Rifts vs D&D

[VGmaster9]

I think both RPGs look very amazing, but which one do you think is better is your opinion? I like D&D for maximalizing the fantasy genre and I like Rifts for its virtually limitless variety in setting.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I won't be the last to say this: RIFTS is probably the most creative setting out there, and for that, I love it.

But each and every edition of D&D is mechanically superior and more playable.

I'd gladly play either, but D&D is the better game by far.

 

[korjik]

You would need to look pretty hard to find a game which needs a new edition more than RIFTS.

 

[pawsplay]

I'm not sure Rifts needs a new edition.
Sometimes it seems like it only gets worse all the time.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

My money's on RIFTS to kick DnD's arse. RIFTS does MEGA-damage!

 

[the Jester]

RIFTS is an awesome concept and a cool world, but a terrible, unbalanced game whose creator seems unable or unwilling to ever clean it up.

 

[aurance]

I loved Rifts. Great ideas. Every sourcebook was fun to read. That said, as an RPG it was mechanically very very messy.

 

[Korgoth]

Megadamage cowboy hats. And with the new rule that if you have any megadamage armor, the megadamage hit that overwhelms it only destroys the armor or something like that. So if you're wearing a Megadamage cowboy hat and boxers (that look like the Texas flag, obviously), and you get shot with like a nuke or a mecha cannon, it just blows up the hat and otherwise you're fine. That's like dumber than Gamma World, yo.

The prosecution rests.

 

[Wik]

I hate to say it, but the RIFTS world isn't even that cool. I mean, the original idea isn't a bad one - a huge fantasy mixing pot - but it just got blown up with stupid, comic book-y stuff, which was fine... but it would then say "you could be the only guy with a mega laser within a hundred miles", which the game did nothing to reinforce.

The worst part about RIFTs is that, even if you use just a core-rules game, with none of the expansions, you will have a party where at least one player feels useless and at least one player just dominates. I've been in games where the Rogue Teacher (me) sat around and did next to nothing while the glitter boy destroyed everything in sight, and the wilderness scout made some rolls to get us to the next fight, and then repeat. And when we got to a city so I could be all Rogue Teacher-y.... the other two players complained that they had nothing to do, and the encounter got waved by - because, at least in those combats, I could shoot my pistol for 1d6 MDC or whatever.

That's RIFTS.

The best part are those where Siembieda talks about system rules and stuff, and acts like an expert. And he talks down all other systems out there for being unrealistic or whatever. Hell, most of the game books consist of Siembieda talking from down on high. Seriously, I read those books and it always feels like the author is talking down to me.

D&D has faults, but comparing the two is a lot like comparing the XBOX 360 to, say, Atari. Sure, Atari did some crazy and creative things in its time, and it looks great when looked at in regards to the times, but if someone released an atari today, it'd be laughed off the streets.

The thing is, RIFTS is the atari... it's still getting released, with no updates.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The worst part about RIFTs is that, even if you use just a core-rules game, with none of the expansions, you will have a party where at least one player feels useless and at least one player just dominates.

While it is true that RIFTS doesn't even pay lip-service to balance, your statement is an absolute that doesn't jibe with my experience. It is perfectly possible to have wildly imbalanced parties that have fun and cohere...if you have the right group. Including a good GM.