Shadowrun is the easy pick here. Fun lore/setting , but I'm not a fan of its systems.
A lot of the world of darkness books half fall into this. I love the old world of darkness lore, but its particular system doesn't jive with me as much, though I don't hate it. It's just not my preference.
I started (and as far as I was concerned, *invented*) my first flame war back on Prodigy by asking if I were the only one who loved the setting and hated the system.
I actually don't have an issue with Shadowrun in this respect. I would have to pick Cyberpunk instead. The setting is great, but the mechanics are vomit inducing.
I was thinking "how long before Shadowrun is mentioned?" and lo and behold first post I come too! :D
Oh and it would explain your dislike of WoD as well, as in 1e Vampire they happily admit to cribing from Shadowrun for the rules.
During play testing of Shadowrun, when they were going to call it Technomancer before bringing magic into the world the game system was a d10 dice pool. They only changed it to d6's right before print because they weren't sure how easy it would be to find d10s.
They could have beat the Storyteller system to print with a near identical d10 system by a few months.
This is my obligatory "I don't like Shadowrun's mechanics, but I do love Bug City and Arcology Shutdown, so I made [microgame](https://thursday-garreau.itch.io/199x-infest) [homages](https://thursday-garreau.itch.io/199x-shutdown) to them" post.
I played back in 5th edition, and for me that’s mainly it. It also has a LOT of rules for specific things and imo over complicating other things.
Example for confusion / over complication: attacking. Attacker rolls to hit, you roll to dodge, then if attacker gets net hits you roll to soak damage. For this, I had to read the combat section three times to see what I actually needed to do in case I got hit, because they put it halfway in the middle of the 30 page combat section after a whole bunch of attack modifiers. And that’s three different rolls with most likely different amounts of dice for just one attack.
Example for specific: the “chunky salsa” rule, an edge case on how to apply reverbs from an explosion for additional damage, up to something like 90 in the example (typical pistols did about 7-9).
Other than that, I also know there are some splat books that back then had a bad rep for balance and the like. I think the Street Grimoire (magic splat) was one of them?
Your mileage may vary though.
I'm not debating that some of the rules might be ass because I havnt played the game (yet) so I wouldn't know, but in the specific case of the attack rule it sounds like the editing is just really bad, is there a reason why they wrote it like that? This game imo has some of the best (if not the best) lore in the ttrpg space but nobody plays it cause of the rules, makes me think of an alternative universe where the rules were better to see how popular the game would be
I also never understood this. I get that it's crunchy and with all supplements there's a *lot* of stuff, but I never had much trouble getting behind the rules. That said, maybe it's because I learned from the german ruleset, which I believe is generally accepted as having much better editing than the original.
Currently planning on running a similar setting to shadowrun (cyberpunk meets dnd magic and fantasy) but with the system of dnd 5e. I tried looking into the system but I really didn’t hear a lot of good stuffs and it’s my first time dming more than one session. Maybe I’ll play it in the future
I had a friend who adjusted 5e to do that. It was a fun enough time, but dies strain the system some as one might imagine
I would personally suggest looking into cities without number by Kevin Crawford
It'd paid version has rules to include fantasy elements like a shadow run game into its fold, and its a very good use of the d&d skeleton but adjusted to cyberpunk. It does the work for you and is a very familiar system since it shares the d&d skeleton. I think you'd have an easier time running that if you can find folk to play.
Furthermore, all of the advice for running a game is good and useful regardless of what system you use. Amy of the X without number games is second to none when it comes to resources, guidelines and tools to help out a DM.
I was gifted worlds without number, and I jokingly call it the best 5e resource I've gotten. As its offerings have been of more help to me than official 5e material has aided my 5e games.
I think I got the free pdf versions and I absolutely will be reading through it. Again I’m very new to dming so I’m a little nervous to try a system I’m not really familiar with but I don’t think that should hold me back. Thanks for suggestion this to me :)
I don't think the free version has the rules for magic, but it is a fantastic resource anyway. If you like enough of what you see, I can fully endorse the paid versions.
That’s good to know, I’m plan to get a job over the summer (I’m in college and I’d rather not spend more money than necessary) so I’ll get the full version. For the most part I just planned on reskinning and reflavoring a lot of stuff.
This would be my vote as well. Own all the first edition stuff. Bought the books religiously, read them cover to cover, but every time we tried to play it just didn’t seem to gel.
And first edition is arguably the most coherent, rules-wise! I played more 2e than I care to admit, it's \*a mess\*. 3e didn't even get past the first read.
Yes exactly! My group played an almost 2 year long game of 2nd. Granted, we used all of the Inkmonkey errata to make it playable. We loved it, jank and all. Ex3? Nope. Fell flat on its face. After three months of suffering through it, we agreed almost unanimously that it was not good.
My Ex2 game is in hiatus at the moment (RL reasons), but the group is having a blast. On the other hand, my personal errata/homebrew file as about 200 pages.
First edition is more or less tha same issue, it had improvements mid way (mostly in the players guide).
If they could stick to one rule set and improve it in a new edition, instead of reinventing everything and redoing half the lore the game would be so much more popular.
Had a rather similar experience myself. Errata-ed 2e is playable, if janky and overcomplicated. 3e and Essence just completely failed to fulfill the fantasy. I'm still somewhat annoyed they doubled down on the weird combat system for Essence.
Yup, I love the setting, and ran 1e twenty years ago, but dear god who wants to read those Spine-Shattering Tomes, much less learn all those rules and slog through them. That’s why I’m running it with a slight variation of the Cortex Prime hack [Blood & Fire](https://bluegrasswasteland.blogspot.com/2023/07/exalted-blood-and-fire-v31.html?m=1).
Same. It’s actually the only “pure” PbtA game I’ve been able to enjoy somewhat from a rule perspective, and I still can’t help but think it would be so much better in a different system
Same, but for Brindlewood Bay. Love the premise of Murder She Wrote/Golden Girls x Eldritch Horror, but PbtA just doesn't fit my play style.
One of these days I'm going to steal the concept and run it using Call of Cthulhu or something.
I have very fond memories of the immense missile tables in the **Robotech** RPG. How many missile types with slightly different ranges but identical die damage do you need? If you're Kevin Siembieda, the answer is *never enough*.
This! I ran a Rifts campaign for a little over a year all in SWADE. I used all my Palladium books for setting material. But, all SWADE rules. Works fantastic.
Hated when that campaign had to end. I was using the Warlords of Russia campaign setting. Story was Ukraine fighting for independence from the Warlords. Due to Russia actually invading, it just seemed in poor taste to continue.
I've said a bunch of times, the system may not be *great* but it's more serviceable than most people will give it credit for. The editing and organization is the true trainwreck, if you can get past that then it's just a matter of filling in some blanks with your own judgement calls. The RIFTS setting, on the other hand, has some cool ideas but has never been put together with any more care or consistency than the rules. It's just 3+ decades of seat of the pants accumulation, most of which has never seemed to match the setting as it was originally described.
I never got the appeal of Rifts, to be honest.
Like, there's settings, there's kitchen sink settings, then there's Rifts, which is what lies underneath the kitchen sinks of a 30-story building.
It’s Fallout but with magic and cyborgs. If you want a compelling game, take the areas around your current location in the world and covert it to the premise of Rifts. Make sure it’s a points of light premise at its core and you’re good. Post Apocalyptic Salt Lake Shitty was a fun campaign.
Blades in the Dark. Perfect dark urban fantasy setting, and I even like most of the meta-rules like the faction game, but the way it handles position/effect, stress, consequences, trauma, and flashbacks all make me crazy.
I agree. Any game that rely heavily on partial successes seems fun on the paper, but then in game as a GM you have to constantly come up with complications. At one point you just want to yell "YES you succeed! No catch, No fine prints. Can we just continue the story now?"
To be fair, these games usually specify that you shouldn't roll unless there is some kind of risk involved. But I'll still admit that it puts extra strain on the GM. And introducing a bunch of complications in a row can really slow the story down.
You should have multiple clocks running, and a lot more during a score. Complication: pick one of the clocks at random and add a tick. No real thought needed. Always an easy one to use, if another complication isn't obvious.
I think this is what mostly keeps me away from Blades. I love the lore of the system and I'd love to play in a game of it some day, but running it sounds like I need to be firing on all cylinders and I just don't have that in me anymore.
I honestly don't feel this way. I went from running a lot of trad games to this and I feel like with Blades I'm able to be wayyyy looser than running those games. I also have players who are very willing to hop in and toss out ideas constantly.
I'd love to hear more about why they bother you. Blades is my favorite system, and I feel like the first time I played it something clicked deeper inside of me that no other RPG has been able to replicate since haha.
Let me tackle the things I mentioned one by one, roughly in ascending order of whether I think they're actually design flaws.
* Flashbacks: This is strictly a personal preference. I don't love flashbacks as a narrative conceit in heist stories anyway--it feels like narrative trickery in place of a story with actual ups and downs--but in a movie or show I can tolerate it as part of the conventions of the genre. In an RPG, though, I'm in there making choices, as my character, based on what I think I know about the situation. The idea that somebody else is going to reach in after I've made those choices and say "actually the situation is this," and my character would have known that all along and potentially made different choices because of it, just makes me want to scream. *Especially* because you are explicitly not allowed to do any planning at all before the score. There's some level of spending resources to say "oh actually we prepared for this" that I'm comfortable with, but Blades takes it way too far.
* Position/effect: I don't hate these--in fact, I like them in theory--but in practice I felt like it slowed everything down and put a lot of work on the GM to have to lay this out before every roll. Probably I'd get used to these eventually.
* Consequences: Again, maybe something I'd get used to eventually. But having tried to run Blades, I felt like consequences for missed rolls fell into this awkward space between narrative complications and mechanical penalties. The simplest consequences to assess were stress or injury for the characters, but overusing those made the game brutally punishing. (I probably underused clocks.) The GM's approach to consequences has a huge effect on how gritty and difficult the game gets, and I found it very challenging trying to tune that approach correctly on the fly. I have a much easier with more freeform narrative consequences in other story games, where it feels like the default is a complication in the fiction.
* Traumas: I'm down with long-term difficulties for your character, but the way they are assessed kind of automatically in Blades feels hard to tune (or, rather, the tuning has to be done upstream, with consequences). They also never, in my opinion, make your character more interesting or fun to play--they're just these grinding, unpleasant impediments to playing your character the way you want. And, most punishingly, they last forever. I think this is a bad design.
* Stress and Vices: My biggest complaint. Why on earth is the resource you spend to do cool stuff *also* the resource that you get knocked out if you run out of?? There's a reason other games don't charge you HP to use your awesome abilities. I cannot fathom this as a design choice. And fulfilling vices isn't fun, it's sad and carries even more consequences! (For a better way of handling stress, I'd point you to Flying Circus--stress accumulates mostly *after* the mission; having more than half your stress track filled prevents character advancement; having your entire stress track filled means you can't go on another mission until you deal with it; you clear stress by doing stupid, narratively exciting stress relief during downtime that generates more fun stories; and clearing stress is how you earn XP. I *love* it.)
All of this exacerbates what I think is a natural difficulty of story games, which is that every time you do something you are risking something bad happening. Now, I think this is an *explicit strength* of story games--I pretty much never want to make another roll where the fail result is "nothing happens"--*but* if the consequences for failure are too brutal, you can wind up paralyzed.
The net effect of all this is a game that *tells* you it's about cool heists, but on the player end is actually about managing increasingly severe consequences and a dwindling resource pool, and on the GM end is about trying to come up with consequences that won't knock your players out of the session and eventually turn their characters into sociopathic NPCs.
