Worst RPG System You Ever Palyed?

[Treebore]

Actually I didn't feel the need to read that far.

 

[TheGM]

Oh, just noticed that you are new here. In case you did not realize it, I do have a VERY strong bias for RM, and an even bigger one for a game called HARP (both published by Iron Crown Enterprises.... the company I work for )

Okay, maybe we should take this offline, but why does HARP feel like a poorly done "RM Light"? (poorly done as in "not light", not poorly done as in "sucks") Is this by design?

 

[TheGM]

The system I enjoyed the least is GURPS. Whether it's a bad system or not, I don't know, but it does not fit what I want out of role-playing.

I'll second that. I've played several of the games that have already been dissed here, and I'd happily play any of them again if I didn't have to play GURPS.

Of course, their stuff is better researched than most, so I do use some of it for reference.

 

[Ourph]

Actually I didn't feel the need to read that far.

Wow! Just......wow!

I had a rather witty and biting reply I was going to post in response to your comments .... but I think this pretty much says it all.

Thanks, you saved me a lot of typing.

 

[Serendipity]

Worst of the worst would be Enforcers - this teeny tiny microprint supers game that stole VAST chunks out of Superhero 2044 and then glommed the worst parts of HERO, Villains and Vigilantes into this unweildy beast of a "game system" - and the setting was pure hokum.
We destroyed that thing.
Runners up would include:
all LARPS,
GURPS,
Third Ed. Gamma World (just.....ewwww)
most anything put out by TSR *except* D&D for that matter (post, say 1981)
The FASA Star Trek RPG
.... surely there are more.

 

[Yalius]

Played? Absolutely, with 100% certainty I'll say Powers & Perils from Avalon Hill. The experience system was horrible.

YES YES YES YES YES! I still have this one on my game shelf. The rule books were organized in sections like 3.4.12.12.2. Remember also, you had different experience levels for every single spell you had, every single weapon, and had sliding attribute scales so what you rolled wasn't necessarily what your actual attribute was at any given time.

 

[Andor]

I've played a lot of the Games mentioned here.

I'm a little baffled by the Star Wars d6 hate. I think it modeled the movies a lot better than the d20 version does. I played it for years and had a blast.

Amber demands a good GM, otherwise it must fail utterly.

Worst game I've played I think does have to go to Role (aka chart) master. I'm sorry guys, while it had it's moments I primarily recall that my character would routinely KILL HIMSELF while trying to cast spells on his class list.

Worst game I've read might have to go to Kult for having the most revoltingly depressing setting I've ever had the misfortune to be exposed to.

 

[Professor Phobos]

Jackalope King:

I appreciate you didn't like C&C, but your post displayed so many assumptions fundamentally alien to my conception of what good gaming is that I can't help but wonder why you thought you'd like C&C in the first place.

In any event, I'd like to quibble with part of your criticisms- your GM's inability to handle a rules-light system isn't a very convincing indictment of that system. I mean, what the heck was that stuff about knights not being able to move like thieves? Or being unable to handle a stunt with a horse? I mean, from your descriptions, he was clearly incompetent, and badly so. A GM who couldn't handle using Strength to hold back attackers would be one whose table I would not return to.

I think the key point is that he felt it somehow necessary to import rules for tripping, disarming, etc, and was uncomfortable departing from the book. That, to me, is completely ridiculous. Why would you need rules for disarming? A dexterity check, perhaps opposed by the opponent. Tripping? A Dexterity check, perhaps opposed by the Opponent...

And, I mean, really? Thieves can dodge, but Knights can not? Why would that ever make sense?

As for 'small amount of character creation options', I would argue that C&C has exactly the same number of character creation options virtually every other RPG has ever had.

As for 'boring combat', combat is about as interesting as you make it...

Yargh. In any event, I don't think C&C is the game for you or your GM, but I don't think it is due to C&C being a bad game. Just one ill-suited to your style of play.

 

[Akrasia]

I am surprised that this thread managed to get past 5 pages before a 'C&C fight' broke out. But of course it couldn't last forever...

Regarding:

...
We got into play, and after a break about four hours in a player mentioned that he was disapointed in his character, since its abilities didn't really reflect what he wanted (he had made a thief who he wanted to play as a social dilitante as he had done with a rogue previously in 3E). ...

This would actually be extremely easy -- just give the thief a charisma 'prime'.

More generally, I agree with Turjan's comment:

... This and the next example are more a showcase for bad DMing. If a manoeuvre just asks for an ability check, why not let him do it? And your next example is even more blatant. An enemy is allowed a strength check for holding back a character, and none of the PCs is? Did it never come to your mind to keep the C&C book and bring the GM back to the shop ? ...

I mean, this is kinda ridiculous:

...
... Occassionally we were allowed to do things like the thief's tumble to safety in the tavern, but generally the CK was hesitant to allow "special moves" that weren't already in the book. We patched this problem before the last encounter of the night by importing 3E's rules for tripping, grappling, disarming, etc.

When the game was over, the CK said that he'd been really frustrated by the lack of direction from the rulebook ....

It is clear that the CK in question simply does not understand the whole point of C&C.

No game system can guarantee good GM'ing.

 

[Tetsubo]

Well of Souls

Cool cosmographic generator, non-existant character generation and reasons to adventure.

I completely forgot about that game! I actually own a copy. I've read it once and never looked at it again...