So what's wrong with Palladium?

[prosfilaes]

The world you live in and the one I live in are two different things. I haven't been beaten by a computer chess game since I was 15. Granted, I'm not playing Big Blue and I'm not Kasparov.

I haven't been beaten by a computer chess game since I was 15, either. Of course, that's because I don't play them. There's free chess engines out there with an estimated ELO rating of 2600 so unless you're an international grandmaster, you're not really trying.

Seriously, a little knowledge about AI will show you that computers excel in formal situations with a limited search space, like chess. But open up the possibilities a little, like an RPG, they still don't compete well with humans.

 

[Hussar]

While this is pretty off topic, I do think that one of the best things to happen to the RPG gaming industries is that the industry has changed from a bunch of amateurs in their basement to a (small) group of professionals who actually understand how business works.

Whether you want to complain about the "suits" ruining the game or not, the hobby is much, much stronger in the hands of people who understand the bottom line than it ever was in the hands of people who, apparently, had pretty much zero idea how to run a fairly large business.

 

[ACpilot]

I just want to chime in in defense of Kevin and RIFTS in particular.

My RIFTS books have held up superbly despite being well loved for almost 2 decades. The sturdy, large, soft books are great for use at the table. Only downside is they are a little difficult to shelve without book-ends for support.

I find their layout extremely easy to use - I have just shy of 3 dozen books and the simple 2 column layout and heavy use of spot illustrations make them very easy to navigate and easy to remember where items are in the books (must-have when you have so many!)

There is fun stuff in every book - flavor and new rules, monsters, character classes, equipment.

I have had so much fun in RIFTS despite sub-par rules (which I've always heavily house-ruled or thrown out entirely). This is mostly because the world is so crazy and full of interesting ideas. The world of Rifts is rich; full of good guys, bad guys, and people in between - strange and unusual adventures are everywhere.

Speaking to the rules themselves, they are ok at best but they turn particularly bad if a DM uses them exhaustively and procedurally for everything.

As far as the balance issue - RIFTS balance, or lack there of, perfectly models the kind of insane power disparities typical in hyper-violent anime (from the 80s and early 90s), where demons and monsters and other baddies can just effortlessly demolish normal humans with preposterous levels of gore. If you play with that sort of mentality the game comes alive.

The RIFTS rules are... unsafe. DMs and players can't rely on them to model outcomes and probabilities the way more modern game systems do, but they do allow for a great amount of action and freedom and crazy power levels.

That said: I'm running a RIFTS campaign right now but with COMPLETELY different rules! Entirely homemade - much faster, simpler, and more balanced (but I still love RIFTS, honest).

 

[wingsandsword]

The GM of any game system should as a matter of campaign development and ongoing maintenance keep a copy of every character sheet and audit every character before play begins in the game and at every level of experience thereafter. Lack of GM intervention in this way is one of the root causes of being a bad GM.

As an aside here. . .say what?

I've been gaming regularly since the '90's. I've played with numerous different gaming groups, in multiple states, across a variety of campaign styles from deep-immersion roleplay to "beer & pretzels". Never once have I seen a GM collect character sheets to audit them, especially as routinely as once per level. Every single tabletop campaign I've ever played in has run essentially on an honor system. In rare cases the GM may keep character sheets to make sure they aren't lost, but they aren't going around doing audits of the sheets between sessions.

The only place I've seen anything even remotely like that was at some large nationwide larps where players pay to play, and character sheets are handled centrally to prevent cheating, but that's in a game that is run as a business and has a lot of PvP.

 

[Summer-Knight925]

Since I know the risks, I tend to try to help out novices.

..."the tutor who tutored the noobs" and all that.

I think there should be an award for being a player who helps other players, people like you are what makes this hobby so much fun, it won't let me give XP, but I hope this gives you the warm fuzzy feeling that Xp does.

--The Summer Knight

 

[Pentius]

As an aside here. . .say what?

