# Worst RPG Ever?



## JacktheRabbit (Mar 24, 2002)

So what is it? What is the worst RPG you have ever played or even just read the rules on?

My personal worst has to be the Robotech game by same guy that did the Rifts games.

Talk about horrible rules. They just sucked through and through and it didnt stop there. Palladium must have hired Hellen Keller as their only editor because they never seemed to catch ANY mistakes made in the books.


----------



## RogueJK (Mar 24, 2002)

IIRC, the general consensus among most gamers is that the worst RPG ever is "World of Synnibarr" by Raven McCraken.


----------



## ThenHeCame (Mar 24, 2002)

5th age fate deck

No Dice = Sin


----------



## hong (Mar 24, 2002)

Senzar?
Spawn of Fashan?


----------



## Ranger REG (Mar 24, 2002)

Worst RPG? WEG's _Star Wars_ RPG. Played it with my friends but never bought the rulebook and am glad. I got sick and tired of the "bucket o dice" system after the first session. Why I continue to play it despite my friends liking it and I have nothing to do once a week is beyond me.

But that's me. I like _Robotech_ RPG but don't like _Rifts._


----------



## Zappo (Mar 24, 2002)

I have never played bad RPGs. I can smell them before playing with a couple of quick questions about key points in the rules and setting. I'm not saying that I can judge any game in five minutes, but if it is a real stinker I can tell it quickly.

However, there's this Ancestry RPG I played at a con. It's a fantasy RPG. It's got a lot of races, a decent magic system, good fighting rules, and is skill-based. What's wrong with it? Uhm, the total lack of flavor.

The first thing I ask when I am confronted with a fantasy system that doesn't seem to have anything special is "Why should I play this instead of D&D"?

When I asked the author, he started talking about how his system fixed all the mistakes in AD&D. This immediately made me peery. Most of the problems he pointed had already been fixed by 3e, and others (like the unrealistic AC and HP rules and the alignments) I actually consider some of the things that make D&D fun.

But the thing that made me even more suspicious was that he spouted a string of "fixes to D&D" and didn't bother telling me what his game had of special, or if it had an interesting setting. The back cover stated things like "300 spells! 15 races! Infinite monsters thanks to hybridomancy!" and such.

I played it all the same, 'cause the D&D tables were all already taken, and as I expected it was a nice fantasy system, just like thousands of others, without anything special or interesting about it. The demo adventure was a dungeon crawl.

It did have some good bits, like the "scalable" combat system - it had three levels of hit location precision, each balanced against the others, allowing you to play it like D&D or like GURPS or like something in between. Eg. you could aim to the enemy and just deal HP, or aim to his head and deal HP and stun rounds, or aim to his eye and deal HP, blindness, and bleeding damage for some rounds.

But in the end, it's still a wizard, a fighter, a rogue and a cleric wandering through a cave complex and massacring monsters.


----------



## Zappo (Mar 24, 2002)

Aw, and WEG star wars is the worst _system_ I've ever played, but the setting of course saved it.


----------



## EOL (Mar 24, 2002)

Man that's a tough one, generally even a really bad RPG has some saving graces.

Now I'm not sure if this even reached the critical mass to be called an RPG, but in connection with the Dark Sword Series (by Weis and Hickman) a paperback set of rules was published as a supplement or something like that.

At first it seemed cool, but the mechanics completely broke down in about the first 5 seconds.  I realize that it wasn't positioned as a full-fledged RPG, but it ended up being so bad I wonder why it was published at all.  Anybody else come across that book?


----------



## Eryx (Mar 24, 2002)

I would have to say _Paranoia_. That game was awful.


----------



## JacktheRabbit (Mar 24, 2002)

I disagree the WEG Starwards game at least worked and the rules were decent. The problem was their lack of decent research into the movies.

Also the other problem was the very fact that it is Star Wars. In the Star Wars movie everyone eventually feels useless once the party Jedi hits a certain level of strength.




			
				Zappo said:
			
		

> *Aw, and WEG star wars is the worst system I've ever played, but the setting of course saved it. *


----------



## Moon_Goddess (Mar 24, 2002)

F.A.T.A.L.


----------



## JPL (Mar 24, 2002)

I saw that Dark Sword...looked none too good, as I recall.  Interesting setting, at least until Book III...

I bought but never played "Men in Black".  Just sort of stoopid.  I thought it did a poor job capturing the flavor of the movie.

I have several GURPS sourcebooks (Cliffhangers 2ed is preordered), but I do not like the looks of the game system, and I doubt I'll ever play it.

Just for the record --- Marvel SAGA?  Good game.  Fast and loose, and excellent at modeling the conventions of comic books.


----------



## Crothian (Mar 24, 2002)

DocMoriartty said:
			
		

> *I disagree the WEG Starwards game at least worked and the rules were decent. The problem was their lack of decent research into the movies.
> 
> Also the other problem was the very fact that it is Star Wars. In the Star Wars movie everyone eventually feels useless once the party Jedi hits a certain level of strength.
> 
> ...




That's why we never allowed Jedi in the group.   

Champions, i think that's what it's called.  Way to complicated.  Took hourse to crete the super hero and then the system seemed all buggy.

Edit: Had the name wrong, it was Champions not Hero System.  Something a guy at college introduced to us.  After that one night we never played again.


----------



## JacktheRabbit (Mar 24, 2002)

You want a system that took forever? Then try the Champions game. Not only did characters take forever but the way the game was made in such a way that every monster or foe had to be created in the same long drawn out process.




			
				Crothian said:
			
		

> *
> 
> That's why we never allowed Jedi in the group.
> 
> Hero system, i think that's what it's called.  Way to complicated.  Took hourse to crete the super hero and then the system seemed all buggy. *


----------



## Cyragnome (Mar 24, 2002)

Vampire: The Masquerade...and it's ilk.  2E DND, really burned me up a bit too...before The Complete Munchkin's Handbook...er...Skills and Powers it was entirely inflexible...But of course my favorites are the above mentioned Champions, GURPS, and nearly all flavors of Traveller (and I *do* like 3E)


----------



## drowdude (Mar 24, 2002)

Worst I have ever read? 

F.A.T.A.L.


Worst I have ever played?

Champions.


----------



## Tempuswolf (Mar 24, 2002)

Crothian said:
			
		

> *Champions, i think that's what it's called.  Way to complicated.  Took hourse to crete the super hero and then the system seemed all buggy.
> 
> Edit: Had the name wrong, it was Champions not Hero System.  Something a guy at college introduced to us.  After that one night we never played again. *




I totally agree with you Crothian NOT!

I rate *Champions* and the *Hero System* as the *best* RPG and game system ever.

One man's poison...lol.

I do agree that *5th Age Dragonlance/SAGA* was not fun; I hesitate to say it's the worst game ever since I played so few games other than *Champions* for the last 2 decades.


----------



## cybernetic (Mar 24, 2002)

I never really like the Rolemaster Series......there was way too much to keep track of...kinda the same with Runequest as well...


----------



## Kesh (Mar 24, 2002)

ThenHeCame said:
			
		

> *5th age fate deck
> 
> No Dice = Sin *




While I won't argue about 5th Age, diceless RPGs aren't so bad. White Wolf's "Mind's Eye Theater" system works surprisingly well, and I've always been interested in trying Everway, which uses a card based system.

As to the complaints about Vampire: the Masquerade... well, the game itself doesn't appeal to me that much, but the Storyteller system works surprisingly well in games. I prefer Werewolf: the Apocalypse, which takes advantage of the system's strengths.

To be honest, I haven't played a bad RPG _system_ yet. But I haven't played a whole variety of RPGs, so there's not much I can say on that.


----------



## Ds Da Man (Mar 24, 2002)

Vampire, and RIFTS. I hated RIFTS because of the character mixture (be a glitterboy or you will suck!)


----------



## baseballfury (Mar 24, 2002)

It's so hard to choose just one. While it's easy to take shots at stuff like Senzar, I'd rather mention games that at least had a shot at being good. For instance:

7th Sea: The "pirate game" with no pirates in it! This could have been so good, but at almost every turn the designers choose the wrong path.

Hackmaster: Can't decide if it's a joke or a serious game. If it's a joke, it's not funny enough for the page count. If it's serious, I have my own notebook full of house rules from the 80s, thanks.

Star Trek (LUG version): The system just wasn't Star Trek enough and making a character was far more of a chore than it should have been. Again, wasted potential.

As those are all fairly recent, I should delve into my collection and come back with more later...


----------



## sfgiants (Mar 24, 2002)

Twilight 2000. Neat idea, and character creation, but fire off a couple rounds of a machine gun and you had problems (now roll 24 d6...)


----------



## Sulimo (Mar 24, 2002)

Aftermath was pretty bad IIRC. Its been ages since I've seen it though.

So was RIFTS.

I must admit I'm surprised with some of the suggestions above. Some of them I really enjoy (Paranoia,  WEG Star Wars) whilst others (Rolemaster) are alltime faves.


----------



## HellBlazer (Mar 24, 2002)

> Champions, i think that's what it's called. Way to complicated. Took hourse to crete the super hero and then the system seemed all buggy.




The Hero System is THE BEST system out there.

The new edition comes out in April (I look forward to this more then DnD3e)..but hey..to each his own


----------



## Sulimo (Mar 24, 2002)

baseballfury said:
			
		

> *7th Sea: The "pirate game" with no pirates in it! This could have been so good, but at almost every turn the designers choose the wrong path. *




Umm...I've never played it but, I never thought it was a "pirate game". Rather its a fantasy version of rennaissance Europe.  So, perhaps the problem was with your expectations rather than the game.


----------



## rounser (Mar 24, 2002)

> Hackmaster: Can't decide if it's a joke or a serious game.




It's both.  Tongue-in-cheek humour and long term campaigning aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, but like you, most people aren't used to the idea and assume "game involving humour/parody elements" must equal "throwaway beer n pretzels game".
T'aint necessarily so.


----------



## mythusmage (Mar 24, 2002)

Seen Hybrid yet? The thread about it should be just below this one.


----------



## JeffB (Mar 24, 2002)

I'm suprised too by some of these responses..I love Champs, RQ and RM...honestly I'd rather play them than most modern game systems..

