• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Palladium Fantasy: Why the Hate?

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
Psion said:
I don't think Pallaium FRPG gets as much hate as RIFTS does. In our group, it got a fair amount of play, and many players really dug the races (like Wolfen). I mercilessly plundered book 2 for cities, towns, and keeps.

It does have the ubiquitous and never updated or refined Palladium system which has the emblematic problems such as a flurry of different combat modifiers and a tedious percentile based skill system.

I also always felt my character was very weak under the Palladium FRPG, but I guess some folks dig that sort of thing.

I think maybe it is the Rifts/Palladium as a company thing that makes me think that. Now that i am considering it, I think the word "Palladium" comes up a lot when discussing bass-ackwards systems etc... (which i don't agree with, btw; Heroes Unlimited was my first supers RPG, and as I said, I don't see anything more "wrong" with PFRPG than I do with AD&D -- I actually enjoy old school mechanical wonkiness.)

Also, I purchased Book II at the same time. If I can get past the absolutely horrible layout, I think there might be some stuff to steal from there. In fact, I am considering stealing the skill system wholesale for my AD&D 1E game, as I was trying to figure out a way to build a "thief" skill progression chart for every class anyway.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Hairfoot

First Post
I haven't seen Palladium Fantasy, but the reason I gave up on other Palladium games was the loathsome, micro-managed combat systems.
 

jdrakeh

Front Range Warlock
HellHound said:
Bingo.

A lot of material from Palladium Fantasy made it into a lot of our older D&D games. I also ran three different campaigns using the system.

Yeah, I'm a huge Palladium Fantasy fan, myself. I dislike pretty much every other game that Palladium has ever published (the original TMNT was okay) but Palladium Fantasy (or, better yet, The Palldium RPG) is solid gold in my book. It was the third fantasy RPG that I played regularly.

While I don't see PF commented on very often at D&D communities. Now, given that it's not the game that said communities are ostensibly devoted to, this shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody. That said, I stand by my earlier statement that I have never seen Palladium Fantasy actively maligned by said communities, either.

I see some talk of "impressions" rather than evidence further up the thread, which makes me wonder if the OP and other posters haven't ascribed needlessly sinister motives (i.e., hate of Palladium Fantasy) to D&D communities for failing to frequently discuss Palladium Fantasy.
 
Last edited:

Hairfoot

First Post
I should add that I love Rifts as a setting, if not a game system. To my frustration, I once spent months putting together a D20 modern campaign setting, and when my playing group read the summary they pointed out I'd just created Rifts, but worse.

Grr.
 

AFGNCAAP

First Post
Agreed. Palladium Fantasy is a nifty setting, though the mechanics leave something to be desired, IMHO. However, there are other gaming options out there that I prefer over Palladium Fantasy.

Palladium the company, on the other hand, is another issue.

Besides, I'd prefer to play OD&D (Rules Cyclopedia version) if I want to go for an old-school feel to a game, rather than AD&D or Palladium Fantasy.
 

HeavenShallBurn

First Post
In my experience the hate for "Palladium" is ultimately directed at Kevin himself as a result of his (allow me to be diplomatic) idiosyncratic and sometimes eccentric or questionable behavior. Which frequently then gets expressed through the company itself being as he is its head.

I find the mechanical aspects of the his games distasteful especially given how far RPGs have progressed in the last 20 years. But the fluff aspects of his settings can be positively inspired and I freely steal from them in building settings or campaigns for any other system I'm using. Purely on fluff aspects his setting books are second only to GURPS supplements in the sheer usefulness of their flavor and information even if they don't have the pretty factor of say Iron Kingdoms.

Personally I'd as soon skin him alive and feed him to fire ants as hand him a donut but that's a personal matter entirely separate from the games he puts out.
 

Phlebas

First Post
I've a friend who DM'd Palladium fantasy for ten years - I played on / off as work would allow.

the rules are fine.... comparable to AD&D or 2nd Ed in terms of robustness / playability, though it does start falling apart at higher levels where you all end up multi-classing rather than go beyond 8th and the DM has to start house ruling spells. Pretty true for most systems though so not a specific palladium criticism

The setting is quite clever, some nice variants on standard fantasy tropes and the backgrounds (Haven't read too many but others have) seem to be quite detailed.

Never seen the hate myself, but don't think i'd go back to it after 3,5 (never really saw it as better / worse than 2nd Ed really)
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
HeavenShallBurn said:
I find the mechanical aspects of the his games distasteful especially given how far RPGs have progressed in the last 20 years.