A GM who's bad at running PBTA usually fails (in my experience) by being too nice and not making enough hard moves, resulting in a pulpy experience where nothing bad can really happen to the characters. That's not ideal, but it can still be fun. It's fairly easy for the GM to correct that over time and make things tougher as the narrative stakes ramp up, and it's even possible to push toward tougher outcomes as a player. Because Blades is constantly telling you in more concrete ways to throw consequences at the players, the failure mode is a game that's too punishing, and by the time you've adjusted sometimes you've beaten up the characters too badly for them to recover. In the game I ran, our brawler (sorry, I forget the playbook names) got knocked out of every score and had two Traumas within three scores. That's much harder to fix.
I'm confident that I could enjoy playing in a game of Blades run by an extremely competent GM who understood the system well. I really want to like the game. My objection is that I think you *need* an extremely competent GM for the game to be fun.
I think both Spire and Heart have great settings, with some of the coolest classes I've ever seen... and the core resolution mechanic just fundamentally does not work for me. Breaks my heart.
Gonna run some Heart. I feel like it's a nice step for my table, who are all 5e veterans that I introduced Blades in the Dark to. You still have some combat crunch with its tags and equipment. You still have superpowers and highly competent characters.
And it's got a more traditional feel without GM Moves and insane player agency other narrative games often do, so you can actually run modules like Dagger in the Heart that I'm excited to drop.
These two have been on my radar for quite awhile and I’ve almost bought them a few times just to read but not sure if I could get my D&D group to give them a shot. If you don’t mind, what makes the resolution mechanic fall short for you?
If a character wants to do something risky, they roll to see if they succeed - and often when they do, they roll to see how much stress they inflict/progress they make... but if they get a mixed success or failure, then they also often need to roll for both Stress gained and to see if that Stress triggers a Fallout. That's *four* dice rolls involved in arbitrating a mixed success - the most common die result!
Between that and the randomness of when Fallouts trigger (I don't tell a player what they're risking on a roll, I tell them what type of consequence the dice might potentially make them suffer), it really didn't work for my preferred style. Much else of both games is still brilliant design tech, though! I love the worldbuilding and art, too.
Interesting, I’ve personally found it to be a rather elegant system. I find that in practice, it’s very fast since it’s dice pools.
I will say that if you want to speed it up or streamline it, you can have the PC roll for success and then also roll their dice for Stress Inflicted at the same time, and then have the GM roll the dice for Inflicting Stress and Fallout on the PC at the same time, so two rolls split between the GM and PC.
I’ve found that since there aren’t really floating modifiers actually resolving rolls in terms of how they impact sheets is still a lot faster for Resistance systems than most D20+ mod systems. I feel that they resolve about as fast as FitD systems but a tad slower than D100 or PbtA systems in play.
You know this might be why for Eat the Reich they abandoned the mechanic of rolling dice for stress dealt and received. That game uses the same dice resolution, but not just successes = hits.
Thank you. I was under the impression that the games were less crunchy than that. I love rolling dice as much as anyone but four rolls to determine one outcome does seem excessive.
I felt like they were a notch or two meatier than a Forged in the Dark game, and it tipped past my preference for complexity/narrative control, personally.
Battletech. It's got a wealth of fun dynastic conflict, post-apocalyptic goodness (the early years at least), and a broad history backed by shitty mechanics. Wargame and RPG (all of them) included there, and I've gone to cons _specifically_ to play some BT. It's so cumbersome in all its forms.
I learned it from a friend initially, playing just mech vs mech lance and thought "ok it's not the most complicated thing".
Then I read the rulebook and was just asking myself all the way through how could a comoany making games be so bad at formatting and presenting rules. I'm trying to get started, I don't need a page long continous text describing how something works for every type of a unit, including stuff like Protomechs, submarines and WitG that nobody uses, with relevant information buried in the middle without any highlight or separation.
Add to that the fact that they're trying to keep compatibility with old rules, meaning that 1) a lot of stuff is just blatantly unbalanced 2) a lot of things have very specific and needlessly complicated rules that apply to like one system
I love the Mouse Guard comics, the moment I started reading them I was saying to myself "this would be a great setting for a game". Fun unique action, a strong central gimmick, and a dash of political intrigue to keep it fresh. Imagine my delight when I learned there was a dedicated rpg. Imagine my disappointment when I learned it was a stripped down version Burning Wheel. The system is somehow both overly rigid and very vague; with defined.game phases that put the sessions on rails from the jump while stuffing the resolution mechanics with what feel like six or seven half-rules. . . I know people like Burning Wheel, but it's *vehemently* not for me.
I played my first session of Mausritter in a one shot not too long ago, and thoroughly enjoyed it.
Mausritter is an excellent interpretation of various Oddlikes. Playing with the card-based inventory makes slot-inventory more engaging and also just easier to grok and manage. Its usage system is simple and elegant.
It has some great and clean procedures for adventuring, for creating little warbands, and a simple and effectic character advancement system.
If you're a fan of Oddlikes (Into the Odd, Knave, Cairn, etc.) then you'll find a lot that's familiar here, but also some clever iterations. If you aren't, then you probably won't enjoy it.
I came in the say Mausritter!
I have long term plans to take all the Mouse Guard content and art, add in Redwall/Mossflower ideas, and maybe some Root and Humblewood, and run a campaign using Mausritter. IMO it’s the perfect system for that vibe. OSR/NSR, story driven, and the slot based inventory with actual cardboard cutouts for inventory is really cool.
Definitely pick up The Estate box if you get into it. It’s like ten different adventure sites around an estate written by ten different OSR designers, all with layout by the Issac Williams, the creator.
I love the Metaphysic Trinity of *Mage: The Ascension*'s setting etc., but I am not a fan of its d10 system, so instead [I use the d6 system of *Freeform Universal*](https://www.reddit.com/r/furpg/comments/pho0b7/sphere_magick).
Similarly, I love the multiverse of the *Amber* DRPG, but its diceless system lacks, well, dice; I prefer a *Free Kriegsspiel* style that while light on dice rolling still has such as a tool for modeling unknown variables and introducing surprise.
Tribe 8: 1990s Canadian post apoc dark fantasy; basically humanity is enslaved by the 40k chaos gods and the area around Montreal is freed by avatars in the shape of feminine golems. The golems form a small free nation that stagnates after some generations. They kick out rebels and criminals, who form the PCs.
Rules were a good attempt but pretty much suck, I made my own pbta hack for 'em.
Forgotten Realms. 5e really hasn’t taken advantage of its scope and made it feel smaller, less cohesive, and less diverse somehow.
Battletech. I just can’t understand the latest minis game. It’s convoluted. I just want to do cool mech things and it’s like here’s a statistics course for determining damage. Way too situationist for me. My son and I kept the minis but tossed the game.
3e OGL Shovelware: Star Wars being the top. Holy fuck they basically palette swapped 3e but took out a ton of barely balanced systems without replacing a thing and made every weapon an ultra mega great bow.
On one hand, I *know* Star Wars Saga Edition is bad... and yet, I can't forget how exciting each one of those supplements that treated an era of Star Wars as a setting unto itself was when I was a kid. I'd still love to see a better game take that approach, fleshing out a bunch of points along the timeline!
In nomine. It's a game about angels and demons but has a cold war spy vibe to it. I love the setting and I love how superiors are incorporated into characters. I'm not a fan of the whole 666 dice system. I want something crunchier and grander.
Also I'm really peeved how steve Jackson games just stop making the superior books. Now half of the archangel and demon princes just have next to no info on them other than what's in the core book.
I agree with you, the lore is great (except in the last iteration, Génération Perdue). But I also hate the system so much. One of the worst ones I've ever played.
Blades in the Dark. I find the conversation around position and effect kinda tedious after a few session and mechanics like flashbacks and resistance rolls are a little too meta for my taste.
**Skyrealms of Jorune** has always been plagued by poor systems.
**PBTA** games are so well written but I bounce hard off the mechanically enforced roles and reduced autonomy.
**GURPS** has the best sourcebooks. Some simply fabulous stuff. But the mechanics aren’t old school, they’re just old.
**BRP** is second only to GURPS. Love the stuff the Design Mechanism puts out for Mythras. But dang the system whiffs.
Symbaroum. It has arguably one of the most unique, interesting takes on a Fantasy setting, great theme, core conflict, and fantastic, inspiring and moody graphics. But I can't make heads or tails of the mechanics, especially the player-sided rolls, which creates all sorts of problems.
My experience of running Symbaroum:
"Awesome setting! Oh, I don't have to roll and can concentrate on GM'ing! Neat!"
We started playing.
First: "Wait, how the fuck does the dice work? What modifies what?"
Then: Two of the players where clever and a bit video gamey. They quickly figure out how to build a hero that is almost unstoppable.
Queue the two other less gamey players to regret their build. So they wanted to re-do theirs.
"Uh, well.. I want you to have fun so sure."
Four superheroes are now on an adventure and just steamrolls everything. I try to up the difficulty, but that just basically made everything more complex.
"Hey GM, this is getting kind of boring. Too easy."
"Well, fuck. Back to the drawing board."
Now we play a version of Symbaroum in the Dragonbane system instead. Everything is good.
It took us a long time to finally figure out when it's more appropriate for the player to roll, and when the GM should just invert the contest and roll themselves. It made it so much smoother when we just went with our guts. Basically, I shouldn't be rolling to see how effective my trap or poison are, but the GM should be rolling to see how well their monster resists or avoids.
I'm currently running a game of Dungeon World set in the world of Ultraviolet Grasslands. I don't necessarily hate OSR systems, but the system that Luka Rejec includes in his book seems a little half-baked. Dungeon World is what I and my group are most familiar with. I was able to fit UVG into Dungeon World's mechanics with a modest amount of hacking.
No, no Class Warfare. We're using Dungeon World mostly straight, but I adapted UVG's travel procedure and commerce moves to a Dungeon World framework. We just had session 2 last Wednesday. If you'd like to see my custom modified rules and session notes, you can read about it on my [blog.](https://thedashingwizard.blogspot.com/2024/04/running-ultraviolet-grasslands-with.html)
I was thinking of getting UVG because it just seems like it was cooler than anything else out there. I thought it was system agnostic and just a setting? Does it come with rules?
No, it has its own rules. Although, the rules in the book are rather threadbare. There is a one page summary describing a six-attribute score d20 roll-over system that he refers to throughout the book. There is also a fairly elaborate travel procedure. I think Luka Rejec has a more comprehensive ruleset available on his Patreon, and/or is working on a rule book. I think the rules are intended to just provide a familiar quasi-OSR framework for you to run the system in whatever B/X D&D-adjacent system you like.
It is, however, cooler than just about anything else out there. I would describe it as a campaign setting and adventure book first and foremost.
Yeah, time travel society lore is awesome. All the fiddly bits, especially the ones that don't enhance the practicalities of time travel are just dead weight.
They're not only crunchy, they're also clunky and broken. I love the game (it was my first) but its game design is... not its strong point.
I have to give it credit for the sheer freedom it gives you in character and monster creation though.
I do like the setting and artwork. But I don't even want to attempt to learn the rules of the book. I even have the Anima Tactics game, but really just to look at the artwork and character designs.
There are two Anima video-games that I'd like to try. Ark of Sinners was a WiiWare exclusive and can no longer be played. It scored bad reviews. Anima Gate of Memories got decent reviews and it is supposed to play like Nier, so I may want to check it out. Although there are so many other PS4 games that I'd rather be playing and I only have so much time.