Apparently some you have never really seen some of the total and utter crap that came out in the late 70's & early 80's 

Dave Arneson's Adventures in Fantasy ranks highest in my book...

Lands of Adventure from FGU 

Powers & Perils from Avalon Hill...(you think ROLEMASTER is complicated and full of charts? hunt down a copy of P&P)...

Superhero 2044...

Man Myth & Magic from Yaquinto Games...

Universe from SPI... 

MERC from FGU (I actually liked Aftermath)...

The original RECON...

The TRI-TAC system games (Fringeworthy, FTL2448, Stalking the Night Fantastic..all wonderful ideas for games..especially FW, but the rules were awful)

Lords of Creation by AH (another great idea ..poor rules... by one of my fave TSR guys no less...Tom Moldvay)

I could go on...


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Mar 24, 2002)

Hey! HackMaster is a fantastic game!

Worst is too hard for me to narrow down. Biggest disappointment: Ghostbusters 2 RPG. It took the first Ghostbusters RPG, which was a very fun little game, and tried to "improve" upon it, and simply made it dull and serious.


----------



## Jasperak (Mar 24, 2002)

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/philippe.tromeur/hybrid.htm

Whatever the heck this thing is.  Am I supposed to try and shoot down Voyager with old German military aircraft?


----------



## Eosin the Red (Mar 24, 2002)

> I rate Champions and the Hero System as the best RPG and game system ever.




Ditto. 


*Worst * has to be either WEG Starwars, Babylon5, or LUG Star Trek. To be fair, I read the intro chapter to ST in the store and put the books down. Looked wonderful, I wish other sci-fi games had that high of a production value. In SW I got to play one of the two caddies, it sucks when your x-wing isn't as deadly in combat as the weakest jedi.


----------



## Corinth (Mar 24, 2002)

Right now, _F.A.T.A.L._ tops the list.  The rest of the worst five RPGs, in no particular order, are: _Spawn of Fashan_, _The World of Synnibarr_, _Senzar_ and _RIFTS_.


----------



## S'mon (Mar 24, 2002)

DocMoriartty said:
			
		

> *So what is it? What is the worst RPG you have ever played or even just read the rules on?
> *




Hate to say it, but...

"Cyborg Commando" by E Gary Gygax.


----------



## S'mon (Mar 24, 2002)

sfgiants said:
			
		

> *Twilight 2000. Neat idea, and character creation, but fire off a couple rounds of a machine gun and you had problems (now roll 24 d6...) *




I love that rule!  I use it for my D&D games when machineguns crop up in dimension-hopping scenarios.

Guess I like buckets of d6 - Warhammer Battles, WEG Star Wars et al are some of my favourites.  A d6 for every machinegun bullet works far better than a d20 for the entire burst IMO.


----------



## Kichwas (Mar 24, 2002)

DocMoriartty said:
			
		

> *So what is it? What is the worst RPG you have ever played or even just read the rules on?*




AD&D, either edition.


----------



## Arken (Mar 24, 2002)

I don't think you can even call it an RPG but it was meant to be one...

WARHAMMER QUEST by games workshop

that was the most dire thing in history, there was no story, generic random dungeons, all interaction with the out side world was done on dice rolls and the random encounters created so many monsters that they couldn't fit in the dungeon


----------



## Eternalknight (Mar 24, 2002)

EOL said:
			
		

> *Now I'm not sure if this even reached the critical mass to be called an RPG, but in connection with the Dark Sword Series (by Weis and Hickman) a paperback set of rules was published as a supplement or something like that.
> 
> Anybody else come across that book? *




Yep, Darksword Adventures.  The stories in the book were fine, but when it came to the game system...  it seemed like a very half-hearted attempt.  

Has anyone played Maelstrom or Dragon Warriors, both published in the mid-eighties in the wake of the Fighting Fantasy series?  If so, thoughts?


----------



## Rowenstin (Mar 24, 2002)

And the oscar for the most unplayable game ever goes to...

Wraith!!!


----------



## Tsyr (Mar 24, 2002)

I like Rifts...

Putting aside Fatal or Synnibar for a moment, I would put in another vote for Champions.


----------



## S'mon (Mar 24, 2002)

Eternalknight said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Yep, Darksword Adventures.  The stories in the book were fine, but when it came to the game system...  it seemed like a very half-hearted attempt.
> 
> Has anyone played Maelstrom or Dragon Warriors, both published in the mid-eighties in the wake of the Fighting Fantasy series?  If so, thoughts? *




Yup - Maelstrom had a nice 16th-century atmosphere and abominable, unplayable rules mechanics.  Dragon Warriors had fairly simple, usable rules mechanics but little atmosphere - half-hearted attempt at a more 'real' medieval setting than AD&D, but basically a D&D clone.  Maelstrom with decent rules would have been very nice.  DW was fine as a game for people who couldn't afford the £36 to buy the 1e PHB, DMG & Monster Manual, or wanted simpler rules.


----------



## El_Gringo (Mar 24, 2002)

Rifts used to be pretty good. But then they started making supplements for it...


----------



## Tsyr (Mar 24, 2002)

The supplements weren't bad individualy, IMO... in fact I quite liked some of them (Triax, Coalition War, Atlantis...), but it seems like each one was trying to outdo the one prior, which led to a quick and massive upping in the power level. The Juicer Uprising is a good example of this... suddenly your "by the book" juicer from the main book was a peice of garbage compared to Titan Juicers, Mega Juicers, Delphi Juicers, Dragon Juicers, Pheaton Juicers, Hyperion Juicers, Juicer Wraiths... all better in every way than a normal juicer it seemed. Triax, IMO, was on the other hand a fairly "reasonable" book. Japan and England weren't bad books either. Atlantis was powerfull, but that fit for what Atlantis was.


----------



## Barendd Nobeard (Mar 24, 2002)

Rowenstin said:
			
		

> *And the oscar for the most unplayable game ever goes to...
> 
> Wraith!!! *




What's so unplayable about it?  I've never read it, but I have some of the books.  It's certainly seems heavy on the story (no surprise), but how it is more unplayable than other WoD games?


----------



## Tsyr (Mar 24, 2002)

Wraith is the one WoD I'm not familiar with, but as I recall from hearing other people talk about it, it's very difficult to.. well... DO things in Wraith. At least from what I gathered, your character is very limited in what they can actualy do.


----------



## Rowenstin (Mar 24, 2002)

Barendd Nobeard said:
			
		

> *
> 
> What's so unplayable about it?  I've never read it, but I have some of the books.  It's certainly seems heavy on the story (no surprise), but how it is more unplayable than other WoD games? *




So you haven´t read anything about the Shadow?

The shadow is supposed to be the worst part of your mind, that adquires consciousness at the time of your death. That part is played by _another_ player. That´s it: another player spends half of his time fu**ing you.

And the setting is not only confusing, there´s no way to keep it serious. The game should be named the Grim Fandango RPG. (Do you believe that the easiest way to die is to be forged into furniture?)


----------



## absurdum (Mar 24, 2002)

I haven't actually played it but B&B or also know as Bunnies and Burrows sounds increadably bad. You basically play a bunny and have to try not to get killed. Anyway I'm probably going to get a look at the rules within the month, mighteven play a game if it doesn't seem too awful, I may report back on it.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Mar 24, 2002)

Not a single vote for EVERWAY?

I claim victory. So bad that most of you can't even recall it.

It's the RPG equivalent of playing "Tea Party" with a hyperactive 5 year old. No dice, no rules, just Making Sh*t Up.


----------



## Carnifex (Mar 24, 2002)

I have to disagree with the people declaiming Champions - I love that system.

However, in terms of worst rpg... well. I haven't relally played all that many. Wasn't too fond of the previous Star Wars rog game (dunno if it was WEG's), and I'm not too keen on GURPS either. The Generic Roleplaying System is *too* generic for my taste


----------



## Barendd Nobeard (Mar 24, 2002)

Rowenstin said:
			
		

> *So you haven´t read anything about the Shadow?
> 
> The shadow is supposed to be the worst part of your mind, that adquires consciousness at the time of your death. That part is played by another player. That´s it: another player spends half of his time fu**ing you. *




Oh, forgot about the Shadow.  Does make it sort of wonky, doesn't it?  In the flavor text, the shadow is very interesting.  But in game play, yikes!




> *And the setting is not only confusing, there´s no way to keep it serious. The game should be named the Grim Fandango RPG. (Do you believe that the easiest way to die is to be forged into furniture?) *




Well, when you put it that way.....


----------



## mhensley (Mar 24, 2002)

absurdum said:
			
		

> *I haven't actually played it but B&B or also know as Bunnies and Burrows sounds increadably bad. You basically play a bunny and have to try not to get killed. Anyway I'm probably going to get a look at the rules within the month, mighteven play a game if it doesn't seem too awful, I may report back on it. *




I don't know about the Gurps Bunnies and Burrows, but the original rules were very well done.  With a good GM, playing a bunny is as least as believable as playing a superhero.


----------



## Zerovoid (Mar 24, 2002)

Arken said:
			
		

> *I don't think you can even call it an RPG but it was meant to be one...
> 
> WARHAMMER QUEST by games workshop
> 
> that was the most dire thing in history, there was no story, generic random dungeons, all interaction with the out side world was done on dice rolls and the random encounters created so many monsters that they couldn't fit in the dungeon  *




I thought Warhammer Quest was great fun.  Sure, its not a full fledged RPG, but sometimes its good to just kill some monsters without worrying about RPing.  Its exactly the same thing that Hero Quest was, and I imagine that alot of people have been introduced to RPing by those boardgame/RPG's.  Also, since you don't need a GM, there is no prep time, which can definately be an advantage.

I don't know why there are all these complaints about the WEG Starwars, but then again, I got to be the Jedi in my party   I just kept pumping up Lightsaber Use, and then someone else said, "Hey, you have to put some points in the bad skills too."  Really all that was needed to fix this problem was having different skills require different amounts of points to increase.


----------



## Wormwood (Mar 24, 2002)

Champions.

