What RPG did you want to love, but just couldn't get into?

Mine is Dune: Adventures in the Imperium.

I love Dune and I ordered the book as soon as I was able. When it arrived I was so excited and was telling all my friends I was going to run it and it was going to be the greatest.

Then I actually opened the book and was just overwhelmed with all the systems and strange modifier tables and I am not ashamed to admit the 2d20 system did not click in my head. I was still willing to try but when I started showing the book to my potential players no one bought in.

It is still parked on my shelf, I would still love to run/play but I just can find a group locally that is interested.

Someone said I should just get the d20 book from the early 2000's...and the cheapest I have ever seen that is close to $300.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I have that trouble with most of Modiphius' 2d20 games. I've wanted to love several but the system just stops me cold. Of their stuff, the Star Trek game is probably the biggest let down. For several reasons.

The other big one, for me, is Exalted. When I heard the premise and saw the early Quick Start I was over the moon. Loved it to pieces. Then I got the books. Ugh. Just an absolute disaster of overwrought design. Though it's been cleaned up over the years, it's not really gotten much better. From my point-of-view at least.
 

I have that trouble with most of Modiphius' 2d20 games. I've wanted to love several but the system just stops me cold. Of their stuff, the Star Trek game is probably the biggest let down. For several reasons.

The other big one, for me, is Exalted. When I heard the premise and saw the early Quick Start I was over the moon. Loved it to pieces. Then I got the books. Ugh. Just an absolute disaster of overwrought design. Though it's been cleaned up over the years, it's not really gotten much better. From my point-of-view at least.
I feel the same about both of those things. The setting of exalted sounds so cool but I wonder if a more rules lite narrative system would work better because trying to figure out charms was more work than what I wanted to put into the game.

Iwish I could like the star trek game, but I also just bounce off the 2d20 system which is annoying because the got a couple other settings, fallout and Conan, that I absolutely love but I can't do 2d20.
 


Mine is Dune: Adventures in the Imperium.

I love Dune and I ordered the book as soon as I was able. When it arrived I was so excited and was telling all my friends I was going to run it and it was going to be the greatest.

Then I actually opened the book and was just overwhelmed with all the systems and strange modifier tables and I am not ashamed to admit the 2d20 system did not click in my head. I was still willing to try but when I started showing the book to my potential players no one bought in.

It is still parked on my shelf, I would still love to run/play but I just can find a group locally that is interested.

Someone said I should just get the d20 book from the early 2000's...and the cheapest I have ever seen that is close to $300.

The one released commercially was using the same system as LUG's Star Trek... Icon system - using only d6 dice pools. The D20 was announced, but I don't think it was released.

There is a fan done d20M version, Dune: A Dream of Rain...
 

I found Apocalypse World inspiring to read. I loved playing in a game using a ruleset inspired by AW. I was jazzed to run it.

Then I learned that I hate running games where the GM doesn't get to roll dice.

I like feeling like a player when I'm running a game. I like my NPCs to feel like characters who are taking their own actions and roll dice to see if they succeed.
 

As others - Modiphius' 2d20 isn't my favorite on its own, and it also just doesn't seem to me to fit the genre of Star Trek material very well, for me, at least.
 

WotC D&D.

Just reading 3e back in the day was a turn-off. When PF1e released, while it was a clone, it was a little better and the 3rd-party material made running it very enjoyable. I played D&D Next & ran 5e a couple times with F2F groups, but despite the marketing that the new edition was trying to mimic old-school D&D in ways, the system felt empty.

I grew up in the hobby - like most of us - with D&D. Played Basic then graduated to running AD&D1e for years. I really enjoyed what the game was even compared to the other good ttrpgs that were being released. But, WotC's systematic changes lost me, to the extent that eventually other ttrpgs that offered a more favorable fantasy RP experience like GURPS and Barbarians of Lemuria won me over.

200.gif
 

4E and PF2. I tried both and found the chargen too stifling and the combat ate too much play time at the table. 4E because I was a D&D fan and wanted to keep playing the big dog, but ultimately felt like a departure from what I wanted from an RPG. PF2 because after PF1 I became a big Paizo fan of all the work they did to keep my fantasy RPG gaming alive, but at the table it reminded me of 4E and why I stopped playing D&D.

These days PF1 remains my fave fantasy RPG, but im playing very little fantasy. Most of my time is now sci-fi games and/or trying new systems. Narrative driven and rules lite is more appealing, even though crunch does not scare me. Just seems more like my fit at the moment. I could see that flipping in a few years as it has in the past.
 

Dungeon World. I like fantasy and improv type stuff and thought Apocalypse World system might be neat but after reading the rule book cover to cover the system just did not click for me both in individual actions and in overall game style. It seemed like there would be constant complications on most individual actions which occasionally would be fun but not so much constantly. Also I generally like running modules in a setting as a DM and this seemed more improv the world as you go than I was comfortable doing.
 

Remove ads

Top