Worst RPG System You Ever Palyed?

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

You know...one day Akrasia's going to post in a thread and not mention C&C at all. That day will be like the day Nightfall didn't mention SL...yet another sign the world is ending.

 

[warlord]

Well this is just painfully obvious I have to say Palladium.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Space Opera was a talisman for me while I was in school. Like one poster said earlier, I felt that the meaning of life would be unraveled if I could just decipher the rules. The "mustering-out" benefits were rife with munckin stuff, one even got a "complete ship" on mustering out... yeesh!

Best ship design rules I ever saw, though.

 

[Breakdaddy]

What the f.......? Yeah, that's me....a foaming-at-the-mouth fanboy of D&D 3e. [insert sarcastic emoticon here]

Is this a joke? Really....tell me. This totally has to be a joke, right?

Did I call you a fanboy? I don't think so. I dont see what AD&Disms you refer to in C&C but you are, of course, entitled to your opinion. Im sorry I seemed to have pushed some sort of button with you, but the rancor in your reply is unnecessary. I play 3.x, D20 Modern, C&C, and SWD20 and like all of the systems. Perhaps you should have given it another go with a different GM. Either way, no problem, but if you calm down the medication might be unecessary.

 

[Devall2000]

Okay, nobody is responding to what I've had to say about the original Marvel Super Heroes RPG.

In a nutshell, Aunt May can't defeat Galactus regardless of karma. The ability levels may be adjectives but there was a numerical value associated with them as well.

Finally, I haven't heard any hard evidence to justify the Marvel RPG being called the worst system ever played. On the whole, I haven't seen anything that was critical of the mechanics (minus, what I've said). It was very simple yet at the same time, served as a very good introductory game into the world of RPG's. The diceless version of the game or SAGA may qualify as the worst RPG but that came afterwards. And, it was a completely different system.

The longevity of this rules lite RPG is based on 2 factors: 1: The Marvel brand name 2: TSR (TSR was the stuff, back then) PROPS TO JEFF GRUBB!!!

-Jamie

 

[ricoboc]

I can't see any reason to spend time or money trying to make myself like another uninspired D&D clone when there are so many other great RPGs on the market today that I could be investing my gaming time into

I agree with this statement. These systems can drain ones wallet.

I'd rather be playing the game or working on a campaign than writing and testing out houserules trying to make a (what I consider to be) pretty lackluster and mediocre attempt at game design work for me. Why should I put in the effort trying to turn a pig's ear into a silk purse when I have talented people like Chris Pramas, CJ Carella or Jake Norwood willing to do the design work for me?

Actually I find this to be one of the fun things about being a GM. I like creating and twisting to make things work. I do realize this can take some time and not everyone finds this fun.

 

[James Heard]

What I think is funny is that I was considering going to check out C&C, until I saw a bunch of people slamming other people for having opinions on it while championing it. It's like when the guy with the pee bottles next to the computer tried to tell me how great Everquest was.

 

[Akrasia]

You know...one day Akrasia's going to post in a thread and not mention C&C at all. That day will be like the day Nightfall didn't mention SL...yet another sign the world is ending.

Actually, I normally only discuss C&C in response to criticisms of it, or if the thread is specifically on C&C.

I try not to bring it up here in nonrelevant threads (and I in fact did not mention it at all in this thread -- instead my first several posts were on WFRP and Rolemaster -- *until* it was subjected to some unfair IMO criticisms).

I like Warhammer FRP, Angel/Buffy (Cinematic Unisystem), and True 20 Adventure as much as C&C (it would be hard for me to rank them).

But those games seem to attract less attention (both positive and negative) on these boards.

 

[Akrasia]

What I think is funny is that I was considering going to check out C&C, until I saw a bunch of people slamming other people for having opinions on it while championing it. It's like when the guy with the pee bottles next to the computer tried to tell me how great Everquest was.

I don't understand this at all. Why should the behaviour of people who had nothing to do with the design of the game -- and who will probably never play it with you -- affect your judgement of the game?

The behaviour of random posters on the internet has no effect on the actual quality of the game.

I've encountered some horrible behaviour by defenders of Conan and 3.5 D&D on various boards (far worse than anything in this thread), but their behaviour did not affect my judgement of those games.

 

[Melan]

Wow. A thread about "The worst game you ever played" turned into a thread about C&C. Where is my rolleyes smiley, admins?

[addendum] The one thing I have to take issue with is the "it is there for nostalgia" statement. This statement fails to understand that for some people, elements of C&C such as different XP tables for different classes, etc., are not nostalgic - they are merely an example of good game design.

I find them just as natural as D&D's class system or the Vancian magic. For some of us, these elements are not bugs which could only be liked because we are nostalgic about them. They are features of a game, nothing more and nothing less. Take my example: in 2000, I'd have been perfectly happy about a D&D 3e that was 1e with more sensible mechanics. I liked 3e fine enough, but when a game closer to AD&D's system came out (again, with better mechanics), I switched to it. Granted, with a few tweaks, but that's what I do with all games I run.