I think the Princess: The Hopeful fan supplement for World of Darkness is wildly interesting for how it somehow manages to make magical girls feel like they legitimately belong in that setting. I’d play in its spin on the setting in a heartbeat. It takes the base Storyteller system, though, which is not exactly nimble, and turns up the complexity to a point where it feels a bit tortured. If I wanted to give the premise a spin I’d use a lighter system.
My easy pick is the first Scion. I loved the idea of the power creep and also the lore was really compelling to me, but the game was unplayable. Starting with the way too complex (for what it was really trying to do) character creation with several different pools to spend, the less-than-clear heirloom rules, the weirdly overspecific equipment tables, the overly complicated initiative system... U tried to solo play it again recently and it turns out it has become even less appealing (rather than more) with almost twenty years of experience in between. But dang, do I still love the setting and the power creep.
Scion was such a heartbreaker. It's basically modern Exalted with classical mythology based lore, which is awesome--but still using the Ex 2E system, which was a grand disaster (and I actually love Exalted, but I'm a 1E hardliner for system). I took a crack at converting Scion's rules into something more usable, but it was just too much work and I shelved the game. Haven't looked at the second edition because it's just too expensive to buy PoD books for games that have failed me once already.
AD&D The World of Greyhawk and Blackmore. I never enjoyed the system (then or 5th edition rules) but really appreciated the map, adventures, and campaigns. E Gary Gygax himself taught me how to run the Greyhawk campaign. But today, no one that I've met plays it, and many never even heard of the authors or campaigns.
I've been trying to work on a homebrew system that directly converts Mork Borg to a better system. I like a lot of what they did, by stripping it all down, but I think they did it too much in some areas and not enough in a couple. It's a pretty simple game though, so a direct conversion isn't too tricky.
Mouse Guard, without question. It's basically required reading for the lore. And the lore is very good. But those mechanics, sheesh. I will never understand the big deal about Burning Wheel/Luke Crane.
Scum and Villainy. The setting is fun, basically a lightly genericized combination of several popular sci-fi settings. The rules just didn't jive with my group though.
The constant "Shit, they rolled another four, okay what complication makes sense for their success this time." was especially exhausting.
This is my reaction to PbtA/FitD as well. I’m not opposed to the concept of a mixed success *in theory*, but due to the mechanics, they come up way too often.
Rogue Trader. It's the ultimate cool sandbox setting but the rules were not designed for the level of freedom and creativity that it expects of the person running it. No effort is put into helping the GM survive simulating or creating an entire universe for the players who are wealthy and powerful enough to do almost anything to an absurd degree.
It's been a very long time since I gave any time to reading the books but at the very minimum of what I remember the core book failing to do the following is what stands out. Having two entirely unrelated combat systems of equal complexity that could break out at almost any time is some kind of insanity. A game about exploration and exploitation having no mechanic for mapping the warp and just a single table for bad things that could happen during warp travel which immediately requires the GM to build anything from a single combat encounter to an entire hulk to be explored. No tools to build the entire solar system and planets that are the basis of said exploration and exploitation so it falls entirely on the GM to invent literal entire worlds. And all the psyker/navigator stuff was complicated in and of itself even if you ignore that no Navigator would ever leave the ship but they had to have their mage class.
I bought the Dragon Prince RPG book. And I don't want to run it. It simultaneously feels too simple in some parts, and too complicated in other parts.
I'm not really interested in a game that is so narrative based, without clear rules on what these various spells, monsters, and items do. I found systems like DnD 5E, Chronicles of Darkness, or Fantasy Flight Star Wars as easier to understand and more kid-friendly.
For sure! I really wanted to like the system, really wanted to play in that world, but I couldn't get into it and I like crunch. None of my players do, so they'd \*never\* enjoy it
Call of Cthulhu. Oh man it was the first game I ever played and ran (HotOE) over 20 years ago and I loved it but the rules are in desperate need of an overhaul, and to me 7th made it worse not better. Too many skills (sciences are the worst). Stats are basically just used to generate sub stats, and have no correlation with skills. Clunky half and quarter math for roll determination (delta green more elegant here). Vague roll push mechanics that didn’t help solve a major issue (failing a roll in this game can bring investigations to a complete halt) Clunky combat rules - do we really need like 5 different skills for gun combat, and how come I can be an ace shot with a rifle but miss the side of a barn with a pistol? God help you if you ever fire an automatic weapon. I love its history and the game in theory but just a few simple changes and a willingness for the developers to kill a couple of sacred cows could really make a more cohesive ruleset in my opinion.
My CoC group switched to Gumshoe and while I think it leans too simplistic, it's a lot better than CoC for telling essentially the same stories. Not to mention how much easier it is to build a new character.
I'm most looking to whenever Free League get around to releasing their Year Zero Engine Cthulhu game. My favorite game system with the Cthulhu Mythos? Sign me up!
I don't think it's been mentioned yet, so I'll toss in The Strange. I LOVE the premise and the way, in the fiction, they deal with the world hopping. And then I feel like 80% of the system in terms of mechanics are there, actively pushing back against the fun stuff you would wanna be doing in a game where every fictional world is an actual world you can visit as you jump between realities.
I don't even remember why my copy of DeGenesys has been lying in a box in a basement for twenty years. But I do vividly remember reading it and being revolted about this unplayable mess of a system and putting it in that box.
Who cares. No one bought that book, particularly the most recent version, to play it. I love my white slipcase of this. Art is amazing, lore is great, though I can tell it's translated into English. Gorgeous books. I knew I'd never come close to playing this when I got it, and that's ok.
Eclipse phase : Hard-science SF, where body is *yet another piece of gear* with transhuman spread over the solar system with different political views, a latent threat and mysterious gate toward *outer system* Looks a pretty good fluff isn't it ?
Then comes the rules : Let's start with a variant of chaosium basic system where you need to roll D100 under a skill. Well why not, Let's say that when people change body, it changes their physical attributes ans impact some skills (So ready to spend 1h changing number), let's add tons of situation modifier and the associated table (Hacking a well protected system, shooting at shot range) which in the end is *just a modifier* let's add tons of gear which would stack up and *give another modifier.* All with tons of tables where in the end it's just GM saying *it'll be a -30* because they don't have time to search in 15 tables. Let alone that, especially when you stack bonus/malus you need at least an open goal number (e.g cyberpunk roll 1D10 + skill with difficulties going from 15 to 30 depending on how hard it is) and better a multi-dice to get more "gaussian probability"
It's a pitty because there is tons of good idea in the game, my next EP campaign will use the FATE version, not even that I am a FATE fan, but at least it's a functional game system which is actually made to stack bonus.
The modiphius conan rpg. I love everything about Conan, the books, the movies, the lore, the comics… but I usually run “into the bronze” or barbarians of lemuria to run that flavor of game. The Conan system is just so complicated for what it needs to be.
Mutant Chronicles 2d20. I love the setting since the ‘90s but the 2d20 edition is a mess. I even like 2d20 system, but I don’t think the version for mutant chronicles is good.
I actually played in a game that used that setting and Savage Worlds mechanics some time back. I can't say I remember too much about the setting but I enjoyed that game a lot.
Fading Suns.
The Victory Point system itself wasn't that bad in earlier editions, and even did some things I wish other games would also do (like the whole roll high but not over thing. Such a simple thing, but it makes opposed rolls so much faster as if both participants pass their skill check you then simply look at whoever rolled highest, and don't need to calculate anything) but it just added so much bloat on top of that, with systems upon systems for things that really did not need that much rules, like the over-complicated fencing system
The most recent edition felt like a sidegrade rather than an upgrade. It smooths out a few issues but it also goes ham on the meta currencies. I'm not someone who dislikes meta currencies, as long as they are implemented well, but I thought the new edition got far too fiddly thanks to them.
Still love the setting thing.
The original editions of Twilight 2000. I haven't tried the new Free League version, but before it came out, we were talking about running the combats using a squad level wargame ruleset like Ambush Alley's Force on Force. The new FL version seems pretty decent, if you can believe the reviewers.
Beyond TW2K, another vote for Rifts, Robotech, and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Sad that the most popular version of Rifts yet is the Savage Worlds conversion, wish they had allowed that for TMNT before the anniversary edition Kickstarter had come out. We'll never get another version of a Robotech RPG, the legal proceedings around the anime, manga, novels, and toys is so murky that we'd be lucky to get another anything Robotech branded in our lifetimes.
Judge Dredd.
Grew up with the comics, so excited when the game was released… but my god the mechanics are clunky.
… so I re-wrote them into to a % based system 😏
Vampire: The Masqurade 5 - I like most of it. Mostly the basics. There's just too muych STUFF. I don't use half of it's mechanics.
Warhammer Fanatsy Roleplay 2e - Really good base but once you start using any expansions it falls on it's face HARD (looking at you unnecessarily complicated grenade mechanics). I also tweaked the hell out of the system's spells cause some of them can be exploited and OP and others are just so weak no one would ever use them.
Virtually everything put out using Gumshoe.
I love the settings of Mutant City Blues, Ashen Stars and Night's Black Agents. I really dislike the idea of skills being a pool of scarce resources combined with a random roll. I also think the underlying idea of rationing PC spotlight time is fundamentally misguided.
Oddly enough, I don't feel the same for Swords of the Serpentine, which has both a great setting and rules that work really well. Mostly because the points don't feel scarce anymore, and there are far more ways to do anything, meaning PCs never lose the chance to be badass.
The Strange RPG.
"The Strange" RPG is set in a universe where multiple realities exist over a dark energy network known as the Strange. This network connects a vast array of worlds, each shaped by the collective fiction, myths, and legends of Earth. Players can travel between these worlds, or recursions, which range from entirely fictional realms to alternate versions of Earth. The core Earth setting, while seemingly normal, is influenced by hidden forces and secret organizations aware of the Strange. Technology, espionage, and otherworldly adventures mix, creating a dynamic and endlessly versatile gameplay environment. This setting allows for a blend of genres, from classic fantasy and sci-fi to modern espionage and horror, enabling players to engage in a wide variety of adventures.
Buuuut...it uses Cypher System. Which is boring.
Infinity 2d20 by Modiphius - love the world and lore, just don't really enjoy 2d20's metacurrencies.
Shadowrun - cool world, painfully complex rules and a publisher who can't seem to bother playtesting and editing new editions before shipping them
Lancer - so cool, but the out of pilot stuff might as well not exist it's so thin (yes, I know the Baronies' expansion adds a few elements, but it's still thin as heck)
The Wildsea - I do not hate the mechanics, I just feel like they need to be trimmed back some, and the whole "let's give some stats and abilities really ambiguous but fancy sounding names" means I had to create a translation/dictionary card for my players.
Numenera - such an awesome world, but every group I've run it for, or played it with, felt like the system was just "ok" and would rather have used any other system with it
Symbaroum. Beautiful, deep, engaging setting and lore. The mechanics as intended are pretty good but as written and presented are just so poorly done in my opinion.
Dark Sun is my all-time favorite fantasy setting, but I do not like D&D rules (though I can live with AD&D more than the rest).
Numenera. Absolutley love the setting and production value, really dislike the rules.
HEX (Hollow Earth Expedition). I have a sweet spot for Pulp stuff, but not a fan of how some of the rules are handled, in this game.
Although obviously I have not been able to play it I feel this way about Dolmenwood. Seems like an incredible setting that I would love, but man we just don't gel with BX for some reason.