I've been gaming regularly since the '90's. I've played with numerous different gaming groups, in multiple states, across a variety of campaign styles from deep-immersion roleplay to "beer & pretzels". Never once have I seen a GM collect character sheets to audit them, especially as routinely as once per level. Every single tabletop campaign I've ever played in has run essentially on an honor system. In rare cases the GM may keep character sheets to make sure they aren't lost, but they aren't going around doing audits of the sheets between sessions.

The only place I've seen anything even remotely like that was at some large nationwide larps where players pay to play, and character sheets are handled centrally to prevent cheating, but that's in a game that is run as a business and has a lot of PvP.

I do it as a matter of course. Started about 5 years ago when someone in one of my games really ripped the honor system a new one. Been doing it partly out of habit since I stopped playing with him. Often times these days it works the other way, I'll catch players who forget to level up, or mark down treasure, or add some bonus or other.

 

[Spinachcat]

As I said, I haven't picked up a Palladium game since the mid-80's, so, I really don't know how bad it is. But, if your description is correct, then that is a VERY poorly designed game.

Like most AD&D GMs, its common for Rifts GMs to have house rules, sometimes extensive house rules with those GMs who have been playing Palladium stuff for decades. And like some AD&D GMs, there are some Rifts GMs who play the game out of the book.

Palladium games are very playable - especially for GMs and players who are more focused on setting and character than system mechanics. I've played a huge number of RPGs and Palladium's settings are continuously impressive.

For many modern gamers, the existence of house rules is "proof" the system is "broken". Perhaps there is some truth in that assertion, but there are very few RPGs I have GM'd that I haven't houseruled to some extent.

 

[Dausuul]

For many modern gamers, the existence of house rules is "proof" the system is "broken". Perhaps there is some truth in that assertion, but there are very few RPGs I have GM'd that I haven't houseruled to some extent.

There are house rules and house rules.

A game might work fine out of the box, and be very close to what your group is looking for, but have a few elements that just rub you the wrong way. In that case, instituting house rules to change those elements is not an indictment of the system--it's just adjusting the system to better fit your particular needs, which the designers can't be expected to anticipate. For instance, I ban resurrection magic when I run D&D. It's not that resurrection breaks the game; it just doesn't fit my style.

On the other hand, when there's an element that almost everyone house-rules, because things just break down otherwise, that suggests the element is at fault. And if everyone who runs a system for long ends up with pages and pages of house rules, I would say the system has issues.

 

[Pentius]

Yeah, I house rule every system at least a little bit(I, too, tend to ban resurrection), but, well, the way I tend to think of it is this.

There are two types of house rules. Style house rules, like my dislike of raise dead, and "Fixing a problem" house rules. Style rules tend to be similar over several games(for the specific user) and aren't a ding on the system. But "fixing a problem" house rules are a ding on the system for each one. At some point, and I have seen this point(though not with RIFTS, which I have yet to see in play) you're playing the house rules, and the system only has a loose connection to the game. Now, that kind of game can be a lot of fun, but it really isn't a point in favor of the base system.

 

[prosfilaes]

I've played a huge number of RPGs and Palladium's settings are continuously impressive.

Continuously impressive? They come in higher than the rules, yes, but in my experience, they tend to be gonzo kitchen sink settings. Rifts certainly is, and Nightbane has that feeling. They don't have anywhere near the elegance of Dark Sun, GURPS Reign of Steel, or GURPS Technomancer. Over the Edge shows how to go a bit gonzo kitchen sink and still feel tight. Planescape--particularly Sigil--gives a clear feel to a world that doesn't seem to come through Rifts or Nightbane. Traveller shows how to do a huge setting and still have constraints. Rifts and Nightbane are practical settings in the sense that they can create characters and start shooting things pretty quickly. ("The guys with the skull ships? They're the bad guys." "Thank you, Captain Obvious." "Oh yeah, there's a lot of vampires in Mexico." "Please tell me we can shoot them." "Yes sirree.") They are easier to run than a lot of the settings I mentioned. But impressive; not really.