Hands down the worst gaming experience of my life. I just wanted to play a freakin' super hero...not take a refresher in Twink 101 ("Now class, this is how you maximize your character's point efficiency using the Variable Power Pool...").

Hint: By the time a single combat reaches it's SECOND hour, the concept of 'fast paced comic book action' is kinda thrown out the window.

On the Wormwood Table of Horrors, playing Champions is #28(between 'Seeing My Grandmother Naked' and 'Finding Half A Cockroach In My Cheeseburger')

YMMV.


----------



## Psychotic Dreamer (Mar 24, 2002)

I must say that Champions was one of my worst gaming experiences also.  I didn't like the fact that character creation felt like doing math homework.  Never really got past making a character.

EDIT: I can't remember what version it was off the top of my head now.  I remember it was a hard cover and was larger than the typical rpg out there.  It would have had to have been in the early 90's or the late 80's when I picked it up at a comic book convention.


----------



## Umbran (Mar 24, 2002)

absurdum said:
			
		

> *I haven't actually played it but B&B or also know as Bunnies and Burrows sounds increadably bad. You basically play a bunny and have to try not to get killed. *




Go read _Watership Down_ (by Richard Adams) or watch the animated film of the same name.  Then go play B&B.  

Also, GURPS: B&B is not just about playing bunnies.  You can play lots of different small animals.  One can probably use the rules to simulate... Brian Jaques' _Redwall_ books, Tad Williams' _Tailchaser's Song_, or Gabriel King's _The Wild Road_.  All worlds that might make very nice RPG settings.


----------



## Deadguy (Mar 24, 2002)

Eternalknight said:
			
		

> *Has anyone played Maelstrom or Dragon Warriors, both published in the mid-eighties in the wake of the Fighting Fantasy series?  If so, thoughts? *



I certainly have played _Dragon Warriors_, indeed _was_ playing in a campaign until very recently. It's a lovely little system that succeeds in what it sets out to do. Basically it's a variant on the standard D&D class/level approach, but the mechanics are simple, consistent and easy to use.

Take combat, for example. Every character has an Attack Rating and a Defence Rating, based on class, level and attributes. To attack you roll against your Attack Rating - then you work out how much you beat your AR by. If that's greater than the opponent's Defence Rating you might have hit. Next you roll the Armour Penetration for your weapon (e.g. 1d8 for a sword), versus the Armour Factor of the opponent; if you roll higher, you penetrate. The Damage you score is fixed by the weapon, so no die roll is required. Also by having a fixed damage rating, PCs can make a better judgement of when it is time to retreat. if that sounds a little complex, really it's not, since Attack and Armour Penetration can be rolled at the same time - and players can often pre-empt the result if it is going to be 'no hit' since a high Attack Roll or a very low Armour Penetration is definitely not going to hit. Consequently combat is quick, but also quite descriptive: e.g you bring your sword under his guard (beat the opponent's Defence Rating), but it nicks his thigh guard and is turned (but just failed to penetrate the armour).

Some of the later character classes are not so well balanced (particularly the Darkness Elementalist and the Warlock), but even so, they provided a usable world with enough detail to make running a campaign quite simple.

It's a shame really that they were never gathered together into a single, revised volume.


----------



## Selfloathing (Mar 24, 2002)

*F.A.T.A.L.*

You can't argue. Shut up about how much you hate 7th sea because of how mean Wick was to D&D, and bow before fatal. 

BOW BEFORE F.A.T.A.L.

Sure, Sinnibar was bad and all, but at least it didn't blatantly insult 75% of the world's people.

BOW BEFORE F.A.T.A.L.

Senzar was hard to read and all, but on the other hand, it didn't have a "vaginal circumfrence" table.

BOW DOWN BOW DOWN BOW DOWN
F.A.T.A.L. is for now and forever the worst game ever. Nothing can even hope to compare. If you made a game where everyone plays a clone of Hitler, and your goal is to "clense" as many people as possible, it still wouldn't be as bad. Even if the resolution method for said game was 2nd ed vampire with d20s instead of d10s and a d4 that you roll for no real reason. IT IS THAT BAD.


----------



## Tsyr (Mar 24, 2002)

I dunno Self... what about that "White Warriors" game someone posted a link to a few weeks back?


----------



## Selfloathing (Mar 24, 2002)

F.A.T.A.L. is worse. Every bit as offensive, but the white pride thingy was close to actualy being a playable game system, if kinda clunky. Fatal is like the child of champions and rolemaster, with the chargen and spell lists of ad&d, just for fun.


----------



## Arken (Mar 24, 2002)

Zerovoid said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I thought Warhammer Quest was great fun.  Sure, its not a full fledged RPG, but sometimes its good to just kill some monsters without worrying about RPing.  Its exactly the same thing that Hero Quest was, and I imagine that alot of people have been introduced to RPing by those boardgame/RPG's.  Also, since you don't need a GM, there is no prep time, which can definately be an advantage.
> . *




Your right it is quite fun, BUT it does say you should have a GM at one point and then thet person has nothing to do. I agree that those hack and slash board games are fun but there are better ones than that with far cheaper miniatures.

PS. I thought Everway was quite good


----------



## KChagga (Mar 24, 2002)

Hey, I like RIFTS you just have to embrace your inner munchkin.  The system isn't bad just too large a power gap between character classes.  One person can be playing a cityrat(which is basically a typical mallrat) while someone else plays a dragon that could kill said cityrat with one finger flick.

My votes for some of the worst:

DC Heroes - if I have to cross reference something and then apply it to a chart to do something count me out.

HOL - never played it, but it is damn funny to read.  Not even sure it is a playable game.


----------



## SSS-Druid (Mar 24, 2002)

Rowenstin said:
			
		

> *The shadow is supposed to be the worst part of your mind, that adquires consciousness at the time of your death. That part is played by another player. That´s it: another player spends half of his time fu**ing you.*




I dunno - I suggest that you evaluate the game based on itself, rather than what was obviously a negative experience.

One of Wraith's _optional rules_ was to allow a player to play your Shadow. This was intended for mature players who were interested in helping another player explore their character's "dark sides" in the context of the game. Not an in-game excuse to "fu**" the Psyche.


----------



## techno (Mar 24, 2002)

Worst RPG? Avalon Hill's *Powers and Perils*. One reviewer called the rules "a math text gone awry." Needless to say, the game didn't last long. I have never seen such complexity in an RPG.


----------



## Sir Osis of Liver (Mar 24, 2002)

Dragonlance SAGA rules, crap exept for the cool ultra flexable spell system. The two and a half times i played, i can up with some really cool stuff spell wise.

Marvel SAGA rules, on the other hand were real good, my gaming group still uses the system when we play. I even managed to gwt all the books, except the adventures.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Mar 24, 2002)

All of you that are bashing Champions because of the complex character creation system just aren't getting it. 

Character creation is the *reason* to play Champions. It *is* Champions. Hell, we used to have game nights devoted to character creation, then you do the "powers test" where everyone's character beats up on everyone else's character. Then you trash them and start making new ones.

Until you can squeeze a 10:1 real points:active points ratio, don't come a knockin'.  

My vote for worst RPG hasn't even been published yet, so I think I'll remain blissfully neutral.


----------



## Crothian (Mar 24, 2002)

Personally, I think the right group of people can make any system good.  Plus having someone who can explain it help.  That was one of the major problems with Champions for me.  Only one guy knew it and he couldn't explain things at all.  THat and he was helping all six of us make characters at the same time.  It was way to confusing.  

Some of the games people have mentioned (Recon, Rifts, WEG Star Wars) I've enjoyed not so much because of  the game, but becasue of the group.  The system is a means to an ends, it's the group that will make or break it for me.


----------



## Col_Pladoh (Mar 24, 2002)

*Re: Re: Worst RPG Ever?*



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Hate to say it, but...
> 
> "Cyborg Commando" by E Gary Gygax.  *




Heh!

I figured that would come up. I wonder why it is that the names of Frank Mentzer, and Kim Mohan, who wrote 90% of that system are never included in the credits?

Guess it's to even out things when Dave Arneson is mentioned for D&D, which by his own admission he didn't write one word of...


Gary


----------



## Particle_Man (Mar 24, 2002)

I was going to go for either "Fantasy Wargamer" (maybe "Fantasy Wargaming"?) for its extreme sexism (this was a one-harback deal that tried to one-up D&D with "realistic" views of medieval life and magic.  It had a good list of saints, but why would anyone want to play a female character in this system is beyond me), or DEADEARTH (not based on any personal experience, but purely on a VERY witty review that totally trashed it), but then I saw this:

"BOW BEFORE F.A.T.A.L. 

Senzar was hard to read and all, but on the other hand, it didn't have a "vaginal circumfrence" table. 

BOW DOWN BOW DOWN BOW DOWN"

Vaginal Circumference Table?  I bow before F.A.T.A.L.


----------



## Randolpho (Mar 24, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Worst RPG Ever?*



			
				Col_Pladoh said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Heh!
> 
> ...




Yeah... on the Dungeons and Dragons movie DVD, he's mentioned as "the" creator of D&D, not the co-creator on more than one occasion...


----------



## Orco42 (Mar 24, 2002)

I vote for Spawn of Fashan.

But the laugh value for making a character is its saving grace.


----------



## Cedric (Mar 24, 2002)

In my experience, the people who don't like Champions, are the people who are too lazy to have actually read the book and understand it.

I'm not trying to make generic offensive statements, I'm just supporting one of my favorite and imo the best RPG out there.

It's the only system in the world where you *absolutely* can make any character you want to make...anything.

From Superheroes to Sorcerors, you can do it in Champions. 

Now, on to the topic...worst RPG ever. Even though I like the White Wolf World of Darkness..I'll pass on both Changeling and Wraith.

I have friends who love both systems, but they are just not my cup of tea.

Cedric

p.s. Gary...no one has mentioned Mythos yet...and I won't say it's the worst, cause I had so much fun playing it with my last group. But those 6 easy steps of character creation have to be the most grueling torture I've ever been through in the name of entertainment (except for seeing Mortal Kombat: Annihilation in the theatre).