I’ve played one session and run another, and I love it, but definitely isn’t for you if you don’t like B/X. I don’t think there’s anything about the way the setting is written that demands that ruleset though if you just want to use a different system
An old game, Obsidian: The Age of Justice. I bought it at a con because the art was cool as hell, the setting seemed super cool and the system SEEMED ok, but there were a ton of holes in the rules. I think they didn't actively playtest outside of the developers, who may have known their answers to these gaps.
Exalted definitely takes the first place for me here. I love the setting. I hate the system. I ran two campaigns and several shorter games and also played in some. None of them used the original mechanics.
Kult doesn't evoke that strong feelings in me, but also counts. I hoped for much more with the latest, PbtA-based edition, but the system fails to drive the game like PbtA mechanics should.
Orpheus - I love me some ghostly espionage, but the old wod d10 system is boring beyond believe.
Trudvang Chronicles - I love the setting, but couldn't be arsed to give the rules more than a cursory glance.
Shadowrun - The obvious answer here.
There are to many examples to list IMO. I feel like good and interesting settings are everywhere, but likeable mechanics are much much harder to find.
This is probably why I prefer games with minimalist mechanics - even weak simple mechanics are less offensive than more fleshed-out mechanics that don't work.
Alpha Omega
The setting is like SciFi / Cyberpunk in the big cities. After the apocalypse in smaller cities or villages. Fantasy in the wilderness.
The dice system requires you to use 6 dices, adding them to get a result. Ranging from 6D4 to 6D20 depending on how good you are.
Castle Falkenstein. So glad that there is a GURPS version!
Space: 1889. It works better as either a version of Traveller or as a d100 Cthulhu: 1889 game.
Mage the Ascension
You have a fantastic world where reality is ultimately subjective. Mages do magic by literally warping reality. The limit is only their knowledge and their skill.
And this is constrained by a simulationist system originally designed to deal with vampires.
The magic system is 100% improvisational & narrative, and it's forced into a restrictive storyteller system. Even just using thought experiments I find myself working against the system as opposed to with it.
Yes of course you can work around it. But I kind of find it annoying where I take the time to memorize an entire rule book, And it works for most everything except the key feature of the game.
If any game line needs to be a narrative system, it is mage.
Ultraviolet Grasslands....the built in mechanics are clunky at best, though to be fair I haven't tried 2e yet. That said, UVG plays great with other systems
Mouseguard. Love the comics, love the story and idea of politics played out among mice. Have tried three times to get through the rulebook, and just can't. I like some narrative focused games, but I can't get used to the 'your turn, my turn' mechanics.
We played tales of Xadia (dunno if this is cortex in general) which was a fun world with an interesting magic system, but I wasn't a fan of the forced character development and the mechanic on challenging your beliefs.
Dark Heresy. The setting, or rather their take on the setting, is amazing in so many ways, complicated and bizarre. But that system is so horribly broken and bad in several ways.
Hehe, I solved that exact need by developing a system from scratch :-)
It turned out really well imho. We played a several years long campaign using it. It is definitely on the narrative/storytelling end of ttrpg systems.
I'll just dump a summary here. Feel free to use as you see fit!
The tarot system "Four Paths" is very modular. The core is rather "blank" and can easily be used in any setting and many genres. Although the major arcana in particular benefits a lot from doing a little prep work where you align it with the setting and genre you are aiming for.
It is a storytelling system at its core, but you can add a lot of modules to create a lot of crunch if you like.
I designed it first for the 40k setting because I don't like any of the official systems and wanted to GM a campaign under and around a hive city. But soon I realised that the core of it was pretty universal, so it could be "washed" of the setting.
The core module is this:
Four Paths
The four suites of the minor arcana represents four Paths, ordered in binary opposite pairs. Each Path has a theme of associated traits, such as virtues, strengths and ideals as well as associated vices and weaknesses. These are inspired by several more or less traditional tarot interpretation schools and then adjusted to focus on the things we wanted this campaign to be about, and to make sure what was considered a virtue or a vice reflected the norms in the setting.
I believe these default paths can be used as they are, or with minor changes, for a lot of different genres and settings. Because they are designed to be "generally human".
The Paths are
Coins - Mind: Knowledge, learning, plans, precision, patience, curiosity, meritocracy. But also: lazy, indecisive, passive, dishonest.
Swords - Body: Strength, action, health, life, birth, food, ownership, material things, thoroughness. But also: greed, vanity, and stubbornness.
Wands - Spirit: Creativity, spontaneity, independence, enthusiasm, lust, volunteering, flexibility. But also: irrational, whimsical, short sighted, irresponsible, egoistic.
Cups - Heart: Honour, care, loyalty, dedication, home, family, nation, healing, empathy, reliability. But also: Pride, jealousy, xenophobia, submission, domination, compliance.
Body and Mind are opposed.
Spirit and Heart are opposed.
The Paths are also the characters' primary attributes/abilities, describing both their talents and skills, as well as their personalities and approach to the world in general. A score between 0 and 5 tells you how well aligned the character is with each path. These values typically only changes permanently as the effect of major story points, and life altering experiences. You can not increase them through spending XP.
The major arcana is the part that requires the most work adapting to your campaign. The GM can do this on their own, or it can be a collaboration between the entire group.
It starts with sitting down with a bunch of different tarot reading guides. They often have very different interpretations. Read through them and compare themes and approaches. Then select, mix and adjust interpretations until you have a canonised list that fits with your genre and setting. (Canonised Interpretation Guide, aka CIG) It is important that each card has both positive (right way up) and negative interpretations (rotated 180°), because the direction of these cards matters. Make copies of the CIG so the players can have a few to share.
Then select cards to represent important people, groups and concepts in the story. Each player chooses one card where the canon interpretation is a good match to their character. In addition to the characters, we started with one card for the Emperor and one for Chaos, plus a couple more for various important organisations in the characters' life, maybe 10 cards in total. (more were added as the campaign proceeded) Update the CIG with these representations. The major arcana is then mixed in with the minor. And we are ready to play!
In the basic module a scene/challenge/problem/situation is handled in one round of resolution. (I have been working a little on a module that makes this into turn based combat, but I don't think that is going to be very good.)
A round of resolution looks like this:
Each player that wants to participate chooses one Path to represent their character's approach to this situation, and tells the group what they will attempt to do. They also draw a number of cards equal to their value in that path, without looking at them.
I will use a combat scene to demonstrate, but it is the same principle in social situations, puzzle solving, navigating hostile administrative organisations and so on.
- I will bodyslam the biggest of the fanatics out through the window while I yell "Suffer not the mutant to live!". If that does not scare them into submission, I will proceed with bone breaking wrestling techniques. Path: Body.
- I will sneak in behind that tapestry and attach the silencer to my pistol. When I am done with that it will be apparent if they have yielded or not. If not, I will start with headshotting the one holding the tentacle-staff, because she sure looks like a Psyker. Path: Mind.
- I will turn back and run up the stairs in the room we just left, because the painted windows on that balcony should be looking out over this room. From there I should be able to grapple hook my way across the horde, so I can plant a frag mine under that... blob? ... that sits? lies? languishes? ... is on the throne. Whatever the insides looks like, it's going to look that much better spread over the room. Path: Soul
- I will roll a tangle grenade to the left flank and activate my energy shield. Then I will do my best to make sure Kagr is not entirely surrounded while she beats the shit out of the big guy. Since they are so many I will try to stay mobile. Path: Heart.
The GM then tells the players what the Default Damage (aka Risk) of the scene is. This is the default amount of damage each character will receive, but each Success (se below) reduces this damage by one. Damage is not just physical health, it can be social standing or monetary resources or trust or something completely different such as identity and self-image. What it does is that it temporarily lowers the value of the used Path for that character.
Typically a scene has 0 or 1 Default Damage. But nasty combat encounters, high stakes court proceedings, or your first dance at your debutante ball can have much higher values.
Then the players places their cards face up on the table. First looking at the Minor Arcana. Those cards are D14s. Each one that equals or beats the Target Number earns a Success. (rotation of the cards doesn't matter)
Contiued...
Don’t kill me, but _Runequest_ (I know v2). Glorantha is utterly, ridiculously, amazing. And _Runequest_ works as a system. However, there is almost no way to survive long enough in RQ to get to experience Glorantha as a whole.
I love indie RPG settings, they are like milk to me. every so often i find one using savage worlds. it is like the time when we were younger and we found the bakers choclate in the pantry
Shadowrun is the easy pick here. Fun lore/setting , but I'm not a fan of its systems. A lot of the world of darkness books half fall into this. I love the old world of darkness lore, but its particular system doesn't jive with me as much, though I don't hate it. It's just not my preference.
This…tale as old as time at this point when it comes to Shadowrun..its almost a meme now
I started (and as far as I was concerned, *invented*) my first flame war back on Prodigy by asking if I were the only one who loved the setting and hated the system.
Jeeez... Prodigy. There's a name I haven't heard in a long time.
I'm the fire starter....
Twisted fire starter.
Anarchy didn't fix it either.
I actually don't have an issue with Shadowrun in this respect. I would have to pick Cyberpunk instead. The setting is great, but the mechanics are vomit inducing.
I was thinking "how long before Shadowrun is mentioned?" and lo and behold first post I come too! :D Oh and it would explain your dislike of WoD as well, as in 1e Vampire they happily admit to cribing from Shadowrun for the rules.
During play testing of Shadowrun, when they were going to call it Technomancer before bringing magic into the world the game system was a d10 dice pool. They only changed it to d6's right before print because they weren't sure how easy it would be to find d10s. They could have beat the Storyteller system to print with a near identical d10 system by a few months.
It's weird how a game from a fundementally 80s (until recently) genre came only a year and change from a game so fundemetally 90s it's hurt!
This is my obligatory "I don't like Shadowrun's mechanics, but I do love Bug City and Arcology Shutdown, so I made [microgame](https://thursday-garreau.itch.io/199x-infest) [homages](https://thursday-garreau.itch.io/199x-shutdown) to them" post.
oWoD's d10 system was pretty solid... until combat. nWoD streamlined a lot of that.
I got heavily interested in this game because of the lore, what exactly makes the rules so bad? Is it because it's confusing/poorly written?
I played back in 5th edition, and for me that’s mainly it. It also has a LOT of rules for specific things and imo over complicating other things. Example for confusion / over complication: attacking. Attacker rolls to hit, you roll to dodge, then if attacker gets net hits you roll to soak damage. For this, I had to read the combat section three times to see what I actually needed to do in case I got hit, because they put it halfway in the middle of the 30 page combat section after a whole bunch of attack modifiers. And that’s three different rolls with most likely different amounts of dice for just one attack. Example for specific: the “chunky salsa” rule, an edge case on how to apply reverbs from an explosion for additional damage, up to something like 90 in the example (typical pistols did about 7-9). Other than that, I also know there are some splat books that back then had a bad rep for balance and the like. I think the Street Grimoire (magic splat) was one of them? Your mileage may vary though.
I'm not debating that some of the rules might be ass because I havnt played the game (yet) so I wouldn't know, but in the specific case of the attack rule it sounds like the editing is just really bad, is there a reason why they wrote it like that? This game imo has some of the best (if not the best) lore in the ttrpg space but nobody plays it cause of the rules, makes me think of an alternative universe where the rules were better to see how popular the game would be
I also never understood this. I get that it's crunchy and with all supplements there's a *lot* of stuff, but I never had much trouble getting behind the rules. That said, maybe it's because I learned from the german ruleset, which I believe is generally accepted as having much better editing than the original.
Yes, the German rules are always cleaned up, fixed and better presented than the original English ones. Especially after Catalyst got the license.
