RPGs that you feel trip over their own cool ideas

[Swanosaurus]

I think there are a few RPGs that come up with a cool, innovative idea that they love, build their system around it ... and then it turns out that while the system is solid, the idea is not so great after all. But they stick to it, because they love it and it's part of their core identity. Now, obviously, this is a purely subjective matter of "what works for you", but are there RPGs that you like, but that present an element as part of their core concept that you think they would be better of without, or that at the very least should be downplayed?

I have two of these. One is Monte Cook's Cypher system - I really like the mechanics, but I'm not a big fan of cyphers. Outside Numenera, they always feel tacked-on, and even within the Ninth World setting, they are kind of artificial. Also, you need to do a lot of book-keeping for them (yes, there are cards, but I don't really like cards in my rpgs).

The other one is Green Ronin's AGE system. It's fine, but the endless stunt lists are just annoying. There's nothing wrong with granting a special effect on doubles, but make it simple and/or freeform. Really, filling a quarter of your book with stunt lists that the players have to choose from every other roll is worse than Rolemaster in grinding the game to a halt.

 

[TheHand]

I felt like a lot of the World of Darkness games had a lot of examples of cool ideas on the story side, but then when it came time to play the mechanics they were often overly convoluted or confusingly written.

And not to pick on White Wolf too much, but I remember trying to get into Exalted 2nd edition and just bouncing off the action economy/initiative system. The GM even had us try using props and counters to help.

 

[TheSword]

Pathfinder 1e feats and to a lesser extent 3e.

They were great to start with, but once we needed an excel spreadsheet to find the feats, and all the theory crafting and the multiple pre-requisites/chains etc it became too unwieldy. This combined with the unbounded accuracy meant that the game could be quickly become boinked. Particularly around attack rolls and spell saves.

 

[Cergorach]

One is Monte Cook's Cypher system - I really like the mechanics, but I'm not a big fan of cyphers. Outside Numenera, they always feel tacked-on, and even within the Ninth World setting, they are kind of artificial. Also, you need to do a lot of book-keeping for them (yes, there are cards, but I don't really like cards in my rpgs).

Have you ever tried running the Cypher system modified without the cyphers? The Cypher system has a SRD, the license is different, but I assume you could build a variant that does not use cyphers while retaining the rest of the system. What I've seen with quite a few systems, that while one part you might love, and hate another part, when you pull out the hated part, either the system collapses completely or you're stuck with a boring mess.

I have a love/hate relationship with Shadowrun, I think that the core dicepool system is very cool, but in the three editions I played it still had major issues, a lot of that is due to horrible organization and scattered systems across many, many books. The other 3 editions I haven't played, apparently didn't fix the issue either and added more stuff I kinda like or absolutely hate. Funnily enough, someone had the thought that trying to keep doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity... And made a different game for the same setting (SR Anarchy), and while that idea was absolutely great, the implementation was far too simplistic for my tastes. Luckily someone made another attempt and made a version 2.0 that is less simple...

But in this age of cheap PDFs (bundles) and (free) DTP software, we can easily assemble and modify a system if we want to...

 

[Bill Zebub]

Star Wars: completely custom dice.

 

[zarionofarabel]

Exalted sounds SO awesome, until you look at the system and realize it's extremely crunchy and slow in play. Too bad too cause it sounds AWESOME!

 

[JohnSnow]

I think there are a few RPGs that come up with a cool, innovative idea that they love, build their system around it ... and then it turns out that while the system is solid, the idea is not so great after all. But they stick to it, because they love it and it's part of their core identity. Now, obviously, this is a purely subjective matter of "what works for you", but are there RPGs that you like, but that present an element as part of their core concept that you think they would be better of without, or that at the very least should be downplayed?

I have two of these. One is Monte Cook's Cypher system - I really like the mechanics, but I'm not a big fan of cyphers. Outside Numenera, they always feel tacked-on, and even within the Ninth World setting, they are kind of artificial. Also, you need to do a lot of book-keeping for them (yes, there are cards, but I don't really like cards in my rpgs).

The other one is Green Ronin's AGE system. It's fine, but the endless stunt lists are just annoying. There's nothing wrong with granting a special effect on doubles, but make it simple and/or freeform. Really, filling a quarter of your book with stunt lists that the players have to choose from every other roll is worse than Rolemaster in grinding the game to a halt.

I really like AGE's stunt system in principle, but I feel like the concept was better explained in Mike Mearls' Iron Heroes, where characters can pull off various effects by utilizing their skills in combat. It's pretty freeform, and crosses over with the game's "Zones" - something that was imported into 4e and then (I think unfortunately) dropped when they made 5e.

The idea of Zones is that they were set up by DMs as intentional parts of the battlefield that players could interact with to trigger some kind of an effect. They sort of vaguely mention the idea under the heading "Fun Combat Encounters" in the 5e DMG, but then give absolutely zero guidance or examples on how to use or implement them in your game.

It's a delicate balance. I don't think DCC does enough to explain the sorts of things you can do with "Mighty Deeds of Arms," and as you say, I think AGE spends way too much page count on endless stunt lists trying to get people to understand how it works. I think the sweet spot is somewhere in the middle.

 

[ART!]

Star Wars: completely custom dice.

Seconded.

I love the idea, but found it really awkward to use. I recognize that part of this is just how my neurodivergent brain works, but there were just too many factors involved in every single roll: different sized dice, different colored dice, symbols instead of numbers, the symbols can cancel each other out, etc). So, for every single roll - including in combat when you're trying toi keep things moving because its Star Wars - I was just tripping over the results.

What also gets me about the game is that they have this (theoretically) dynamic, symbol- and color-based, relatively math-free dice mechanic, but everything else in the game is traditional rpg design stuff, with numerical ratings for equipment, armor, guns, engines, etc. Why isn't everything rated in symbols and dice types, so your rolling more Threat dice or fewer Threat dice or whatever? It makes no sense to me, and feels like a missed opportunity. I wouldn't have liked it, because of my trouble with the dice mechanic, but it would have felt focused and holistic at least.