----------



## Lars Frehse (Mar 24, 2002)

Looking back, I would nomite Palladium. The skill system was a joke, and the races and characters were incredibly unbalanced...
I mean, hey, a game where you can have a swimming skill and still drown in a calm pool is a joke. Also, summoners were able to summon arch demons from the get go, if I remember it correctly...


----------



## S'mon (Mar 24, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Worst RPG Ever?*



			
				Col_Pladoh said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Heh!
> 
> ...




I gave my copy of Cyborg Commando (which cost me £1.99 new from the bargain bin) to a charity shop, so I can't say for sure, but I'm pretty certain your name is the only one on the box (in England this is known as the tort of 'passing off'...)  
The sad thing is that I really wanted it to be good, or at least a source of ideas.  Something like the Duke Nukem video game, perhaps.  But from the fully-android 'cyborgs'  (silly-looking robots with human brains in their torsos) to the unkillable amoebae that were the baddies, everything about it truly, truly sucked.

I guess we live and learn.  And you created D&D, so I guess I can forgive you this one time for letting your name go on that drek.


----------



## AFGNCAAP (Mar 24, 2002)

[/rant]

As for my vote: it depends.  I dare not challenge the depths that are F.A.T.A.L., based solely on the few horrors spoken on here, though I have not, & from what I can gather, will not read it.  However, as for games that I have read/played, I don't have problems with their concepts, but definitely their execution:

*Amber Diceless: I played this thing once.  IMHO, it is not for 95% to 99% of the gaming masses out there, whether fans of Amber or not.  It is something which, IMHO, works great onyl in theory---the level of unbias required on the part of the GM (since I can't recall the official term) just really isn't out there.  It takes a good, strong group who have no doubts about their GM or his judgment.

*GURPS: Once again, great concept, yet lacking in execution.  IMHO, it is not pick up & play friendly.  It has a lot of resources which are spread out amongst various books.  Characters for the game don't seem to be easily portable from one campaign to the next---quite a few disadvantages seem to be hardwired to the setting, or can be mere elements of roleplay rather than reasons to gain a few extra points.

*Palladium: It doesn't matter which Palladium setting---it all stinks, especially since they now use the Rifts system.  Combat is abyssmally long; any sense of balance is thrown to the wind, penalizing players who want to work with a concept they enjoy instead of taking the most benefit-laden combo they can.  It seems to have started as the creator's answer to everything that D&D didn't offer, & festered into the system it is today.

*Marvel (dice) RPG: Utterly failed to capture the four-color feeling that the SAGA version provides.  Luck of the dice worked against the setting instead of helping it.

*TORG, then Masterbook System: Love the concepts, but (thanks to 3rd Ed.) have sheid away from the "roll a die & see what the result equals on a chart" style of resolution.  Absolutely hate the damage resolution system, as well as the magic system.  I think it tries too hard to cover all the bases.

*d6 System: Just get tired of the ton of d6.  Can get to ridiculous lengths against powerful opponents.

*Battlelords of the 23rd Century: Good god, how I hated combat in that game.  The degree of chart rolls for character creation were ridiculous.

There are quite a few more games I'd vote, but I'm having trouble recalling details in my old age at this time.  Always enjoyed D&D, even more so with each edition that's been released, though I still have a soft spot for "Basic"---3E reminds me of it sometimes.  Marvel SAGA's proved very easy to use, & IMHO, works great for the superhero genre over dice-based systems (especially Marvel dice-based & Heroes Unlimited).

Then again, one person's treasure is another person's trash.  Certain games are great for me because they meet many (if not all) the requirements I ask of it.  Other games aren't because they don't meet those demands, or just fail all together.

Well, that's my 2 cents.

[/endrant]


----------



## jester47 (Mar 24, 2002)

The worst RPG ever?  

Any game where your degree of success or failure is determined by how well you can do a task.  

Best example:  White Wolf's World of darkness rules.  The more ranks you have for completeling a certain task, the more dice you roll, the greater the chances for your sucess, but also the greater your chances for failure and a botch.  

As for worlds, whatever works for you.

Aaron.


----------



## jester47 (Mar 25, 2002)

I correct myself, hybrid is the worst game I have ever seen.

Aaron.


----------



## Mortaneus (Mar 25, 2002)

I happen to be a big fan of GURPS and Champions, both of which I think are so far superior to D&D that they're in a completely different league.

But that's neither here nor there.

The REAL question is what games are so bad as to be UNPLAYABLE?

I'd have to say the following:

Dragon Ball Z - Fuzion system:  For crying out loud, if you follow the rules, then the average person can punch a car and have it explode into pieces.  In addition, if Goku did a Keyoken x3, he'd die.  Also, there's no way many of the characters could throw their most powerful attacks, because 3d6+100 still isn't enough to hit the required rolls to toss them.  Finally, you can instantly kill any character by spending the energy to act twice, fly up to them and punch them, thus dropping their energy deflection, and then hitting them with a huge energy blast, causing them to go *poof*.

F.A.T.A.L.  :  See previous commentary.

Dragonquest:  Ahhh!!!  AD&D with a lot more gratuitous rolling.

GURPS Goblins:  Inspired setting.  Interesting to read.  I don't think anyone would ever run it, though.  It's just too odd.

Spawn of Fashan:  Ask Piratecat about this one.


As for the  palladium system (rifts) , while it might suck, at least it's playable.


----------



## Tsyr (Mar 25, 2002)

Cedric said:
			
		

> *It's [Champions] the only system in the world where you absolutely can make any character you want to make...anything.
> *




Wrong.

Pick up a copy of BESM.

Superhero, Sorcerer, Swordfighter, Gunslinger, Mechapilot, Spirit, Werewolf, Vampire, Jet Pilot, Car Racer, God (Greater, Minor, Demi, you name it), Martial Artist, Mouse (Can Champions do that?), Cyborg, Robot, you name it.

And you can roll up a character in under 10 minutes. Even a newbie could do it in half an hour with no instruction.


----------



## JacktheRabbit (Mar 25, 2002)

Only if your idea of an exciting gaming session is hanging out with a bunch of bored tax accountants.




			
				Mortaneus said:
			
		

> *I happen to be a big fan of GURPS and Champions, both of which I think are so far superior to D&D that they're in a completely different league. *


----------



## Lisa Nadazdy (Mar 25, 2002)

Champions is great, for those who detract the system. If it takes several hours to do a combat, obviuosly you don't know how to play it right. Character creation is the only task that takes any time, because the system is so versitile that there is often more than one way to simulate a power or abilty. I've played games such as BESM, and frankly, while a nice, fast system, does superheroes poorly, IMO. Champs just does it better, on all levels.


Worst games? Space Opera, Synibbar, Amazing Engine with a special mention to the muchkinesque Rifts.


----------



## Thorvald Kviksverd (Mar 25, 2002)

I don't know if it is the worst, but it was certainly the most disappointing--probably because I had such high hopes for it...

Hero Wars

...I'll stick with 1st edition _Runequest_ for my _Glorantha_ gaming--thank you very much.


----------



## Rackhir (Mar 25, 2002)

I would have to put in a vote for Twilight 2000. For a system that was supposed to simulate modern combat it did an abysmally bad job. In one encounter we put 3, count-em 3 TOW II's into a BMP-2.That's 3 missiles each designed to destroy a main battle tank, each one that hit a vehicle which has consistently been described as a flaming coffin. 3 TOW II's failed to inflict ANY SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE WHAT SO EVER. After that we just kind of lost interest in the system, we just couldn't take seriously a system that permitted that sort of result.

Champions however, is one of my favorite games. Without a doubt, it is not a game for people who hate math. Anyone who hated math in school will never like it or see it's virtues. If you aren't afraid of math or know how to use a spreadsheet it is hands down the best superhero system ever created. Especially, if you enjoy creating characters and exploiting the systems to implement concepts.


----------



## Ace (Mar 25, 2002)

Tsyr said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Wrong.
> 
> ...




My first try with Besm I did a party of 6 adventures, sans skills in about half an hour. Not bad at all. BESM is not cuppa but hands down its better than champions and as flexible. Also if you like Supers, Silver Age Sentinals is in playtest on Pyramid and it looks  really  good for 4 color stuff.


----------



## Tsyr (Mar 25, 2002)

Ace said:
			
		

> *
> 
> My first try with Besm I did a party of 6 adventures, sans skills in about half an hour. Not bad at all. BESM is not cuppa but hands down its better than champions and as flexible. Also if you like Supers, Silver Age Sentinals is in playtest on Pyramid and it looks  really  good for 4 color stuff. *




And the nice thing about BESM, while expansion books are NICE, they aren't NEEDED... the rules are so dang flexible you can fudge just about anything using some combination of things.


----------



## Thorvald Kviksverd (Mar 25, 2002)

I've noticed that a few have mentioned Twilight 2000...

I assume you're refering to the yellow books--because the original version rocked, had a great feel, and was extremely lethal.

*Rackhir--* As an example of this lethality, the highest armour value listed for the BMP-C is 60--and a TOW II does 4d6(x40) damage!  Excess points are scored internally, and are very, very messy...


----------



## Ulrick (Mar 25, 2002)

While I've seen and even purchased bad RPGs in my time, I'll only list the top ten worst.  10=least worse 1= worst RPG ever.

Pretend I'm David Letterman.

10. Star Wars by West End Games.  The only reason why I played this game was because the GM was very good.  I just got tired of rolling all those dice.

9. Vampire, 2ed--the non-revised version.  Maybe it was because I was 14 or 15 when I bought it, but the rules just confused me and those who tried to play it.  I was the storyteller, I had everyone create a character, I had a plot formed.  But the mechanics just didn't seem "right."

8. Mage--2ed before revised edition.  Great concept.  Just couldn't fathom the rules.  

Note: I really like both revisions to 8 & 9.  The rules are more understandable.  Both games I rate A+.

7. Dragonlance: Sage rules.  Playing a card RPG just didn't feel right.

6. Wraith: The Oblivion.  Good concept.  Bad rules.  After trying to read the most depressing rulebook ever, I had no will to try to encourage other people to play it.

5. Armeggedon: The End Times are here: Again, good concept.  Bad rules.  After reading through the book I realized I could accomplish the same results with another system.

