Rifts vs D&D

[scourger]

They are both awesome, but D&D is the better game. That is the short answer. Here is the long answer.

We played Rifts for a few years about 20 years ago. It is a really great core game. I had Heroes Unlimited so I was familiar with the system but still a little surprised to see whole sections simply reprinted in the Rifts book. Notwithstanding, the GM for the game, who is now one of my best friends, did an amazing job with it using just a few sourcebooks--primarily the Palladium FRPG monster book with the Rifts Conversion Guide. It wasn't perfect, and some concepts like the "harpy shoot" remain in our group lore to this day; but it was fun game that went through several revisions and conversions. We ultimately finished it as an Omega World d20 game, which worked since we were playing the old Gamma World Legion of Gold module anyway.

The same GM did a brief Rifts Africa game but it didn't last beyond a couple of sesions. It was a shame, too, because I really liked my first and second characters; even though I think we only played 2-3 times. The game really appeals to my inner power gamer once I get through the lenghthy character creation process.

On a related note, the same GM has a Systems Failure game that has been on hiatus for a couple of years. Reading Rifts threads made me nostalgic for it, so I hope he is preparing it while skiing this week. He may be prepping another game, which is fine, too; but I really want to see where he takes his Systems Failure story.

My own experiences running Rifts were not as positive. I started a game using the core book but then made the mistake of converting to DragonStar d20 and then Omega World d20. I though it was great, but it lost something in translation for my players. They unlimately mutinied and killed a camapign that had some of my best creativity, but the lesson for me is not to convert games--epsecially once started. I picked up the Rifts: Machinations of Doom graphic novel/sourcebook more recently, but I haven't been successful in talking the group into playing it. I think I'll just have to bring it one night and spring it on them.

Speaking of conversions, I think Rifts would be awesome if converted into other game systems. Obviously, I think d20 can be a good match, and I would also love to see a Savage Worlds version. I only hesitate to do it myself with Machinations of Doom because I had a bad experience with conversions and it seems like it would be more work to convert Rifts than to just do the work of running it as is. And there is the crux of the issue. It is probably more work for the publisher to convert Rifts to the system of the day than it is to stick with it and keep printing and selling books and paraphernalia. Plus, part of me kind of likes that it stayed true even when I didn't. I have a certain respect for that.

So, that's why I have 2 Rifts core books and Machinations of Doom on my shelf when many other books have been traded away over the years.

As for D&D, I have about 6 versions and many derivatives of it on my shelf. I've enjoyed it for over 30 years, and I am currently enjoying running its new Gamma World version. None of it is perfect, but most of it I've used without revision. It's not my favorite genre, but it is my favorite game; and the better of the 2 games being discussed in this threa--which, frankly is like saying that vanilla ice cream is better than strawberry when both are delicious. The reason I'm not currently playing it or excited about doing so is that it all feels familiar now. 4e is not part of my collection for this reason, but I keep hoping that will change. The cancellation of the Ravenloft RPG was a blow to me, but I have faith that the game will come back strong again sometime in the future as it did in 2000.

So, that's the long answer. Now, I'm off to email my friend about reprising that Rifts Africa game.

 

[Wik]

Thats potentially any RPG, 'cause I'm sure I can invent similar scenerios about the different versions of D&D. (actually its a bit like my current saga game in terms of balance of combat/skills in characters but no one is getting bored or missing out on spot light time.

Absolutely. I've been in those situations, predominantely with 3e (personally speaking). The big "however" here comes down to splats - you can have this happen in 3e, but when it does, it's usually because some people are using a lot of splats, while others are using just the core rules or maybe one or two books. In RIFTS, these problems happen right out of the gate.

Hell, they happen when you've got two very similar classes (the rogue scholar and the rogue scientist, for example), and one clearly overshadows the other in most ways (I can't remember which, but one is clearly better at the role it is built for).

