Games you won't play

Games:

  • I won't play 3e (great game, but I've been playing it for many years and I want to experience something new - plus I hate DMing it, and I'm the usual group DM)
  • I'd prefer not to play anything which is diceless (Amber, despite my love of the setting), LARP-y/angsty (World of Darkness), has ludicrous power levels (RIFTS, Exalted), or is simply messed up (FATAL).
Genres:

  • I'll play anything, although graphic sex (except in a joking context) would be disturbing, and relentless gore/horror (low budget horror movies) would be tiresome. A "creeping horror" genre (like Cthulhu or even Ravenloft) is fine.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I like playing wizards, sorcerers and the like. Magical characters and spells are simply my favorite aspect of fantasy. Now, I will gladly play a game where magic doesn't exist in the setting, like a modern counter-terrorism game or a sci-fi game. I'll even play a game where magic exists, but simply isn't the point, like Call of Cthulu (though expect me to be the first one to die/go mad the second his character gets his hands on a spellbook).

But I hate playing in a high-fantasy game where magic exists, but simply isn't available to players. Or where players are punished unduly for choosing to play magical characters. So swords and sorcery really isn't my style, and I'll avoid playing 'mundane' or 'martial' characters whenever I can. This may be a major reason why I didn't click with D&D 3e. DMs had to keep wizards on a short leash, especially at higher levels, so they generally opted to keep a campaign in the lower levels. And, at level 1, magic-users tended to be crossbow-wielding peasants that could summon some shiny lights twice a day. And then die from a kobold nut-shot.

Otherwise, I'll attempt pretty much everything, except for the comically horrible, like FATAL. I often find that I'm intrigued by various settings or styles, like Paranoia or All Flesh Must Be Eaten, but put off by the mechanics. If I had a good DM to ease me through the (in my opinion) unnecesarrily complicated bits, I'd gladly try almost anything.

But chances are I'd rather be blasting stuff as a wizard.
 
Last edited:

There are way too many games that it would be easier to name what I will play. However, here is a sample of the games that I won't play

1. Any version of DND other than 3e (and this assumes the 3e game will end sometime around level 10-12, uses few WOTC supplements other than UA, and both powergaming and combat aren't the groups focus)

2. Any system that is Roll under
3. Any system that doesn't use attribute scores
4. Any system that does not use DC or TN
4. Any system that uses automatic skill improvements based on level
5. Any system that uses character level bonuses to attribute or skills
6. Any system that uses overly broad skills
7. Any TSR game except Divine Right
8. Any supers game other than Mutants and Masterminds, DC Heroes, or Marvel Saga (assuming Marvel Saga uses Steve Kenson's Watcher's Guide and Ultimate powers and the fan errata from his site).
9. Any d20 licensed product using DND style levels, classes, hit die per level, "Vancian" magic
10. World of Darkness
11. Narrativist games
12. Board games
13. Collectable card games
13. LARPs
14. Diceless games
15. Games that heavily favor gamist concerns over simulation
 

Small note, for those who may not know - LARP does not equate to Vampire/WoD. Nor does it equate to running around in the forest tossing beanbags shouting, "Lightning bolt!"

Whether it's standing in a park, beneath an office parking lot at dark, walking around the woods or playing in the safe confines of your house, pretending to be someone else while dressed up and resolving actions with paper, rock, scissors, it's all derivative of Vampire and "lighting bolt, lightning bolt" games.

LARP as a whole is sort of creepy. It's a step far below tabletop RPGs, in my opinion. :cool:


/awaits the onslaught of rabid LARPers
 


- anything with furry PCs (yes, that includes dragonborn)
- any D&D edition other than 3.x (until 5e comes out, that is)
- anything with "abstract", "narrativist" or "fun mechanics" in its design goals.
- non-fantasy settings (no matter what historical period)
- I'm not a big fan of space-opera either. Supers are ok though.

I'm sure there are a bunch of others.

Apart from 0d&d, I've actually tried all these before deciding they weren't for me. I just don't have as much time to waste as I used to.
 



I shy away from games that involve heavy elements of simulation. Not because I dislike a realistic world, but because heavy simulationism really just creates a different, more cumbersome form of gamism that I do not particularly enjoy.

I'm confused by what you mean, here. Could you clarify?

As for me, I won't touch 4e with a ten-foot pole, and I'd really rather not play earlier editions other than 3.5. Narrativist games in general are right out, as well.
 


Remove ads

Top