4. Warhammer Quest.  Hack.  Slash.  Hack. Slash.  Wizard kills everything with spells--gets all the gold.  The game really isn't feasible to play after the characters begin gaining levels and using the random table.  Just too many special abilities to keep track of. But I do like the world it is set in.

3. Dragonstrike! I'm not certain if this qualifies as an RPG.  But the game itself was as cheesy as the video that came with it.

2. FUDGE.  I tried to create my own RPG.  I really tried.

1. GURPS. (In David Spade voice) I have an idea.  Let's create an RPG where we'll have a stack of rulebooks to aid in the creation of a character.  This of course would take at least 3 hours to do so with a lot of min/maxing involved.  Then will have combat rounds be 1 second long so that play will take a long time.
BLECH! (In the Comic-book-owner voice from the Simpsons) Worst RPG EVER.

Ulrick


----------



## Black Omega (Mar 25, 2002)

Worst ever..that's pretty hard to settle on.  I'd have to say I'm right there on Babylon 5.  Great setting, but the game system wasn't good at all.  I like the Palladium reference books for reading, but never even considered playing the system.

Champions/Hero System would be my vote for best game.  That's a place where I and Wizard magazine agree.  Creating characters is pretty easy as long as at least one person is familiar with it.  Combats can be long, but that really depends on how well the group knows the rules.  The two longest combats I've run have both been in 3rd ed Dnd, not Champions.  And most complains about complexity are nullfied if you use Hero System for a human level game.


----------



## jollyninja (Mar 25, 2002)

dragonlance saga had no redeeming qualities. it was crap through and through. cards = poo. ok 1 redeeming quality, min/maxing was quite difficult due to the fact that you were dealt a hand, and that determined what you could do and how well from the beginning to your death. you had a role and that was your role, want to do something else? make a new guy.

having stated that, gurps was the worst experience i have ever had and i only went through one adventure. the group looked at eachother and allmost in unison said "this f'ing sucks"

however it had no tables governing genitalia dimensions. without having even seen that one, it's the worst ever. i give.


----------



## MulhorandSage (Mar 25, 2002)

Okay, let's approach this from another angle; rather than describing those systems whose learning curves were steep or which provided some bad game experiences, here are some qualities I've noticed detract from game systems.

* Imprecise terminology. Basic game terms should accurately describe the effect, and *never* work against what a player would reasonably expect that game term should represent.
* Poor organization. It should take about thirty seconds searching though the index or the table of content to find any important rule, and an additional thirty seconds for the gamemaster to make a consistent ruling.
* Ambiguous rules. Rules arguments are not a good thing.
* Author ego. This is particularly evident in rules that seem to act as a vehicle for the author's literary ambitions (particularly embarassing when the author's fiction-writing abilities fall well short of their ambitions) or a soapbox for their religious and/or political views and turn the game into a screed. 
* Inconsistent tone. The game with the grand epic tone should not have examples pulled from _Knights of the Dinner Table_ or _Bored of the Rings_.
* Inconsistent level of modelling. Detailed simulation systems shouldn't have gaps. Likewise, loose storytelling systems shouldn't have detailed rules for areas that reflect the author's fetish, but deride simulationist games as anal.
* Pre-built for supplements. Does the ruleset have significant gaps that *require* the player to purchase additional supplements to play the basic game system? If so, does it bother to tell the player they're not buying a complete game system?
* Rules in character samples. Is the only way to figure out a rule by deconstructing a character example? Do they *contradict* the rules? 

There are couple of other things that bug me, but are matters of personal taste that shouldn't be considered general rules.
* Rip off setting: Did someone copy a popular setting without acknowledging they filed off the serial numbers? (There's a difference between BESM and TFOS, which acknowledge their love of the source material and those that don't.)
* Swamp water settings. Let's take a genre and add magic (or psionics) to it. I can hear all the Shadowrun fans screaming right now, but I like settings not to give thought to how they mesh their elements. ("Let's do the post-holocaust setting where radiation mutated people into wizards, elves, and trolls! Yeah, that's the ticket!")
* Is the creator a flaming jerk? Does he show no respect for the people who founded this hobby, on whose shoulders he's standing to make his living? Does he corner you at Gencon, engage you in boring,  rambling, and insulting drunken  conversations, then leave you to pay for his drinks when your back's turned? 

Okay, flame away. 

Scott Bennie


----------



## Zelda Themelin (Mar 25, 2002)

Mmh, badly made games, there are many of those out there. 

Boring/Abominable free net-rpg:s - Too many of them out there to even remember most of them. I've read/used many good ones too.

Friend's homebrew - Oh, dear, why I need 25 different stats? And it got worse from there.

TORG -Clumsy system, and I mostly recall this game, because it used cards, and when I bought it, through some printing error, my cards didn't have anything written on them. Still, I had fun playing it for a while.

Many horrible systems/games I've only played have actually been fun, because of good Gm and other players.




			
				Thorvald Kviksverd said:
			
		

> *I don't know if it is the worst, but it was certainly the most disappointing--probably because I had such high hopes for it...
> 
> Hero Wars
> 
> ...I'll stick with 1st edition Runequest for my Glorantha gaming--thank you very much. *




Rant...

Yep, I've seen a lot of bad games, abominations even, but raraly it happens, that my old-time favourite turns into complite piece of junk.

Maybe Hero Wars wasn't as bad, it there hadn't been all those promises, years they tried to make 'perfect system' (and some of those disregarded tries are actually pretty good), and then they choose this crappy half-blooded 'story-telling system', which is actually quite opposite to story-telling, but lacking lot of examples and lists which typically polulater rpg:s. Speak of confusing and lacking system. 'Cool' sounding names for skills/spells/divane gifts/monster abilities/whatsoever without any explanitons what they actually are. Crappy editing, A5-size for books, lack of index, but here comes the 'best part'.

Material is mostly just slightly disguised version reprinted old stuff, with certain 'feeling' added like when Michael Moorcock wrote few extra Elric books in his later days (let's say athmosphere had changed somewhat).

Also, IMO all fantasy-flovor, that was Glorantha, has been replaced with Fantasy-Earth thems, and certain earth-culture/mythos rip-off art/symbols just puts me off.

Glorantha used to be great world with sense of adventure, and wonder. But it's makers have years ago forgotten what adventure and heroes are about.

After reading great amount of 'sad' fan-products which so hard to avoided bringing bad (aka. IMO good) elements popular in D&D to game. This was not game-system issues, but idea that pc:s are some nobodies in the world, where 'real heroes' and rulers get to be "system npc:s". Every adventure I've ever seen in years Glorantha was only actively written in fanzines and stuff seems to dearly hold idea, that Greg Stafford's creations are real movers and shakers (however, this moving and shaking has been pretty static and Hero Wars-system didn't change that), and pc:s are expected to remain as just´some 'random' adventurers.

I could go on about this, but I let it rest.  

And yes, when I still play in Glorantha, I use RQ system, and only good old material.


----------



## Thorvald Kviksverd (Mar 25, 2002)

*Zelda Themelin--*

I couldn't agree more.  BTW, you alluded to some of the versions that never made it to print, have you checked out the site that offers a free download of RuneQuest Slayers?


----------



## Wild Karrde (Mar 25, 2002)

I'm not really sure what I consider the worst system out there but I am surprised by all the people who don't like Champions.  I'm an agreement with alot of people on here as placing it as the best RPG to be made to date.  This game simply rocks.

Maybe the problem alot of people are having is the first time they made characters with someone they went overboard with all the rules.  My very first experience with it was just making straight point for point characters.  No power pools, disads. or ads. or anything like that.  Then once we got a feel for the nature of the game and we all really dug it the GM let us revamp our characters.  Needless to say we were all hooked and are hardcore Champions players to this day.


----------



## Henry (Mar 25, 2002)

By mere word of mouth, the two games "White Warriors" and F.A.T.A.L. have to take the cake. This may sound insane, but I would love to find a copy of FATAL, just to see how bad it truly was. I'm the type of person who has collected a video of Allied force cleanup efforts of Nazi Death Camps, just so people can't tell someone I know that it never happened. And in my neck of the woods, this stands more than an improbable chance of happening. 

Beyond this, the worst game I have attempted to read and play falls to Champions, or to Cyberpunk 2020, and used to be Shadowrun, before it's 3rd edition revision. I dislike any game, in fact, that uses the tallied number of successes on individual dice to determine how successful I am. Increases in skills DO NOT AFFECT THE DICE in these type of games; it only allows more chances to attempt the action. Only things such as equipment increases, circumstance modifiers, etc. affect the actual roll - which I don't mind; but not having equal increases with skill makes it harder and harder to attempt an action, and really annoys me.

Champions requiring so much time to build a character and to play through a combat, which are both staples of 4-color Super-hero games, is counter-productive to me. Advanced Marvel super Heroes, by Jeff Grubb, while not the best super-hero game around, had the tremendous advantage of being fast. Powers were flexible enough so as to build individualized super-heroes with the same basic rules. 2 Heroes could have the EXACT SAME POWERS, yet look and feel very different. I would love to see a Super-Hero game with that much speed and flexibility produced. I hold out some expectation for both Godlike and, should I run across it or some Fast-play rules, BESM.


----------



## Tsyr (Mar 25, 2002)

Sadly, F.A.T.A.L. still exists. Its original webserver got taken down, but some guys on RPG.NET posted a link a while back to the new site...

http://www.fatalgames.com/


----------



## Jezrael (Mar 25, 2002)

I'm not a big fan of Rolemaster; in fact I downright loathe the basic system (ICE did put out some great Middle Earth supplements for it though, that were easily convertable to just about anything else); just not my bag. 

Conversely I love Champions/Hero System, complexity and all.

Immortal was crap, were there actually any rules in that book?


----------



## sineater (Mar 25, 2002)

Worst RPG game I ever tried was an old game called BOOTHILL. A western game where if you got into a gun fight you were pretty much goin to die or be severly wounded and end up dying. It was impossible to live.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Mar 25, 2002)

sineater said:
			
		

> *Worst RPG game I ever tried was an old game called BOOTHILL. A western game where if you got into a gun fight you were pretty much goin to die or be severly wounded and end up dying. It was impossible to live. *




I loved BOOT HILL for that very reason. You know, you get shot, you are _supposed_ to die. 