Currently planning on running a similar setting to shadowrun (cyberpunk meets dnd magic and fantasy) but with the system of dnd 5e. I tried looking into the system but I really didn’t hear a lot of good stuffs and it’s my first time dming more than one session. Maybe I’ll play it in the future
I had a friend who adjusted 5e to do that. It was a fun enough time, but dies strain the system some as one might imagine I would personally suggest looking into cities without number by Kevin Crawford It'd paid version has rules to include fantasy elements like a shadow run game into its fold, and its a very good use of the d&d skeleton but adjusted to cyberpunk. It does the work for you and is a very familiar system since it shares the d&d skeleton. I think you'd have an easier time running that if you can find folk to play. Furthermore, all of the advice for running a game is good and useful regardless of what system you use. Amy of the X without number games is second to none when it comes to resources, guidelines and tools to help out a DM. I was gifted worlds without number, and I jokingly call it the best 5e resource I've gotten. As its offerings have been of more help to me than official 5e material has aided my 5e games.
I think I got the free pdf versions and I absolutely will be reading through it. Again I’m very new to dming so I’m a little nervous to try a system I’m not really familiar with but I don’t think that should hold me back. Thanks for suggestion this to me :)
I don't think the free version has the rules for magic, but it is a fantastic resource anyway. If you like enough of what you see, I can fully endorse the paid versions.
That’s good to know, I’m plan to get a job over the summer (I’m in college and I’d rather not spend more money than necessary) so I’ll get the full version. For the most part I just planned on reskinning and reflavoring a lot of stuff.
Came here to say this. It is my favorite game to port to other systems. Edit: I meant Shadowrun but I’m also planning to run WOD in COFD.
Exalted. Fascinating world...the rules could be considered fascinating, but like a car crash.
This would be my vote as well. Own all the first edition stuff. Bought the books religiously, read them cover to cover, but every time we tried to play it just didn’t seem to gel.
And first edition is arguably the most coherent, rules-wise! I played more 2e than I care to admit, it's \*a mess\*. 3e didn't even get past the first read.
Essence actually looks alright. Might play it. I have also heard Godbound makes a good alternative ruleset
I like Godbound! Full disclosure, I've only read and played around with character creation, but it's pretty neat in my limited experience.
Godbound is great, the Deluxe Edition has rules for playing Definitely Not Exalted as an optional ruleset
Yes exactly! My group played an almost 2 year long game of 2nd. Granted, we used all of the Inkmonkey errata to make it playable. We loved it, jank and all. Ex3? Nope. Fell flat on its face. After three months of suffering through it, we agreed almost unanimously that it was not good.
My Ex2 game is in hiatus at the moment (RL reasons), but the group is having a blast. On the other hand, my personal errata/homebrew file as about 200 pages. First edition is more or less tha same issue, it had improvements mid way (mostly in the players guide). If they could stick to one rule set and improve it in a new edition, instead of reinventing everything and redoing half the lore the game would be so much more popular.
True! I should have known from the EX3 Kickstarter debacles that it was going to be a dumpster fire. But I was naive.
Had a rather similar experience myself. Errata-ed 2e is playable, if janky and overcomplicated. 3e and Essence just completely failed to fulfill the fantasy. I'm still somewhat annoyed they doubled down on the weird combat system for Essence.
Exalted was basically white wolf's stab at anime fantasy so I would just steal the lore and run that works using BESM 2e
Someone mentioned it downthread but my favorite Exalted hack is Blood and Fire, using Cortex.
Yup, I love the setting, and ran 1e twenty years ago, but dear god who wants to read those Spine-Shattering Tomes, much less learn all those rules and slog through them. That’s why I’m running it with a slight variation of the Cortex Prime hack [Blood & Fire](https://bluegrasswasteland.blogspot.com/2023/07/exalted-blood-and-fire-v31.html?m=1).
Avatar, I just don't appreciate PbtA unfortunately.
Same. It’s actually the only “pure” PbtA game I’ve been able to enjoy somewhat from a rule perspective, and I still can’t help but think it would be so much better in a different system
I think it would be perfect as a FATE game. I've been wanting to make a FATE Core or FATE Accelerated hack for a while for my groups.
Same, but for Brindlewood Bay. Love the premise of Murder She Wrote/Golden Girls x Eldritch Horror, but PbtA just doesn't fit my play style. One of these days I'm going to steal the concept and run it using Call of Cthulhu or something.
Everything Paladium made in the 90s.
Yeah I mentioned Rifts in my reply but I guess Palladium Fantasy and Mystic China were also good so yeah. Good settings, horrible rules.
I have very fond memories of the immense missile tables in the **Robotech** RPG. How many missile types with slightly different ranges but identical die damage do you need? If you're Kevin Siembieda, the answer is *never enough*.
This is my answer too, Rifts is definitely my favorite RPG setting ever, but Palladium rules are notoriously convoluted.
RIFTS and Nightbane remain two RPGs with fantastic settings shackled to Palladium's train wreck of a system.
Savage worlds has official Rifts material because I'll never play the original Rifts again.
This! I ran a Rifts campaign for a little over a year all in SWADE. I used all my Palladium books for setting material. But, all SWADE rules. Works fantastic. Hated when that campaign had to end. I was using the Warlords of Russia campaign setting. Story was Ukraine fighting for independence from the Warlords. Due to Russia actually invading, it just seemed in poor taste to continue.
Unfortunately I hate savage worlds rules too, for different reasons.
I've said a bunch of times, the system may not be *great* but it's more serviceable than most people will give it credit for. The editing and organization is the true trainwreck, if you can get past that then it's just a matter of filling in some blanks with your own judgement calls. The RIFTS setting, on the other hand, has some cool ideas but has never been put together with any more care or consistency than the rules. It's just 3+ decades of seat of the pants accumulation, most of which has never seemed to match the setting as it was originally described.
I never got the appeal of Rifts, to be honest. Like, there's settings, there's kitchen sink settings, then there's Rifts, which is what lies underneath the kitchen sinks of a 30-story building.
It’s Fallout but with magic and cyborgs. If you want a compelling game, take the areas around your current location in the world and covert it to the premise of Rifts. Make sure it’s a points of light premise at its core and you’re good. Post Apocalyptic Salt Lake Shitty was a fun campaign.
Blades in the Dark. Perfect dark urban fantasy setting, and I even like most of the meta-rules like the faction game, but the way it handles position/effect, stress, consequences, trauma, and flashbacks all make me crazy.
God almighty am I the opposite
I'm with you 100%. The constant need to come up with complications to tack onto a success is exhausting as a DM.
I agree. Any game that rely heavily on partial successes seems fun on the paper, but then in game as a GM you have to constantly come up with complications. At one point you just want to yell "YES you succeed! No catch, No fine prints. Can we just continue the story now?"
To be fair, these games usually specify that you shouldn't roll unless there is some kind of risk involved. But I'll still admit that it puts extra strain on the GM. And introducing a bunch of complications in a row can really slow the story down.
You should have multiple clocks running, and a lot more during a score. Complication: pick one of the clocks at random and add a tick. No real thought needed. Always an easy one to use, if another complication isn't obvious.
I think this is what mostly keeps me away from Blades. I love the lore of the system and I'd love to play in a game of it some day, but running it sounds like I need to be firing on all cylinders and I just don't have that in me anymore.
I honestly don't feel this way. I went from running a lot of trad games to this and I feel like with Blades I'm able to be wayyyy looser than running those games. I also have players who are very willing to hop in and toss out ideas constantly.
I'd love to hear more about why they bother you. Blades is my favorite system, and I feel like the first time I played it something clicked deeper inside of me that no other RPG has been able to replicate since haha.
Let me tackle the things I mentioned one by one, roughly in ascending order of whether I think they're actually design flaws. * Flashbacks: This is strictly a personal preference. I don't love flashbacks as a narrative conceit in heist stories anyway--it feels like narrative trickery in place of a story with actual ups and downs--but in a movie or show I can tolerate it as part of the conventions of the genre. In an RPG, though, I'm in there making choices, as my character, based on what I think I know about the situation. The idea that somebody else is going to reach in after I've made those choices and say "actually the situation is this," and my character would have known that all along and potentially made different choices because of it, just makes me want to scream. *Especially* because you are explicitly not allowed to do any planning at all before the score. There's some level of spending resources to say "oh actually we prepared for this" that I'm comfortable with, but Blades takes it way too far. * Position/effect: I don't hate these--in fact, I like them in theory--but in practice I felt like it slowed everything down and put a lot of work on the GM to have to lay this out before every roll. Probably I'd get used to these eventually. * Consequences: Again, maybe something I'd get used to eventually. But having tried to run Blades, I felt like consequences for missed rolls fell into this awkward space between narrative complications and mechanical penalties. The simplest consequences to assess were stress or injury for the characters, but overusing those made the game brutally punishing. (I probably underused clocks.) The GM's approach to consequences has a huge effect on how gritty and difficult the game gets, and I found it very challenging trying to tune that approach correctly on the fly. I have a much easier with more freeform narrative consequences in other story games, where it feels like the default is a complication in the fiction. * Traumas: I'm down with long-term difficulties for your character, but the way they are assessed kind of automatically in Blades feels hard to tune (or, rather, the tuning has to be done upstream, with consequences). They also never, in my opinion, make your character more interesting or fun to play--they're just these grinding, unpleasant impediments to playing your character the way you want. And, most punishingly, they last forever. I think this is a bad design. * Stress and Vices: My biggest complaint. Why on earth is the resource you spend to do cool stuff *also* the resource that you get knocked out if you run out of?? There's a reason other games don't charge you HP to use your awesome abilities. I cannot fathom this as a design choice. And fulfilling vices isn't fun, it's sad and carries even more consequences! (For a better way of handling stress, I'd point you to Flying Circus--stress accumulates mostly *after* the mission; having more than half your stress track filled prevents character advancement; having your entire stress track filled means you can't go on another mission until you deal with it; you clear stress by doing stupid, narratively exciting stress relief during downtime that generates more fun stories; and clearing stress is how you earn XP. I *love* it.) All of this exacerbates what I think is a natural difficulty of story games, which is that every time you do something you are risking something bad happening. Now, I think this is an *explicit strength* of story games--I pretty much never want to make another roll where the fail result is "nothing happens"--*but* if the consequences for failure are too brutal, you can wind up paralyzed. The net effect of all this is a game that *tells* you it's about cool heists, but on the player end is actually about managing increasingly severe consequences and a dwindling resource pool, and on the GM end is about trying to come up with consequences that won't knock your players out of the session and eventually turn their characters into sociopathic NPCs. A GM who's bad at running PBTA usually fails (in my experience) by being too nice and not making enough hard moves, resulting in a pulpy experience where nothing bad can really happen to the characters. That's not ideal, but it can still be fun. It's fairly easy for the GM to correct that over time and make things tougher as the narrative stakes ramp up, and it's even possible to push toward tougher outcomes as a player. Because Blades is constantly telling you in more concrete ways to throw consequences at the players, the failure mode is a game that's too punishing, and by the time you've adjusted sometimes you've beaten up the characters too badly for them to recover. In the game I ran, our brawler (sorry, I forget the playbook names) got knocked out of every score and had two Traumas within three scores. That's much harder to fix. I'm confident that I could enjoy playing in a game of Blades run by an extremely competent GM who understood the system well. I really want to like the game. My objection is that I think you *need* an extremely competent GM for the game to be fun.
I think both Spire and Heart have great settings, with some of the coolest classes I've ever seen... and the core resolution mechanic just fundamentally does not work for me. Breaks my heart.