And the thing is, in D&D, we can usually assume that combat and dungeon exploration are going to be the main part of the game - the game makes that fairly clear, and we can assume that most newbie GMs will either do that, or announce that their game will be "different" (god help those poor players, but whatevs). RIFTS has all these great speeches about how the game is the best game ever, but it gives no real suggestion what you do. A player reading a writeup for a SAMAS pilot will have an entirely different idea of what the game is about than the player of a Vagabond. Or a Ley Line Walker. Or a Dragon.

Hell, let's imagine that group - how are they going to fit together? What are they going to DO? The SAMAS and the Ley Line Walker won't get along, but hey, that's fun RP possibilities. But they don't really belong in the same encounter. And the Vagabond and the dragon are going to fit in entirely different settings. Much of the game is going to consist of one-on-one screen time with the GM, while the rest of the group watches.

This is a similar problem that Shadowrun had. And you'll remember that, to keep the audience, steps were taken to fix that problem and keep the entire group occupied, with mixed success. But at least steps were taken. Rifts took no steps.

Now, in D&D, let's think of some mixed up character roles - a crazy wizard variant, a binder, a swordsage from Bo9s, and a half-dragon half-werewolf barbarian.

They're all werid characters, and might not all get along. There will probably be power discepancies between the characters, which was a failing of 3e in particular in my book. However, the group can all participate - the way the game is set up, it doesn't encourage one player to get all the face time (although, admittedly, the druid and some summoners kind of break that rule, just a little bit).

The main point? Any game can be screwed up by a bad GM. But RIFTS is one of those games that, as written, will directly contribute to a bad play experience. The only way it can work for long-term play is to have players either deliberately choose to avoid taking certain classes, or to have the GM be clever in how he sets up encounters so everyone can contribute.

***

For what it's worth, I do have some decent memories of RIFTS. In fact, it can be a fun system - but only with a small group (two players, three max). When run in a small group, the imbalances of the system seem smaller, and you can actually run games where a Vagabond and a Dragon can get along. I ran a halfway decent mini-campaign where a wilderness scout and a glitter boy were trying to escape a Coalition company in the wilderness of Northern Illinois.

Although, even then it was annoying. In any scene where the Glitter Boy was awesome, the wilderness scout was basically secondary, and in any scene where the wilderness scout shined, the glitter boy was actually a liability.

It's fine for a mini campaign, but it'd be a serious PITA in a long-term campaign.

Also, fun aside, for years I'd look at my dragon magazines and the ads for RIFTS Underseas. I wanted that product so bad, even though by this point I knew RIFTS was not the game for me. I lacked money, being a teenager, and when I finally had cash to buy the book, it wasn't in my game store. For years, it was like the holy grail for me - I really, REALLY wanted that book.

I mean, psychic whales? Undersea cities? Aquatic mecha? All amazing things.

And then, a few years ago, I found a copy and snagged it up. And, well... I think I may have shaken a fist at the heavens and shouted "SIEMBEIDA!"

Also, Rifts: England was a crock, and one of the worst books I've ever read. Just sayin.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Rifts never lit my fire. I think Palladium Fantasy was pretty cool, though.

 

[TanisFrey]

Rifts never lit my fire. I think Palladium Fantasy was pretty cool, though.

My biggest criticism of the game system used in Rifts it the attack roll. You only need a 5 to hit regardless of the situation. So, the vagabond on the ground with a MD projectile gun fires on a Jet that will be within range, He only needs a 5 even if that jet is flying supersonic!!!! Sure, the pilot can dodge and use up an action for that round.

In real life during Desert Storm, the Iraqis with AAA guns could not hit our jets. Our pilots were not trying to doge, they just flew at their targets and spread away after their attack run.

The system tries to be very realistic and was for the fantasy setting, but it just breaks down with the inclusion of fire arms.

My second objection of the system was the Mega Damage (MD) to Structural Damage Capacity ratio. A weapon that does SDC cannot damage a MD, this is fine and realistic, you cannot destroy a tank with a pistol. But the 100 SDC to 1 MC is too much. Once a characters MD armor is destroyed the character has no chance of surviving a MD hit. People cough on the outer edge of a large explosion, can and do survive with only being knocked out and no other physical damage. It would be better is the ratio was 1 MD to 20 SDC, giving characters a chance of survival while still being deadly.