The whole game had a very fatalistic "Young Guns" feel to it. I thought it captured the genre beautifully.

Of course, my GM at the time was the reigning KY state storytelling champion, who also worked volunteer time at the local Wild West show...


Wulf


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Mar 25, 2002)

sineater said:
			
		

> *Worst RPG game I ever tried was an old game called BOOTHILL. A western game where if you got into a gun fight you were pretty much goin to die or be severly wounded and end up dying. It was impossible to live. *




Boot Hill is a classic. The whole point was that gunfighting is dangerous - just like in real life. If you stayed away from fights which involved you against more than one, you had a good chance of living. If the odds were greater than that, you'd better be the Man With No Name.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Mar 25, 2002)

I feel better having the Colonel behind me with basically the same sentiment.


----------



## JPL (Mar 25, 2002)

Top Secret/S.I. was a seriously flawed game...but I loved it.  

I loved it when two guys were punching each other, and the hit location kept coming up "leg".

I loved the Athletic Ability advantage...+20% to your speed and most of your useful skills.

I loved the Freelancers supplement, set in the far-flung future of 1998.

We did everything from Delta Force commandos to a private eye campaign modeled after "Spenser: For Hire" to a ninja street gang.

Man...to be fifteen again...


----------



## Turlogh (Mar 25, 2002)

As I have not seen all RPGs I cannot truely say which is the absolute worst ever but from the ones I have seen there are a few I really don't like.  These are-
White Wolfs World of Darkness- terrible layout, lousy rules (if you can find them)
Gurps
Champions
The old DC Hero's Game
TSRs attempt at a Conan RPG


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Mar 25, 2002)

Worst sytems I've ever bought or played. 

Recon
Traveller:2300
Star Ace
Champions
AD&D 2E
Middle Earth Role Playing Game(ICE)
Ghostbusters RPG
Pendragon

Best:
AD&D 1E
Chill
DC Heros
Star Wars (WEG)


----------



## KnowTheToe (Mar 25, 2002)

sineater said:
			
		

> *Worst RPG game I ever tried was an old game called BOOTHILL. A western game where if you got into a gun fight you were pretty much goin to die or be severly wounded and end up dying. It was impossible to live. *




I would put Boot Hill as my all time favorite game.  It was so simple that in HS I had every table memorized and we did not even have to carry the book to play.  We made charts for drinking contests and brawling.  It was the shootenist, tootenist game ever.  Thin plot lines and characters dropped by a single shot.  My favorite character was Yip Lip Ding the last chineese cowboy.  He was 6'5" tall and ordered milk at saloons.  A fight was sure to break out.  We had Tequila TeCarlo our alcoholic comrad that would pass out drunk before every heist.  He enjoyed role playing the saloons  and his character so much that he almost never made it to the gun fights.  Good Times.  How dare you insult such mastery.


----------



## KnowTheToe (Mar 25, 2002)

I forgot to vote.  I hated CAR WARS.  I just could never get into it.  I didn't care about the dynamics of how it worked.  Twightlight 2000 is a close second.  I so wanted to like that game.  First version, too deadly, second version it was over corrected.


----------



## Ace (Mar 25, 2002)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> *Worst sytems I've ever bought or played.
> 
> Recon
> Traveller:2300
> ...




I like the way you do your answers Flexor. Here is my highly subjective list

Worse:
Hero Wars (mechanics not the Glorantha game world)
RIFTS (Munchkin bait)
Stalking the Night Fantastic (too complex)
Champions (chargen is too complex and min max oriented)
Twillight 2000 (broken rules set, cool background though, well at least in 1986)
Aftermath (complexity fetish at it gain)
AD&D1e (sorry I know its blaspehemy but...)
Blue Book D&D

Best:
GURPS (with the rules tuned down though....)
Unisystem (All Flesh Must Be eaten, Buffy etc  great light rules)
Rolemaster (the rules suck but the people and games have been awesome)
D6 Star Wars  (form follows function, too bad I don't like Star Wars for a gaming enviroment)


----------



## S'mon (Mar 25, 2002)

ColonelHardisson said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Boot Hill is a classic. The whole point was that gunfighting is dangerous - just like in real life. If you stayed away from fights which involved you against more than one, you had a good chance of living. If the odds were greater than that, you'd better be the Man With No Name. *




Anyone know if it's possible to get hold of Boot Hill other than through eBay?  My only info on it is the conversion pages in the 1e DMG, but from the description it sounds great - a lot like the improvised rules I used in a Western PBEM, 'Quickdraw'. which was a lot of fun - one player got through maybe a dozen PCs, he couldn't help but try to be Clint and always got a bullet in the lung, stomach, skull, etc...


----------



## Wicht (Mar 25, 2002)

heh - *Boothill* rocks!!  I love the game.  One of my favortie RPG recollections was the time I adapted a "Predator" alien for the setting and threw it at the cowboys. 

As for worst.  

*F.A.T.A.L.* all the way.

*World of Synnibar* which I am still trying to wade through has to be in there as well.

For sheer depressing reading, *Wraith* makes the list as well.

I have never played these three, but then I am niether a Masochist nor a Sadist.


----------



## psionotic (Mar 25, 2002)

*Cowboy Up!!*

I also loved Boot Hill.  It was fast, fun, and deliciously deadly.  Sure you went through a lot of characters if you had gunfights every session, but that was part of the fun of the thing.  And the rules were fairly in depth for how simple they were.

Of course, I also liked Star Frontiers and the Advanced Marvel Super Heroes (non Saga) a lot, but I can't really remember how the rules works.

Damn, I used to have all three of those games, I wonder if I could dig them up somewhere?

Back on Topic:  My RPG experience is pretty limited, having only played 8-10 different systems.  The worst were Palladium Fantasy, Rifts, and WEG's Star Wars.   While I like the setting, the bucket o dice mechanic of Shadowrun was also annoying.  

I of course must also bow down to Fatal, but luckily have had no exposure to it.


----------



## Eosin the Red (Mar 25, 2002)

To echo what some of the other folks have said, I am baffled at seeing Champions on this page? It blows me away. I have looked to see if there was some commonality and it seems to me that many of the folks who mention Champions as the worst system, have frequently mentioned a love of fast and loose systems (WEG, BESM, Storyteller). Most of us who love Champions (or GURPs or RM) seemed more likely to list the loose systems as our least favorite. Mine being WEG.

Some of the comments just do not hold much water. My first battle in D&D ran several hours, mainly cause we did not understand the rules. Many of us diehard champions fans can say with a strait face that combat takes roughly the same amount of time as 3E. When you know the rules it flows smoothly.

Not defending the complexity - that is what makes the system good. I think if those same people who complain about making characters up had tried to make up a Fiendish-lycanthrope-wizard-archmage-chosen of mystra-nightsong enchanter-half dragon as their 1st 3E character, they would have found that experience to also be disheartening.

The first point seems the most telling - some like their games loose, some prefer them to be geared for exact calculation of ability. Niether way is better. It was just shocking to see Champions taking it on the nose.

All of this of course IMO, YMMV, and any other appendige to indicate we are all entitled to an opionion. Which BTW, I can say are not like some parts of the anatomy. I have seen with my own eyes folks who did not have said part of anatomy, or whos anatomy had been surgically removed. SO, opinions are even more common that specific parts of anotomy, at least on the net.


----------



## King_Stannis (Mar 25, 2002)

i guess i'd have to say the last edition of traveller - the one with the black covers trimmed in red. it's not so much that it was bad, but it just never clicked with me and my group. i so wanted to like it, but it ended up being pretty boring.


----------



## coyote6 (Mar 25, 2002)

Worst games I've seen: FATAL, followed closely by that White Warriors/RAHOWA thing. 

Worst game I paid money for: Lords of Creation.


----------



## eatenmyeyes (Mar 26, 2002)

I spent a large amount on Rifts books before I realized that the rules were complete vomit.  The setting is amazing and original.  But it is ruined by stupid mechanics.  So, I plan to sell them.  Are there any takers?

3E, BESM (TriStat), and BeerEngine are by far the best.


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Mar 26, 2002)

*Re: Re: Worst RPG Ever?*



			
				arcady said:
			
		

> *
> AD&D, either edition. *




Definitely the worst RPG I have actually played is _AD&D2_.  (I give _AD&D1_ a break because of the time period it was written, but 2e has no such excuse.)

I have to stand up for _Paranoia_.  It has a certain hilarious mood to the game that you have to get the swing of.  I understand why some people may not enjoy it, though.

I tried reading _Dangerous Journeys_.  Even this rules wonk found it too painful to bear.


----------



## Ridley's Cohort (Mar 26, 2002)

Ulrick said:
			
		

> *
> 2. FUDGE.  I tried to create my own RPG.  I really tried.
> 
> 1. GURPS. (In David Spade voice) I have an idea.  Let's create an RPG where we'll have a stack of rulebooks to aid in the creation of a character.  This of course would take at least 3 hours to do so with a lot of min/maxing involved.  Then will have combat rounds be 1 second long so that play will take a long time.
> ...




Both of these RPGs are excellent for certain styles of play and horrendous for some styles of play.

FUDGE is great as the basis for a rules light system.  What makes it different from most system is it is very _coarse_, so it feels ackward in a combat heavy game unless you are really comfortable with the system.  This is a really good game engine to use for a game heavy with storytelling and a modest number of rolls.

GURPS is not the system for a GM who has to wage constant warfare with munchkins and powergamers.  It is a pretty good system for a campaign balanced with respect to roleplaying and combat.


----------



## sineater (Mar 26, 2002)

Maybe Boothill was a classic in others eyes which I have no problem. When I palyed it maybe I didn't give it enough time or it was the person running the adventure that thought we should get into lots of fights. In one session I went through 5 guys. So I told the group I've had enough. We did finally get rid of the person running the game he took to much to the liking of killing off characters in all the games he ran.


----------



## MerricB (Mar 26, 2002)

GURPS is the worst... when used for anything but "realistic" play; I think it's pretty good for an average power level, but the moment a character has an 18 INT, the skill system breaks down horribly.

