Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Retreater" data-source="post: 8637951" data-attributes="member: 42040">I'll list a few lessons I've learned from systems I don't regularly play. Just because some of these seem like criticisms, I hope no one takes them as my bashing these systems. Even if something didn't appeal to me, I value having learned that preference in my hobby. 4e: I like when games aren't simulationist. I don't need measurement to be accurate if it doesn't serve the game. I like having all the information handy to run an encounter. I also enjoy breaking from the "zero to hero" mode of traditional D&D play - starting as capable heroes means the fun and story can start sooner.Numenera: There aren't enough options for what your character can do. Having basically two abilities makes every encounter feel very samey. Enemies with high DR ensured my characters were worthless in combats. The "death spiral" of ability damage compounded the "weaker characters get weaker and more worthless" problem. Having the discoveries would've made it more interesting, but as a core mechanic to keep the game interesting and functional, to have the metacurrency completely in the hands of a GM isn't a design element I like.OSE (and really the OSR in general): I didn't grow up with the nostalgia of B/X. As a result, the game felt flat. I appreciated the simplicity to an extent. However, the slow advancement, lack of options, and fragility of the characters would discourage me from wanting to invest in a long campaign.GURPS: A lot is made of the complexity of the system, but what really did me in was the Hindrance system in character creation, fine-tuning a character with positive and negative characteristics. The Fantasy Trip: After playing through several mock combats, it became clear that there is really only one good build of character. Other characters were going to die almost instantly. And if you can "beat" the game that easily, it's not for me.Warhammer 3e: Touching on one of the themes in this list, it was easy to make a great character (or just as easily, a lousy one). In a party you could have a dwarf slayer that could kill a dragon solo, or a ratcatcher that would die to a goblin. I prefer balance in play, and I can't imagine a group of players being okay with this.Warhammer 4e: I don't like comparing/contrasting degrees of success. I don't like weak characters that can die in a 10-foot fall. I don't like lingering injuries that last for weeks/months of game time. Lots of metacurrency is also required, which I don't like.FATE: Reading the core book about the DM needing to earn points to make story things happen (that's as good as I can understand it), I don't like that. It's one of those systems (like City of Mist) wherein the player who can come up with the most narratively powerful moves has the best character. The DM really doesn't have the tools to know what power level is appropriate and fun for the group.Shadowrun: Too many pools of dice. I prefer a die with bonuses or penalties for resolution.Savage Worlds: I don't like comparing/contrasting degrees of success. I'm not a fan of metacurrency (especially when it's in the hands of the GM to make the system playable.) I think it's much more complex than it needs to be, and some of the subsystems seem tacked on.Call of Cthulhu: Can be a great system if everyone is on board, but it's pretty much a railroad regardless of the adventure you're playing. Your characters are too weak to really interact with the world very much. Due to the tropes of the theme, there is a sameness to most of the adventures.Forbidden Lands: You can mitigate the lingering injuries. The death spiral of ability damage can be healed. The dice pools are limited. I like the random charts and behavior of the monsters. There are some "trap" builds, however, that can allow you to make completely worthless characters.Star Wars RPG (Fantasy Flight): I had to have another player handle the rules for me when I GMed this. I don't like spontaneous improv narrative dice systems. Dungeon Crawl Classics: I don't like character funnels. Too many characters bog down gameplay and the random nature means that your best characters may die, and you're stuck with a garbage character you don't want to play. Also, the dice all look too similar and are unnecessary to achieve the style of play. I also don't like chart-dependent games in which every player has to have access to charts, stop play and look up results.</blockquote>

Verification