The Third thing they should change IMO is pilots of mecha should get knocked around and take some buries when their mecha is shot. Maybe they take 50% of the MD as SDC when someone Natural 20 on them on an attack. I an thinking of 50% of the raw number, so an missile that inflicts 30 MD to the mech does 15 SDC to the pilot as he is thrown around inside of the mecha.

 

[Crothian]

My biggest criticism of the game system used in Rifts it the attack roll. You only need a 5 to hit regardless of the situation. So, the vagabond on the ground with a MD projectile gun fires on a Jet that will be within range, He only needs a 5 even if that jet is flying supersonic!!!! Sure, the pilot can dodge and use up an action for that round.

There are rules for needing a higher number then 5 to hit an opponent. I'm not sure how flying supersonic is not dodging though, dodging is more then evasive actions. The game assumes an active defense instead of a passive one.

 

[Stormonu]

My experience with Palladium comes from directly playing Robotech and TMNT back in the 80's/90's. I've only read through Rifts, and haven't been brave enough to actually run it. However, my experience with Robotech and TMNT portions of the game really turned me off to the mechanics. And the book organization seemed so scatterbrained on top of everything else.

Between the absurdly low skill % success chances, the agonozong slow rounds due to the attack/parry system and the length of time in just making characters (I can throw a 3E character together in 20 minutes, Palladium took about 2 hours or more), I have just been turned off to the system.

I'll gladly raid it for ideas, though.

 

[giant.robot]

Between the absurdly low skill % success chances, the agonozong slow rounds due to the attack/parry system and the length of time in just making characters (I can throw a 3E character together in 20 minutes, Palladium took about 2 hours or more), I have just been turned off to the system.

The problem with Rifts' attack/parry mechanics isn't that they exist but that characters can end up with multiple attacks every round. In GURPS or D6 where you've got a similar mechanic an individual round isn't too complicated because multiple attacks are the exception rather than the rule. If you make a combat oriented character in Rifts without multiple attacks you'll get creamed. I like the active dodge/parry mechanic I just think Rifts does it all wrong.

 

[TanisFrey]

The problem with Rifts' attack/parry mechanics isn't that they exist but that characters can end up with multiple attacks every round. In GURPS or D6 where you've got a similar mechanic an individual round isn't too complicated because multiple attacks are the exception rather than the rule. If you make a combat oriented character in Rifts without multiple attacks you'll get creamed. I like the active dodge/parry mechanic I just think Rifts does it all wrong.

It is easy to create a combat character with 2 or 3 attacks a round at first, or with 4 or 5 if they are a mecha pilot at first level. Yes, at first level.

I do not mind the attack/parry system, I just don't like how Rifts implements it. I currently play in a Hackmaster Basic game, the system has a defense roll against every attack. Here is the difference, you don't sacrifice anything to make one. In any given time you are in melee you are assumed to be trading blows with your opponent, thus you get a defense roll. Even helpless person get a 1d8p defense roll for luck, this is verse the attackers d20p attack roll. How often you get an opening to do damage is based on you skill with the weapon you are using and the weapon itself. Some simple weapons are fast like a dagger, speed 6, other are complex to use like heavy crossbow, speed 60.

 

[airwalkrr]

Rifts absolutely hands-down no contest.

I love D&D, but if I could find a core group of gamers to play Rifts with forever I would burn my D&D books. Rifts is my favorite RPG of all time and I doubt I would ever tire of it.

 

[Chainsaw Mage]

My biggest criticism of the game system used in Rifts it the attack roll. You only need a 5 to hit regardless of the situation. So, the vagabond on the ground with a MD projectile gun fires on a Jet that will be within range, He only needs a 5 even if that jet is flying supersonic!!!!

Why would the vagabond waste ammo from his MDC projectile gun when his MDC penknife is probably just as effective?