Hmm... I really detest Rolemaster as well; it seems to be a heroic system, yet instant death is too much a factor.

Cheers!


----------



## Tsyr (Mar 26, 2002)

eatenmyeyes said:
			
		

> *I spent a large amount on Rifts books before I realized that the rules were complete vomit.  The setting is amazing and original.  But it is ruined by stupid mechanics.  So, I plan to sell them.  Are there any takers?
> 
> 3E, BESM (TriStat), and BeerEngine are by far the best. *




Depends... what ya got, and what ya want for them?


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Mar 26, 2002)

sineater said:
			
		

> *Maybe Boothill was a classic in others eyes which I have no problem. When I palyed it maybe I didn't give it enough time or it was the person running the adventure that thought we should get into lots of fights. In one session I went through 5 guys. So I told the group I've had enough. We did finally get rid of the person running the game he took to much to the liking of killing off characters in all the games he ran. *




I suspected this was how it played out in your group. I'd suggest giving it another chance. For a game of its time period - the late 1970s - it is unusual in how it encourages roleplaying. Not through rules on character interaction, but in just how deadly combat can be. Watch a Western movie closely sometime; they often are not nearly as violent as the seem at first. Especially for ones made in the 1950s and on. Boot Hill simulates that very well.


----------



## Drew (Mar 26, 2002)

Particle_Man said:
			
		

> *I was going to go for either "Fantasy Wargamer" (maybe "Fantasy Wargaming"?)  *




Holy Crap! I can't believe anyone else has ever heard of this thing! I'm not sure where I got the book, but it somehow ended up in my hands. I passed it on to a friend (without his knowledge) and now he can't get rid of it. Its like a curse! The game was called "Fantasy Wargaming" and the cover proclaimed it "The Highest Level of All!" As I recall the game put a heavy emphasis on your character's astological sign. There were a number of disadvantages, but you simply rolled them at random. I know one of the disadvantages was "Homosexual." Yeesh...

The funny thing is, I can't recall anything about the actual system. I think it used % dice.


----------



## SableWyvern (Mar 26, 2002)

MerricB said:
			
		

> *
> Hmm... I really detest Rolemaster as well; it seems to be a heroic system, yet instant death is too much a factor.
> *




I've never understood seeing this sentiment from d&d players.

A first level d&d character will generally be able to drop a clone of himself with two hits, often times one. At high levels you have insta-kill spells, allowing a single saving throw or die. In earlier additions, you even had insta-kill spells with no save at all (eg, death spell).

Anyone ever fought a beholder?

The only game I can recall that I would consider more lethal than any edition of d&d is the Aliens Adventure Game (which, back on topic, is also one of my votes for worst game ever).

Aliens Adventure Game:

Starting characters could be green recruits or 20 year battle hardened veterans - all based on random die rolls.

The advanced movement/initiative system could not be used if an alien was involved in combat.

Generally speaking, without armour, a hit to a limb incapacitated that limb, a hit to the head or torso killed.

Aircraft can only fire if they have initiative. In a spacecraft vs aircraft fight, the spacecraft always have inititiative. Yet they go on for some time about spacecraft vs aircraft combats, even though the aircraft can never, ever, fire a shot.

Introducing an original type of alien required drawing up a whole new combat matrix for it.

Characters were hopelessly specialised (eg, a dropship pilot would be well advised to do exactly what they did in the movies - wait on the ship while the rest of the party carried out the operation).

All in all, a game designed to sell based on the name, not its value as a game in and of itself.


Traveller: The New Era is pretty poor as well. It tried to do some really good things (the only game I've ever seen with rules for beaten zones for automatic weapons). Unfortunately, the mechanics ended up very unwieldy.

*Other mediocre games:*
WHFRP
Interstellar Elite Combat (nice concepts, too many big numbers - d100,000 anyone?)
Anything Palladium
World of Darkness (don't mind the system, hate the attitude)

*The Best* (in no particular order)
OD&D
3e D&D
Rolemaster (both RM2 and RMSS)
Silouhette System
Paranoia


But, its all just a matter of personal taste.


----------



## Tsyr (Mar 26, 2002)

How about Shadowrun? One hit from a hold-out pistol can drop a decker or mage if they aren't lucky...


----------



## Doc_Klueless (Mar 26, 2002)

*Worst:* 
D6 System = Not the Star Wars rpg but the "generic" D6 System that WEG put out. Woefully incomplete including a missing chapter.

Palladium 2e Fantasy Role Playing Game = My munchkin character doesn't have enough hitpoints. I know! Let's tack on S.D.C.s!

*Mediocre* 
Fading Suns Victory Point System = Excellent world/universe. Probably the best I've ever seen. Wacked out system. 10% chance of failing no matter how good you are at something.

GURPS = Great game. Let's you do all kinds of stuff and mostly works all the time. Reads like stereo instructions. Blech.

*Best:* 
James Bond 007 RPG by Victory Games = Beyond a doubt my favorite rpg ever. I loved that game and played it almost exclusively for about a year.


----------



## The Furious Puffin (Mar 26, 2002)

Who brought FATAL???? I mean yeesh, the reviews page on there web-site says it all. This is offically the stupidest idea of all time.

The worst RPG I have ever played almost certainly goes to Alternity! This games resolution system was so horrible that it beggers belief. Combat was a table consulting nightmare of doom. (This would have improved with time I imagine, but seeing as I am one of the two players in our group that can learn rules it doesn't help) Just having to consult the 3 charts every time you did anything to determine the success roll.

Oh and any game that attempts to resolve Burst fire by bullet (AKA Cyberpunk a LMG and full automatic agaist a heavily armoured target. I suspect it would have been fast to caculate the STD Dev when you get hit 20-30 times. Hardwired corrected this to some extent however.)

Best RPG's I have played

D&D 3e (Duh! ;-)

Paranoia 2nd edition (Again a personal taste issue, if you want is odd-ball sense of humor and slapstick-fights its good, otherwise its quite, quite bad.)

Edit: Removed some misplaced words, added the last part


----------



## V-2 (Mar 26, 2002)

> Best:
> James Bond 007 RPG by Victory Games = Beyond a doubt my favorite rpg ever. I loved that game and played it almost exclusively for about a year.




Gee. That's exactly what happened to me. Nobody ever mentions that game and how good it was. Simple, elegant, and the hero point system actually _worked_.


----------



## MerricB (Mar 26, 2002)

SableWyvern said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I've never understood seeing this sentiment from d&d players.
> 
> ...




Don't remind me.  I detest beholders.

Death at low levels isn't a problem. 

Death from spells isn't a problem for me so much: there's no spell that just says "you're dead"; most allow you a saving throw, or require you to be under a certain level of hit points - then too, spellcasting in melee was extremely difficult. And you need a high level spellcaster for the deadliest spells.

My problem with Rolemaster criticals is that they occur in melee combat, extremely often, and make combat extremely undesirable to participate in - sure, fine for some games and genres, but given that Rolemaster was initially intended as a replacement combat system for AD&D it became quite problematical.



> *
> But, its all just a matter of personal taste. *




Absolutely! Rolemaster isn't a bad system; it's just that there's a gap between what I think it's for, and what it actually does. (I do like the skill system).

Cheers!


----------



## Geoff Watson (Mar 26, 2002)

Tsyr said:
			
		

> *How about Shadowrun? One hit from a hold-out pistol can drop a decker or mage if they aren't lucky... *




Only if the shooter is really, really lucky (six successes more than the decker/mages dodge roll and body roll).

Mages in ShadowRun ARE allowed to wear armour, y'know, so they only need to roll 2s on the dice, since holdout pistols have sucky power.

Geoff.


----------



## arwink (Mar 26, 2002)

Tales from the floating vagabond.  And it seemed like such a good idea to buy it at the time.

Streetfighter using the Storyteller system.

The version of Top Secret that came out before top secret/SI, where everything was much more seventies and the rules system was completely random.

What depresses me is I've either run or played in campaigns in all of them, usually lasting six months or more.  Masochistic tendencies I guess


----------



## Victim (Mar 26, 2002)

The Furious Puffin said:
			
		

> *Who brought FATAL???? I mean yeesh, the reviews page on there web-site says it all. This is offically the stupidest idea of all time.
> 
> The worst RPG I have ever played almost certainly goes to Alternity! This games resolution system was so horrible that it beggers belief. Combat was a table consulting nightmare of doom. (This would have improved with time I imagine, but seeing as I am one of the two players in our group that can learn rules it doesn't help) Just having to consult the 3 charts every time you did anything to determine the success roll.
> 
> ...




Umm, what tables do you need in Alternity?


----------



## eatenmyeyes (Mar 26, 2002)

Tsyr said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Depends... what ya got, and what ya want for them? *




I have almost everything.*
Worldbooks 1-23
Sourcebooks 1-4
Mercenaries
Demensionbooks 1-4
Mutants in Orbit
Dragons & Gods
Coalition Wars 1-4
Conversion Book 1 & 2
14 issues of Rifter
Signed hardcover Basic book

* WB1, WB2, and SB2 are slightly damaged.

I would be ecstatic to get .25 of the cover price for the lot.


----------



## Deadguy (Mar 26, 2002)

Drew said:
			
		

> *Holy Crap! I can't believe anyone else has ever heard of this thing! I'm not sure where I got the book, but it somehow ended up in my hands. I passed it on to a friend (without his knowledge) and now he can't get rid of it. Its like a curse! The game was called "Fantasy Wargaming" and the cover proclaimed it "The Highest Level of All!" As I recall the game put a heavy emphasis on your character's astological sign. There were a number of disadvantages, but you simply rolled them at random. I know one of the disadvantages was "Homosexual." Yeesh...
> 
> The funny thing is, I can't recall anything about the actual system. I think it used % dice. *



I still have a copy somewhere. When I first saw it back in, oh 1982-ish I was really impressed. It had a lot of useful ideas about mediaeval society and how to use that in an RP game. And for its time it had some original ideas.

There were three 'classes' you could advance in: Warrior, Cleric and Wizard. But there was nothing stopping people mixing their classes provided they could justify it. Indeed everyone earned different XPs for each class all the time (there were tables for handling the different sources of XP). So it was an early multi-class system - and you even got to improve your attributes as you advanced.