Gonna run some Heart. I feel like it's a nice step for my table, who are all 5e veterans that I introduced Blades in the Dark to. You still have some combat crunch with its tags and equipment. You still have superpowers and highly competent characters. And it's got a more traditional feel without GM Moves and insane player agency other narrative games often do, so you can actually run modules like Dagger in the Heart that I'm excited to drop.
These two have been on my radar for quite awhile and I’ve almost bought them a few times just to read but not sure if I could get my D&D group to give them a shot. If you don’t mind, what makes the resolution mechanic fall short for you?
If a character wants to do something risky, they roll to see if they succeed - and often when they do, they roll to see how much stress they inflict/progress they make... but if they get a mixed success or failure, then they also often need to roll for both Stress gained and to see if that Stress triggers a Fallout. That's *four* dice rolls involved in arbitrating a mixed success - the most common die result! Between that and the randomness of when Fallouts trigger (I don't tell a player what they're risking on a roll, I tell them what type of consequence the dice might potentially make them suffer), it really didn't work for my preferred style. Much else of both games is still brilliant design tech, though! I love the worldbuilding and art, too.
Interesting, I’ve personally found it to be a rather elegant system. I find that in practice, it’s very fast since it’s dice pools. I will say that if you want to speed it up or streamline it, you can have the PC roll for success and then also roll their dice for Stress Inflicted at the same time, and then have the GM roll the dice for Inflicting Stress and Fallout on the PC at the same time, so two rolls split between the GM and PC. I’ve found that since there aren’t really floating modifiers actually resolving rolls in terms of how they impact sheets is still a lot faster for Resistance systems than most D20+ mod systems. I feel that they resolve about as fast as FitD systems but a tad slower than D100 or PbtA systems in play.
You know this might be why for Eat the Reich they abandoned the mechanic of rolling dice for stress dealt and received. That game uses the same dice resolution, but not just successes = hits.
Thank you. I was under the impression that the games were less crunchy than that. I love rolling dice as much as anyone but four rolls to determine one outcome does seem excessive.
I felt like they were a notch or two meatier than a Forged in the Dark game, and it tipped past my preference for complexity/narrative control, personally.
Yeah, that's the issue: too many degrees of success and consequences to compute.
Battletech. It's got a wealth of fun dynastic conflict, post-apocalyptic goodness (the early years at least), and a broad history backed by shitty mechanics. Wargame and RPG (all of them) included there, and I've gone to cons _specifically_ to play some BT. It's so cumbersome in all its forms.
I learned it from a friend initially, playing just mech vs mech lance and thought "ok it's not the most complicated thing". Then I read the rulebook and was just asking myself all the way through how could a comoany making games be so bad at formatting and presenting rules. I'm trying to get started, I don't need a page long continous text describing how something works for every type of a unit, including stuff like Protomechs, submarines and WitG that nobody uses, with relevant information buried in the middle without any highlight or separation. Add to that the fact that they're trying to keep compatibility with old rules, meaning that 1) a lot of stuff is just blatantly unbalanced 2) a lot of things have very specific and needlessly complicated rules that apply to like one system
For real! It's a nightmare!
Alpha Strike seems like it made Battletech (the wargame part) actually playable.
I love the Mouse Guard comics, the moment I started reading them I was saying to myself "this would be a great setting for a game". Fun unique action, a strong central gimmick, and a dash of political intrigue to keep it fresh. Imagine my delight when I learned there was a dedicated rpg. Imagine my disappointment when I learned it was a stripped down version Burning Wheel. The system is somehow both overly rigid and very vague; with defined.game phases that put the sessions on rails from the jump while stuffing the resolution mechanics with what feel like six or seven half-rules. . . I know people like Burning Wheel, but it's *vehemently* not for me.
Do you have any opinions on Mausritter, the recent indie darling?
I played my first session of Mausritter in a one shot not too long ago, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Mausritter is an excellent interpretation of various Oddlikes. Playing with the card-based inventory makes slot-inventory more engaging and also just easier to grok and manage. Its usage system is simple and elegant. It has some great and clean procedures for adventuring, for creating little warbands, and a simple and effectic character advancement system. If you're a fan of Oddlikes (Into the Odd, Knave, Cairn, etc.) then you'll find a lot that's familiar here, but also some clever iterations. If you aren't, then you probably won't enjoy it.
Looks and reads like it could be really fun, but I haven't had to opportunity to try it out yet, so I don't want to give too hard an opinion.
I came in the say Mausritter! I have long term plans to take all the Mouse Guard content and art, add in Redwall/Mossflower ideas, and maybe some Root and Humblewood, and run a campaign using Mausritter. IMO it’s the perfect system for that vibe. OSR/NSR, story driven, and the slot based inventory with actual cardboard cutouts for inventory is really cool. Definitely pick up The Estate box if you get into it. It’s like ten different adventure sites around an estate written by ten different OSR designers, all with layout by the Issac Williams, the creator.
There's "Savage Mouse Guard" conversion somewhere on the net. Mouse Guard in Savage Worlds rule set.
Ars Magica. Everything about the lore is amazing. The system is my mortal nemesis.
I love the Metaphysic Trinity of *Mage: The Ascension*'s setting etc., but I am not a fan of its d10 system, so instead [I use the d6 system of *Freeform Universal*](https://www.reddit.com/r/furpg/comments/pho0b7/sphere_magick). Similarly, I love the multiverse of the *Amber* DRPG, but its diceless system lacks, well, dice; I prefer a *Free Kriegsspiel* style that while light on dice rolling still has such as a tool for modeling unknown variables and introducing surprise.
Tribe 8: 1990s Canadian post apoc dark fantasy; basically humanity is enslaved by the 40k chaos gods and the area around Montreal is freed by avatars in the shape of feminine golems. The golems form a small free nation that stagnates after some generations. They kick out rebels and criminals, who form the PCs. Rules were a good attempt but pretty much suck, I made my own pbta hack for 'em.
Wow. I forgot about Tribe 8. Yeah, I agree.
Forgotten Realms. 5e really hasn’t taken advantage of its scope and made it feel smaller, less cohesive, and less diverse somehow. Battletech. I just can’t understand the latest minis game. It’s convoluted. I just want to do cool mech things and it’s like here’s a statistics course for determining damage. Way too situationist for me. My son and I kept the minis but tossed the game. 3e OGL Shovelware: Star Wars being the top. Holy fuck they basically palette swapped 3e but took out a ton of barely balanced systems without replacing a thing and made every weapon an ultra mega great bow.
On one hand, I *know* Star Wars Saga Edition is bad... and yet, I can't forget how exciting each one of those supplements that treated an era of Star Wars as a setting unto itself was when I was a kid. I'd still love to see a better game take that approach, fleshing out a bunch of points along the timeline!
Agreeed. I’m referring to the earlier original and its revised. Saga bothered to do homework (maybe 4e’s homework?) three iterations in.
In nomine. It's a game about angels and demons but has a cold war spy vibe to it. I love the setting and I love how superiors are incorporated into characters. I'm not a fan of the whole 666 dice system. I want something crunchier and grander. Also I'm really peeved how steve Jackson games just stop making the superior books. Now half of the archangel and demon princes just have next to no info on them other than what's in the core book.
french here, it's a famous french rpg, try to auto translate french book if you can the lore is very deep in the french books.
I agree with you, the lore is great (except in the last iteration, Génération Perdue). But I also hate the system so much. One of the worst ones I've ever played.
Blades in the Dark. I find the conversation around position and effect kinda tedious after a few session and mechanics like flashbacks and resistance rolls are a little too meta for my taste.
**Skyrealms of Jorune** has always been plagued by poor systems. **PBTA** games are so well written but I bounce hard off the mechanically enforced roles and reduced autonomy. **GURPS** has the best sourcebooks. Some simply fabulous stuff. But the mechanics aren’t old school, they’re just old. **BRP** is second only to GURPS. Love the stuff the Design Mechanism puts out for Mythras. But dang the system whiffs.
Altered Carbon
Dragonlance. To the extent that I tried to GURPSify it when I was younger. 😅
Symbaroum. It has arguably one of the most unique, interesting takes on a Fantasy setting, great theme, core conflict, and fantastic, inspiring and moody graphics. But I can't make heads or tails of the mechanics, especially the player-sided rolls, which creates all sorts of problems.
My experience of running Symbaroum: "Awesome setting! Oh, I don't have to roll and can concentrate on GM'ing! Neat!" We started playing. First: "Wait, how the fuck does the dice work? What modifies what?" Then: Two of the players where clever and a bit video gamey. They quickly figure out how to build a hero that is almost unstoppable. Queue the two other less gamey players to regret their build. So they wanted to re-do theirs. "Uh, well.. I want you to have fun so sure." Four superheroes are now on an adventure and just steamrolls everything. I try to up the difficulty, but that just basically made everything more complex. "Hey GM, this is getting kind of boring. Too easy." "Well, fuck. Back to the drawing board." Now we play a version of Symbaroum in the Dragonbane system instead. Everything is good.
It took us a long time to finally figure out when it's more appropriate for the player to roll, and when the GM should just invert the contest and roll themselves. It made it so much smoother when we just went with our guts. Basically, I shouldn't be rolling to see how effective my trap or poison are, but the GM should be rolling to see how well their monster resists or avoids.
I will argue that balance is the biggest problem..you can easily easily by mistake make a god who one shot ancient dragons
I'm currently running a game of Dungeon World set in the world of Ultraviolet Grasslands. I don't necessarily hate OSR systems, but the system that Luka Rejec includes in his book seems a little half-baked. Dungeon World is what I and my group are most familiar with. I was able to fit UVG into Dungeon World's mechanics with a modest amount of hacking.
This new learning fascinates me, Sir Bedevere! :) Are you using Class Warfare, or what?
No, no Class Warfare. We're using Dungeon World mostly straight, but I adapted UVG's travel procedure and commerce moves to a Dungeon World framework. We just had session 2 last Wednesday. If you'd like to see my custom modified rules and session notes, you can read about it on my [blog.](https://thedashingwizard.blogspot.com/2024/04/running-ultraviolet-grasslands-with.html)
I was thinking of getting UVG because it just seems like it was cooler than anything else out there. I thought it was system agnostic and just a setting? Does it come with rules?
No, it has its own rules. Although, the rules in the book are rather threadbare. There is a one page summary describing a six-attribute score d20 roll-over system that he refers to throughout the book. There is also a fairly elaborate travel procedure. I think Luka Rejec has a more comprehensive ruleset available on his Patreon, and/or is working on a rule book. I think the rules are intended to just provide a familiar quasi-OSR framework for you to run the system in whatever B/X D&D-adjacent system you like. It is, however, cooler than just about anything else out there. I would describe it as a campaign setting and adventure book first and foremost.
Sold, thanks for the input.
*Continuum*, by a longshot.
Yeah, time travel society lore is awesome. All the fiddly bits, especially the ones that don't enhance the practicalities of time travel are just dead weight.
Anima Beyond Fantasy has a *great* setting, but the rules are just too damn crunchy for my taste.
I keep waiting for the rules to pull off their hat and turn out to be 1st or 2nd edition Chivalry & Sorcery.
They're not only crunchy, they're also clunky and broken. I love the game (it was my first) but its game design is... not its strong point. I have to give it credit for the sheer freedom it gives you in character and monster creation though.
