D&D as well. My reply, which mentioned games other than 3e D&D you may recall, is entirely on-topic (unlike your reply, or this one for that matter :\ ).I think I answered that already, but I can go into a bit more depth if you like.

The general RPG board appeals to me because it covers a cross-section of games and gamers. From here I can pull ideas from across systems and genres to work into the games or the characters I run. That's one of the great things about a general RPG forum where gamers familiar with different systems can interact.

Because of similarities with the games I do play, such as d20 Modern (a Wizards of the Coast d20 product), I can often ask general d20 questions on this board and get a response from other d20 gamers, including those playing 3.0 or 3.5 Dungeons and Dragons, that are applicable to the games I play

From your post someone not familiar with ENWorld might expect to see posters spamming up threads with off-topic posts along the lines of "d4d teh suxxors!!11!!!11!" I haven't noted that to be the case. I also know that the moderators usually step in if a problem arises - again, I haven't seen it.No, you evidently prefer to camp out on this board, hijack other posters' threads, and harangue those who disagree with your personal taste in games.

*Pssst!* There is a Chill Pill dispenser over by the water cooler. You might want to look into it. What looks sadder than someone stepping up and making a general comment other people might feel the same way about? Someone hijacking a thread to complain about someone hijacking a thread.

 

[coyote6]

Time Lords - The GM I played under made us use the Play Yourself rules that are built into the game. IMHO any game that has rules to play yourself built into its core can rot on the game store book shelf.

Is that the one where your equipment was, "whatever you, the player, actually brought to the game"?

I bought that. Read the rules. Re-read the rules. Decided I wouldn't be playing that game.

(Besides, who needs people bringing their granddad's WWII trophies to a game, just so their character would be well-equipped?)

 

[Silver Moon]

Boot Hill. Do I really have to explain why?

Mirroring Shaman's comment, I would like to hear you explain why. My assumption would be that you dislike it because it is (1) Unstructured; (2) Miniatures oriented. Those are two of the reasons I enjoy it. There are loads of potential for a fast-paced Western under this rule system. The opposite extreme would be Sidewinder: Recoiled, which is also an excellent system for somebody who wants a structured D20 western with lots of character creation options.


And to weigh in on the Dragon-Slayer/Shaman debate. Both seem to be trying to turn this into a heated debate about what ENWorld is, isn't or possibly should be. I'd suggest that those topics be taken up in the "Meta" forum instead. Otherwise, any thread in General RGP Discussion could potentially become a target for the strong pro-D&D3.x or anti-D&D3.x crowd. But it should be noted that this thread was clearly labeled as being Non-D20. I think that anybody who therefore has a problem with Non-D20 games should probably just avoid posting in this and other so lableled threads (as well as those labeled as 1E/2E/OD&D).

 

[mythusmage]

Boot Hill was never an RPG. Boot Hill was a skirmish game at the one figure equals one man scale. You could roleplay in a Boot Hill game, but that was not its reason for existence.