I think the whole idea of "progression" and "advances" in RPGs rings pretty hollow. Skill based or classless/levelless systems aren't more advanced than class/level systems. Dice pools aren't inherently more sophisticated than linear dice progressions. And a d20 sure isn't more mature than a d100 when they do exactly te same thing. Some evidence might suggest that really "Forge"-y games might qualify as "progress", but if you dig I am sure you can find RPGs from 1980 that embraced elements of GNS, etc...

One of the players in one of my two groups is the type to roll his eyes and scoff at the suggestion of playing AD&D or WHFRP or PRPG, because he feels that -- up until 4e was announced anyway -- D&D 3.5 was the pinnacle of fantasy role-playing game design. I disagree. It is different, and it has refined some of AD&D's tropes, but it isn't inherently superior to older games simply by virtue of having a strong core mechanic, anymore than SR4 is superior to SR1 by aping the new World of Darkness system.
 

I've played Palladium fantasy several times with a really bad DM. I think even a good DM would have had problems with the rules, though.

The rules are terrible. I've played 2e and feel I'm qualified to compare; the rules are actually worse.

Character generation is broken. Like DnD 2e, point buy was either not an option or we weren't allowed to know of that option. You had to roll your stats in order, and the DM wouldn't let us change that order because many of the races had weird stats (eg roll 3d6 for Physical Strength, roll 4d6 for Physical Prowess, etc). Lots of core races got overpowered stats; I think elves got +6 P.P., and trolls (core!?!) got huge bonuses for P.S. If you roll an 18, or maybe it was even any time you got a 6 on a d6, you were entitled to add extra dice, so your stats inflated fast. The bonuses for really high stats was broken because (and only because) of the high stats you could get. Then there were the skills, some of which would boost stats yet again. I always took Boxing, Running and one more (I forget which) to get the extra attacks, but when trying to avoid the other ones (bumped stats too much) I was actually told by the DM to take them.

Getting a character with a high P.P. compared to a not-so-high P.S. seemed unavoidable, even when avoiding the physical skills. This was true even for elves (who had really high P.P. scores).

Sometimes stats could be underpowered, too. Why did you need to roll 3d6 for speed? What if you roll a 6? That means you're just a slowpoke. Most reasonably healthy people are capable of walking at the same speed, out of combat and even in. Note that if you rolled low for a stat you were screwed, especially if you had a DM that wouldn't let you arrange stats to taste.

The Two-Weapon Fighting rules were busted. They were so good there was no reason not to take it. The only way to get them was to take Martial Arts: Assassin and eventually even our munchkin monty haul DM had to ban that.

The skills system was wimpy. Getting to the 50% mark took a lot of levels; even when taking secondary skills that might boost a primary skill by 20%, you still saw low numbers (eg below 50%). There were also way too many skills that should have been consolidated, such as Ambush being a different skill from Prowl. IIRC you took skill penalties for being psychic, but I played a psychic character once and wasn't made to take any penalties.

I have particular loathing for the Cleric rules. I never played a cleric, but we had this player who would always play an evil cleric (not that he ever acted it). Many of the abilities (regardless of alignment) were really wimpy. Make a prayer roll; 18% chance of success. Make another roll to use any other ability; if you're lucky, the chance of pulling it off is 30% + 3% per level. Getting to the 50% mark would take a really long time.

The combat rules needed a bit of help, especially the parry vs dodge rules. Parrying was so much better than dodging (due to not taking up an action) that if someone shot at you with an arrow, you were supposed to parry rather than dodge! There was also huge penalties to avoiding ranged attacks for some unknown reason; an arrow is fast, but then so is a sword, so why should avoiding an arrow be so hard?

Psionics were just broken. I played a psionic character once and realized why the DM thought it was broken. Couldn't they have added some kind of metacap? My character, at 1st-level, with an M.E. of 14 (reasonable stat, equivalent to Wisdom 14... heck, that's actually pretty low for a psychic) was capable of instantly killing any PC in the party, twice, due to hit point damage (it wasn't save or die). I discovered this when I killed a bear; I pumped half my ISPs into the attack and it was sheer overkill. Any non-psychic had a 25-30% chance of saving against my attacks. Even the uber-angel he summoned to smack down a bad PC with too much magical gear could be killed (50% chance of making their save because the angel was psychic). I had more than enough ISP to blast through any halfway reasonable number of hit points; due to the metacap not being there. The more balanced Evil Eye never seemed to work, even though statistically it should have.
 

Sounds like the op should have been asking, "where's the love?" rather than "where's the hate?"

Also sounds like Palladium just isn't as popular as he would like it to be. ;)
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top