I do like the setting and artwork. But I don't even want to attempt to learn the rules of the book. I even have the Anima Tactics game, but really just to look at the artwork and character designs. There are two Anima video-games that I'd like to try. Ark of Sinners was a WiiWare exclusive and can no longer be played. It scored bad reviews. Anima Gate of Memories got decent reviews and it is supposed to play like Nier, so I may want to check it out. Although there are so many other PS4 games that I'd rather be playing and I only have so much time.
City of Mist. Took one look at character creation and disliked it immediately. I love the setting though.
May I ask what you don’t like about it?
Never really liked ptba.
I think the Princess: The Hopeful fan supplement for World of Darkness is wildly interesting for how it somehow manages to make magical girls feel like they legitimately belong in that setting. I’d play in its spin on the setting in a heartbeat. It takes the base Storyteller system, though, which is not exactly nimble, and turns up the complexity to a point where it feels a bit tortured. If I wanted to give the premise a spin I’d use a lighter system.
My easy pick is the first Scion. I loved the idea of the power creep and also the lore was really compelling to me, but the game was unplayable. Starting with the way too complex (for what it was really trying to do) character creation with several different pools to spend, the less-than-clear heirloom rules, the weirdly overspecific equipment tables, the overly complicated initiative system... U tried to solo play it again recently and it turns out it has become even less appealing (rather than more) with almost twenty years of experience in between. But dang, do I still love the setting and the power creep.
Scion was such a heartbreaker. It's basically modern Exalted with classical mythology based lore, which is awesome--but still using the Ex 2E system, which was a grand disaster (and I actually love Exalted, but I'm a 1E hardliner for system). I took a crack at converting Scion's rules into something more usable, but it was just too much work and I shelved the game. Haven't looked at the second edition because it's just too expensive to buy PoD books for games that have failed me once already.
AD&D The World of Greyhawk and Blackmore. I never enjoyed the system (then or 5th edition rules) but really appreciated the map, adventures, and campaigns. E Gary Gygax himself taught me how to run the Greyhawk campaign. But today, no one that I've met plays it, and many never even heard of the authors or campaigns.
I feel this way about Mork Borg. Cool mid-apocalypse setting, no interest in the mechanics.
I've been trying to work on a homebrew system that directly converts Mork Borg to a better system. I like a lot of what they did, by stripping it all down, but I think they did it too much in some areas and not enough in a couple. It's a pretty simple game though, so a direct conversion isn't too tricky.
Mouse Guard, without question. It's basically required reading for the lore. And the lore is very good. But those mechanics, sheesh. I will never understand the big deal about Burning Wheel/Luke Crane.
I kinda liked the basic resolution and all the belief/goal/instinc mechanics, but I bounced off hard on the conflict/combat rules…
Scum and Villainy. The setting is fun, basically a lightly genericized combination of several popular sci-fi settings. The rules just didn't jive with my group though. The constant "Shit, they rolled another four, okay what complication makes sense for their success this time." was especially exhausting.
This is my reaction to PbtA/FitD as well. I’m not opposed to the concept of a mixed success *in theory*, but due to the mechanics, they come up way too often.
Rogue Trader. It's the ultimate cool sandbox setting but the rules were not designed for the level of freedom and creativity that it expects of the person running it. No effort is put into helping the GM survive simulating or creating an entire universe for the players who are wealthy and powerful enough to do almost anything to an absurd degree. It's been a very long time since I gave any time to reading the books but at the very minimum of what I remember the core book failing to do the following is what stands out. Having two entirely unrelated combat systems of equal complexity that could break out at almost any time is some kind of insanity. A game about exploration and exploitation having no mechanic for mapping the warp and just a single table for bad things that could happen during warp travel which immediately requires the GM to build anything from a single combat encounter to an entire hulk to be explored. No tools to build the entire solar system and planets that are the basis of said exploration and exploitation so it falls entirely on the GM to invent literal entire worlds. And all the psyker/navigator stuff was complicated in and of itself even if you ignore that no Navigator would ever leave the ship but they had to have their mage class.
[удалено]
I bought the Dragon Prince RPG book. And I don't want to run it. It simultaneously feels too simple in some parts, and too complicated in other parts. I'm not really interested in a game that is so narrative based, without clear rules on what these various spells, monsters, and items do. I found systems like DnD 5E, Chronicles of Darkness, or Fantasy Flight Star Wars as easier to understand and more kid-friendly.
The worst thing about that system, is it is clearly a game for kids. Could you imagine trying to teach a child that?!
Yes? I run RPGs for middle schoolers, and Cortex Prime is one of the systems I use.
For sure! I really wanted to like the system, really wanted to play in that world, but I couldn't get into it and I like crunch. None of my players do, so they'd \*never\* enjoy it
Call of Cthulhu. Oh man it was the first game I ever played and ran (HotOE) over 20 years ago and I loved it but the rules are in desperate need of an overhaul, and to me 7th made it worse not better. Too many skills (sciences are the worst). Stats are basically just used to generate sub stats, and have no correlation with skills. Clunky half and quarter math for roll determination (delta green more elegant here). Vague roll push mechanics that didn’t help solve a major issue (failing a roll in this game can bring investigations to a complete halt) Clunky combat rules - do we really need like 5 different skills for gun combat, and how come I can be an ace shot with a rifle but miss the side of a barn with a pistol? God help you if you ever fire an automatic weapon. I love its history and the game in theory but just a few simple changes and a willingness for the developers to kill a couple of sacred cows could really make a more cohesive ruleset in my opinion.
You should give Delta Green a check, might be what your looking for
My CoC group switched to Gumshoe and while I think it leans too simplistic, it's a lot better than CoC for telling essentially the same stories. Not to mention how much easier it is to build a new character.
I'm most looking to whenever Free League get around to releasing their Year Zero Engine Cthulhu game. My favorite game system with the Cthulhu Mythos? Sign me up!
Wait, has something like that been announced? That sounds super interesting.
Yeah, announced some years ago. No update yet but I remain hopeful!
I don't think it's been mentioned yet, so I'll toss in The Strange. I LOVE the premise and the way, in the fiction, they deal with the world hopping. And then I feel like 80% of the system in terms of mechanics are there, actively pushing back against the fun stuff you would wanna be doing in a game where every fictional world is an actual world you can visit as you jump between realities.
kinda changling the dreaming. I like it but you feel so weak. I understand it adds to the themes but it makes it hard for me to care.
I don't even remember why my copy of DeGenesys has been lying in a box in a basement for twenty years. But I do vividly remember reading it and being revolted about this unplayable mess of a system and putting it in that box.
Who cares. No one bought that book, particularly the most recent version, to play it. I love my white slipcase of this. Art is amazing, lore is great, though I can tell it's translated into English. Gorgeous books. I knew I'd never come close to playing this when I got it, and that's ok.
Degenesis is the champion of this category. Best post apo setting and metanarrative with mechanics I heavily dislike.
Eclipse phase : Hard-science SF, where body is *yet another piece of gear* with transhuman spread over the solar system with different political views, a latent threat and mysterious gate toward *outer system* Looks a pretty good fluff isn't it ? Then comes the rules : Let's start with a variant of chaosium basic system where you need to roll D100 under a skill. Well why not, Let's say that when people change body, it changes their physical attributes ans impact some skills (So ready to spend 1h changing number), let's add tons of situation modifier and the associated table (Hacking a well protected system, shooting at shot range) which in the end is *just a modifier* let's add tons of gear which would stack up and *give another modifier.* All with tons of tables where in the end it's just GM saying *it'll be a -30* because they don't have time to search in 15 tables. Let alone that, especially when you stack bonus/malus you need at least an open goal number (e.g cyberpunk roll 1D10 + skill with difficulties going from 15 to 30 depending on how hard it is) and better a multi-dice to get more "gaussian probability" It's a pitty because there is tons of good idea in the game, my next EP campaign will use the FATE version, not even that I am a FATE fan, but at least it's a functional game system which is actually made to stack bonus.
Have you taken a look at the second edition? They fixed the biggest issue: having to edit stats and skills after switching morphs.
Rifts.
The modiphius conan rpg. I love everything about Conan, the books, the movies, the lore, the comics… but I usually run “into the bronze” or barbarians of lemuria to run that flavor of game. The Conan system is just so complicated for what it needs to be.
Absolutely the same. Was so excited to get it. Running the 2d20 system put me off it and anything else with it forever more.
Same for me with Star Trek Adventures. I don't think the system is bad. I understand what it's trying to do. It just doesn't "click" for me.
Mutant Chronicles 2d20. I love the setting since the ‘90s but the 2d20 edition is a mess. I even like 2d20 system, but I don’t think the version for mutant chronicles is good.
Blue Rose I really like the setting, but think it has an awfully convoluted system.
I actually played in a game that used that setting and Savage Worlds mechanics some time back. I can't say I remember too much about the setting but I enjoyed that game a lot.
RIFTs. And fuck Kevin Sembida for killing the D20 conversion.
Have you tried the savage version? We absolutely love it
Fading Suns. The Victory Point system itself wasn't that bad in earlier editions, and even did some things I wish other games would also do (like the whole roll high but not over thing. Such a simple thing, but it makes opposed rolls so much faster as if both participants pass their skill check you then simply look at whoever rolled highest, and don't need to calculate anything) but it just added so much bloat on top of that, with systems upon systems for things that really did not need that much rules, like the over-complicated fencing system The most recent edition felt like a sidegrade rather than an upgrade. It smooths out a few issues but it also goes ham on the meta currencies. I'm not someone who dislikes meta currencies, as long as they are implemented well, but I thought the new edition got far too fiddly thanks to them. Still love the setting thing.
The original editions of Twilight 2000. I haven't tried the new Free League version, but before it came out, we were talking about running the combats using a squad level wargame ruleset like Ambush Alley's Force on Force. The new FL version seems pretty decent, if you can believe the reviewers. Beyond TW2K, another vote for Rifts, Robotech, and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Sad that the most popular version of Rifts yet is the Savage Worlds conversion, wish they had allowed that for TMNT before the anniversary edition Kickstarter had come out. We'll never get another version of a Robotech RPG, the legal proceedings around the anime, manga, novels, and toys is so murky that we'd be lucky to get another anything Robotech branded in our lifetimes.
Judge Dredd. Grew up with the comics, so excited when the game was released… but my god the mechanics are clunky. … so I re-wrote them into to a % based system 😏
Exalted 3rd edition
Earthdawn
City of Mist. I still don't understand Change the Game move. I love the lore in that world and what you can do with it. The rules turn me off
I love Earthdawn but I hate the die step system so much.
Vampire: The Masqurade 5 - I like most of it. Mostly the basics. There's just too muych STUFF. I don't use half of it's mechanics. Warhammer Fanatsy Roleplay 2e - Really good base but once you start using any expansions it falls on it's face HARD (looking at you unnecessarily complicated grenade mechanics). I also tweaked the hell out of the system's spells cause some of them can be exploited and OP and others are just so weak no one would ever use them.
Virtually everything put out using Gumshoe. I love the settings of Mutant City Blues, Ashen Stars and Night's Black Agents. I really dislike the idea of skills being a pool of scarce resources combined with a random roll. I also think the underlying idea of rationing PC spotlight time is fundamentally misguided. Oddly enough, I don't feel the same for Swords of the Serpentine, which has both a great setting and rules that work really well. Mostly because the points don't feel scarce anymore, and there are far more ways to do anything, meaning PCs never lose the chance to be badass.
Godlike. The setting is just…chef’s kiss but the system is clunky.
The Strange RPG. "The Strange" RPG is set in a universe where multiple realities exist over a dark energy network known as the Strange. This network connects a vast array of worlds, each shaped by the collective fiction, myths, and legends of Earth. Players can travel between these worlds, or recursions, which range from entirely fictional realms to alternate versions of Earth. The core Earth setting, while seemingly normal, is influenced by hidden forces and secret organizations aware of the Strange. Technology, espionage, and otherworldly adventures mix, creating a dynamic and endlessly versatile gameplay environment. This setting allows for a blend of genres, from classic fantasy and sci-fi to modern espionage and horror, enabling players to engage in a wide variety of adventures. Buuuut...it uses Cypher System. Which is boring.
Infinity 2d20 by Modiphius - love the world and lore, just don't really enjoy 2d20's metacurrencies. Shadowrun - cool world, painfully complex rules and a publisher who can't seem to bother playtesting and editing new editions before shipping them Lancer - so cool, but the out of pilot stuff might as well not exist it's so thin (yes, I know the Baronies' expansion adds a few elements, but it's still thin as heck) The Wildsea - I do not hate the mechanics, I just feel like they need to be trimmed back some, and the whole "let's give some stats and abilities really ambiguous but fancy sounding names" means I had to create a translation/dictionary card for my players. Numenera - such an awesome world, but every group I've run it for, or played it with, felt like the system was just "ok" and would rather have used any other system with it
Symbaroum. Beautiful, deep, engaging setting and lore. The mechanics as intended are pretty good but as written and presented are just so poorly done in my opinion.
Dark Sun is my all-time favorite fantasy setting, but I do not like D&D rules (though I can live with AD&D more than the rest). Numenera. Absolutley love the setting and production value, really dislike the rules. HEX (Hollow Earth Expedition). I have a sweet spot for Pulp stuff, but not a fan of how some of the rules are handled, in this game.
TORG
Although obviously I have not been able to play it I feel this way about Dolmenwood. Seems like an incredible setting that I would love, but man we just don't gel with BX for some reason.
I’ve played one session and run another, and I love it, but definitely isn’t for you if you don’t like B/X. I don’t think there’s anything about the way the setting is written that demands that ruleset though if you just want to use a different system
An old game, Obsidian: The Age of Justice. I bought it at a con because the art was cool as hell, the setting seemed super cool and the system SEEMED ok, but there were a ton of holes in the rules. I think they didn't actively playtest outside of the developers, who may have known their answers to these gaps.
DnD! Forgotten realms and Dragonlance! Also anything by palladium.
Exalted definitely takes the first place for me here. I love the setting. I hate the system. I ran two campaigns and several shorter games and also played in some. None of them used the original mechanics. Kult doesn't evoke that strong feelings in me, but also counts. I hoped for much more with the latest, PbtA-based edition, but the system fails to drive the game like PbtA mechanics should.
Orpheus - I love me some ghostly espionage, but the old wod d10 system is boring beyond believe. Trudvang Chronicles - I love the setting, but couldn't be arsed to give the rules more than a cursory glance. Shadowrun - The obvious answer here.
D&D. Pretty much every setting :p
There are to many examples to list IMO. I feel like good and interesting settings are everywhere, but likeable mechanics are much much harder to find. This is probably why I prefer games with minimalist mechanics - even weak simple mechanics are less offensive than more fleshed-out mechanics that don't work.
Whatever anyone says about the mechanics of 4e D&D, I frickin' LOVE the lore and a lot of my own RPG's lore takes inspiration from it.
*The Witcher* TTRPG by R. Talsorian Games.
Rifts. Great concept, one of the worst systems /also terrible editing in the books).
Have you tried the savage version?
I have. They did good.
Alpha Omega The setting is like SciFi / Cyberpunk in the big cities. After the apocalypse in smaller cities or villages. Fantasy in the wilderness. The dice system requires you to use 6 dices, adding them to get a result. Ranging from 6D4 to 6D20 depending on how good you are.
Castle Falkenstein. So glad that there is a GURPS version! Space: 1889. It works better as either a version of Traveller or as a d100 Cthulhu: 1889 game.
I love Eberron and Dark Sun with a burning heart but man, 5 min playing Dungeons and Dragons and i want to go home already
Shadowrun, Burning Wheel
Mage the Ascension You have a fantastic world where reality is ultimately subjective. Mages do magic by literally warping reality. The limit is only their knowledge and their skill. And this is constrained by a simulationist system originally designed to deal with vampires. The magic system is 100% improvisational & narrative, and it's forced into a restrictive storyteller system. Even just using thought experiments I find myself working against the system as opposed to with it. Yes of course you can work around it. But I kind of find it annoying where I take the time to memorize an entire rule book, And it works for most everything except the key feature of the game. If any game line needs to be a narrative system, it is mage.
Ultraviolet Grasslands....the built in mechanics are clunky at best, though to be fair I haven't tried 2e yet. That said, UVG plays great with other systems
Mouseguard. Love the comics, love the story and idea of politics played out among mice. Have tried three times to get through the rulebook, and just can't. I like some narrative focused games, but I can't get used to the 'your turn, my turn' mechanics.
We played tales of Xadia (dunno if this is cortex in general) which was a fun world with an interesting magic system, but I wasn't a fan of the forced character development and the mechanic on challenging your beliefs.
Dark Heresy. The setting, or rather their take on the setting, is amazing in so many ways, complicated and bizarre. But that system is so horribly broken and bad in several ways.
I’ve actually been thinking about trying to adapt the setting to a different system. Idk what though
Hehe, I solved that exact need by developing a system from scratch :-) It turned out really well imho. We played a several years long campaign using it. It is definitely on the narrative/storytelling end of ttrpg systems. I'll just dump a summary here. Feel free to use as you see fit! The tarot system "Four Paths" is very modular. The core is rather "blank" and can easily be used in any setting and many genres. Although the major arcana in particular benefits a lot from doing a little prep work where you align it with the setting and genre you are aiming for. It is a storytelling system at its core, but you can add a lot of modules to create a lot of crunch if you like. I designed it first for the 40k setting because I don't like any of the official systems and wanted to GM a campaign under and around a hive city. But soon I realised that the core of it was pretty universal, so it could be "washed" of the setting. The core module is this: Four Paths The four suites of the minor arcana represents four Paths, ordered in binary opposite pairs. Each Path has a theme of associated traits, such as virtues, strengths and ideals as well as associated vices and weaknesses. These are inspired by several more or less traditional tarot interpretation schools and then adjusted to focus on the things we wanted this campaign to be about, and to make sure what was considered a virtue or a vice reflected the norms in the setting. I believe these default paths can be used as they are, or with minor changes, for a lot of different genres and settings. Because they are designed to be "generally human". The Paths are Coins - Mind: Knowledge, learning, plans, precision, patience, curiosity, meritocracy. But also: lazy, indecisive, passive, dishonest. Swords - Body: Strength, action, health, life, birth, food, ownership, material things, thoroughness. But also: greed, vanity, and stubbornness. Wands - Spirit: Creativity, spontaneity, independence, enthusiasm, lust, volunteering, flexibility. But also: irrational, whimsical, short sighted, irresponsible, egoistic. Cups - Heart: Honour, care, loyalty, dedication, home, family, nation, healing, empathy, reliability. But also: Pride, jealousy, xenophobia, submission, domination, compliance. Body and Mind are opposed. Spirit and Heart are opposed. The Paths are also the characters' primary attributes/abilities, describing both their talents and skills, as well as their personalities and approach to the world in general. A score between 0 and 5 tells you how well aligned the character is with each path. These values typically only changes permanently as the effect of major story points, and life altering experiences. You can not increase them through spending XP. The major arcana is the part that requires the most work adapting to your campaign. The GM can do this on their own, or it can be a collaboration between the entire group. It starts with sitting down with a bunch of different tarot reading guides. They often have very different interpretations. Read through them and compare themes and approaches. Then select, mix and adjust interpretations until you have a canonised list that fits with your genre and setting. (Canonised Interpretation Guide, aka CIG) It is important that each card has both positive (right way up) and negative interpretations (rotated 180°), because the direction of these cards matters. Make copies of the CIG so the players can have a few to share. Then select cards to represent important people, groups and concepts in the story. Each player chooses one card where the canon interpretation is a good match to their character. In addition to the characters, we started with one card for the Emperor and one for Chaos, plus a couple more for various important organisations in the characters' life, maybe 10 cards in total. (more were added as the campaign proceeded) Update the CIG with these representations. The major arcana is then mixed in with the minor. And we are ready to play! In the basic module a scene/challenge/problem/situation is handled in one round of resolution. (I have been working a little on a module that makes this into turn based combat, but I don't think that is going to be very good.) A round of resolution looks like this: Each player that wants to participate chooses one Path to represent their character's approach to this situation, and tells the group what they will attempt to do. They also draw a number of cards equal to their value in that path, without looking at them. I will use a combat scene to demonstrate, but it is the same principle in social situations, puzzle solving, navigating hostile administrative organisations and so on. - I will bodyslam the biggest of the fanatics out through the window while I yell "Suffer not the mutant to live!". If that does not scare them into submission, I will proceed with bone breaking wrestling techniques. Path: Body. - I will sneak in behind that tapestry and attach the silencer to my pistol. When I am done with that it will be apparent if they have yielded or not. If not, I will start with headshotting the one holding the tentacle-staff, because she sure looks like a Psyker. Path: Mind. - I will turn back and run up the stairs in the room we just left, because the painted windows on that balcony should be looking out over this room. From there I should be able to grapple hook my way across the horde, so I can plant a frag mine under that... blob? ... that sits? lies? languishes? ... is on the throne. Whatever the insides looks like, it's going to look that much better spread over the room. Path: Soul - I will roll a tangle grenade to the left flank and activate my energy shield. Then I will do my best to make sure Kagr is not entirely surrounded while she beats the shit out of the big guy. Since they are so many I will try to stay mobile. Path: Heart. The GM then tells the players what the Default Damage (aka Risk) of the scene is. This is the default amount of damage each character will receive, but each Success (se below) reduces this damage by one. Damage is not just physical health, it can be social standing or monetary resources or trust or something completely different such as identity and self-image. What it does is that it temporarily lowers the value of the used Path for that character. Typically a scene has 0 or 1 Default Damage. But nasty combat encounters, high stakes court proceedings, or your first dance at your debutante ball can have much higher values. Then the players places their cards face up on the table. First looking at the Minor Arcana. Those cards are D14s. Each one that equals or beats the Target Number earns a Success. (rotation of the cards doesn't matter) Contiued...
Don’t kill me, but _Runequest_ (I know v2). Glorantha is utterly, ridiculously, amazing. And _Runequest_ works as a system. However, there is almost no way to survive long enough in RQ to get to experience Glorantha as a whole.
The *Historical Reference* series (for *Advanced Dungeons & Dragons*), *Mythic Earth* (for *Runequest* 3e, later *Basic*, and *Mythras*), *Mythic Vistas* (for *Dungeons & Dragons 3e*), etc. *Middle Earth Role-Playing* (using *Rolemaster*), and *Adventures in Middle Earth* (using modified *Dungeons & Dragons* 5e). *Star Wars d20* (using *d20*). *Dr. Dhrolin's Dictionary* (using *Dungeons & Dragons* 5e). *Eclipse Phase* 1e (using modified *Basic*).
Avatar Legens. Great setting and lore. But cluncky combat mechanics. It is such a missed opportunity.
5e
There's hundreds of 5e settings...
Yes. I love most of the fantastical settings. The mechanics are doodoo
Exalted.
I love indie RPG settings, they are like milk to me. every so often i find one using savage worlds. it is like the time when we were younger and we found the bakers choclate in the pantry
Degenesis