Additionally, long before AM (or so it seemed) it had a system for magic that didn't rely on fixed spells but was a complex interplay of astrological associations. It allowed all sorts of approaches to magic, from the ecstatic shamanic to the intellectual and esoteric. But it was a really horrible kludge to try and work out what the difficulty was to cast the spell.

Likewise there was a specific system for appealing for miracles, from the powers of Heaven, the infernal powers, or even from the Norse gods. It was again overly complex, but wholly original at the time.

And the rest of the mechanics was very much traditonal 70's-early 80's mechanistic, e.g. you _had_ to calculate who was the party leader using a chart - because characters _had_ to obey him or her - so very wargamer-ish in that regard. There was other stuff too. I don't think it was really usable as a role-playing system, but it was a mine of ideas for mediaeval gaming.


----------



## Tsyr (Mar 26, 2002)

Dang deadguy, I actualy wanna get a copy of that now


----------



## Green Knight (Mar 26, 2002)

> I know one of the disadvantages was "Homosexual." Yeesh...




_GM: Ok, Green Knight, roll for your disadvantage. 

GK: Alright ... *rolls* Hmm, 87. *checks chart* Damn! I'm a homosexual!_  

ROTFLMAO!!! 

And eatenmyeyes, you're not the only one looking to offload his Rifts collection. Next couple of days I'm gonna be putting my entire Palladium collection up on eBay. I just can't stand the Palladium rules system, any more. Love the Rifts and Palladium Fantasy settings, but the rules get in the way of my enjoyment of the game. 

Had the same feeling with AD&D. After playing it for a while, it'd eventually start feeling like the rules were hamstringing me, cutting down my enjoyment of the game. 

Dragonlance 5th Age flat out sucked. No ifs and or buts about it. Character creation was especially lame. If you got lucky with the draw, then you'd have a character who was good at EVERYTHING. If you were unlucky at the draw, then you could end up with a character who's completely USELESS. 

GURPS was okay, but it was easily abused. 

Can't comment on Champions til I buy the Hero System 5th Edition book. We'll see.


----------



## Desdichado (Mar 26, 2002)

Seems to me that a lot of folks have picked some games that they didn't like aspects of and claimed that they were the _worst_ games ever.  Sounds like pretty sour grapes.  Champions certainly, by any stretch of the word (and I'm the kind of guy who strongly dislikes the design philosophy of Champions) isn't the _worst_ game ever, nor is Rifts, nor Palladium, etc.  Frankly, I don't see how anyone could _not_ vote for something ala FATAL or Synnibar.


----------



## Deadguy (Mar 26, 2002)

Tsyr said:
			
		

> *Dang deadguy, I actualy wanna get a copy of that now  *



I can't put my hands on my copy, but I am fairly sure that it is _Fantasy Wargaming_ by Bruce Galloway. Check up under BookFinder.com - I can see a fair few secondhand copies.


----------



## Doc_Klueless (Mar 26, 2002)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> * Frankly, I don't see how anyone could not vote for something ala FATAL or Synnibar. *




Speaking only for myself, I can only vote for games I've actually played, read, and/or remember, which leaves out FATAL or Synnibar.


----------



## Desdichado (Mar 26, 2002)

_



			Speaking only for myself, I can only vote for games I've actually played, read, and/or remember, which leaves out FATAL or Synnibar.
		
Click to expand...


_FATAL, at least, is a free download, so at least looking at it, when it got all that attention a few monthes ago, wouldn't have been hard.

I guess I just struggle with the concept that many people have picked games that can't possibly be the _worst_ games ever, just games that they had personal gripes with.  I dunno, maybe the purpose here was to vent, but I doubt it.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Mar 26, 2002)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> FATAL, at least, is a free download, so at least looking at it, when it got all that attention a few monthes ago, wouldn't have been hard.
> 
> I guess I just struggle with the concept that many people have picked games that can't possibly be the worst games ever, just games that they had personal gripes with.  I dunno, maybe the purpose here was to vent, but I doubt it. *



_


Well unless you had experience with every game system then you have to go with what you played.  Champions was one of the least fun games I've every bought, IMO._


----------



## dagger (Mar 26, 2002)

Anyone recommend a system with similar background as Twilight 2000. Ala modern combat with post accopcalyptic things.


----------



## Doc_Klueless (Mar 26, 2002)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *FATAL, at least, is a free download, so at least looking at it, when it got all that attention a few monthes ago, wouldn't have been hard.*




I hadn't even _heard_ of FATAL until this thread. I guess I have to little free time to follow every thread. Gotta pick and choose.  



> *I guess I just struggle with the concept that many people have picked games that can't possibly be the worst games ever, just games that they had personal gripes with.  I dunno, maybe the purpose here was to vent, but I doubt it. *




Is there any other way?  It's all subjective.


----------



## Col_Pladoh (Mar 26, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Worst RPG Ever?*



			
				S'mon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I gave my copy of Cyborg Commando (which cost me £1.99 new from the bargain bin) to a charity shop, so I can't say for sure, but I'm pretty certain your name is the only one on the box (in England this is known as the tort of 'passing off'...)
> The sad thing is that I really wanted it to be good, or at least a source of ideas.  Something like the Duke Nukem video game, perhaps.  But from the fully-android 'cyborgs'  (silly-looking robots with human brains in their torsos) to the unkillable amoebae that were the baddies, everything about it truly, truly sucked.
> ...




As publishes by NI, all three names were on the box, although I don't recall the order.

Actually, when I saw the end result I was not absolutely pleased. There are still notes on file here for the second and third sets. The game was going to add a step where the characters became exactly what you mentioned, brains in metal bodies, and finally they were to go back to humans in even bigger bodies, not unlike another game that was around back then...



Gary


----------



## Bozo (Mar 26, 2002)

*simple*

WEG Star Wars...OK lets make characters..oh and by the way no Jedi....


----------



## Ulrick (Mar 26, 2002)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *....Frankly, I don't see how anyone could not vote for something ala FATAL or Synnibar. *




I didn't vote because thanks to the fellows here at EN World, I was informed the both games sucked.  

Therefore, I haven't had any contact with either system.  And if that many people say those game suck, I'm not going to waste my time looking at them.

So, therefore, my choice for worst game ever is still GURPS.

And I just want to say thanks to all the people involved with running and maintaining EN World, and the people that come here regularly.  You guys and gals have saved me time and money in that you've shyed me away from horrible game settings and systems.

Thank You. 

Ulrick


----------



## Pielorinho (Mar 26, 2002)

Strangely, I'd put WoD as my second-favorite gaming system.  I really like games with moral ambiguities, games in which everyone has very plausible motives, games in which idealists come into bloody conflict with one another, and WoD accomplishes this better than nearly any other system.  Besides which, Pentex is a great explanation for so many things in the world today.  Did you know that Pentex owns Enron, and that Enron's collapse was due to Glasswalker interference?  Major werewolf coup, that.

I only played Wraith once.  It's a very interesting world, I think, but the dynamic of having another player control your shadow was more than I could take.  We were playing on a long road trip, and I was driving, and I eventually called a halt to the game when I realized that I was gripping the steering wheel until my knuckles turned white and was speeding about 30 miles over the speed limit.  That much stress isn't fun.  (Of course, it didn't help that the player controlling my shadow is a sadist).

My least favorite game is Paranoia.  A funny jokeworld for about fifteen minutes.  After that, the joke wears really thin for me.

Daniel


----------



## Wicht (Mar 26, 2002)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *I guess I just struggle with the concept that many people have picked games that can't possibly be the worst games ever, just games that they had personal gripes with.  I dunno, maybe the purpose here was to vent, but I doubt it. *



_

I gotta agree with you.  There have been many games I did not like the system for yet still felt were essentially playable.  In fact I might even attempt a try at one or two of them if goaded into it.  But F.A.T.A.L, or World of Synnibar, I would never even attempt having looked at the rules of each.  Those who wish place  legitimate games in the same category of "Worst Game Ever" with F.A.T.A.L. are being very insulting to the creators of those games.  There is no way that Paranoia, which is fun for many of us, (or Champions, or Gurps, or what have you) can be legitimately compared with the vile filth of the absolute worst RPG ever.   

And it will not take those who want to look at the rules of F.A.T.A.L. long to discover why those of us who have glanced at them rank it at the bottom of the bottom._


----------



## S'mon (Mar 26, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Worst RPG Ever?*



			
				Col_Pladoh said:
			
		

> *
> 
> As publishes by NI, all three names were on the box, although I don't recall the order.
> 
> ...




The horror, the horror...


----------



## Wormwood (Mar 26, 2002)

I didn't pick FATAL because I've only skimmed it. For all I know, the underlying system is sound and workable. I don't feel like wading through the hentai to find out. I chalk the game up to juvenilia, that's about it. 

Champions, on the other hand, devoured 8 hours of my life that I'll never get back. 

I stand by my choice.


----------



## Lisa Nadazdy (Mar 28, 2002)

> Anyone recommend a system with similar background as Twilight 2000. Ala modern combat with post accopcalyptic things.




AfterWars by Stellar Games (I think the company went under a few years ago). They made a number of interesting games, such as Nightlife, A.C.E. Agents, and my favorite, It Came from the Late, Late, Late Show.

The rules could be a touch clunky in places, but otherwise simple percentile rolls to detemine most actions. Weapon Combat was reasonably deadly, and the background was interesting (post nuclear world with a twist). But tried to stick to it's guns somewhat on what should realistically be in the setting.


----------



## olethros (Mar 28, 2002)

*Silhouette?*

Speaking of good and bad, what do people think of the Sillhouette system from dream Pod 9?

Speaking of bad, this thread sent me off to F.A.T.A.L.
Now I'm scarred for life....


----------



## Neqroteqh (Mar 28, 2002)

*What's wrong with FATAL?*

I don't see what the big deal is here... I'm not sure I like the rules (never played it), but my group already had come up with a formula for determining penis length and vaginal circumfrence, engaged in rape and demonic posession on a not too irregular basis, and engaged in every tasteless act you could imagine... all using the system of AD&D and D&D 3E.... Nothing new here. 

Worst RPG I've ever played?  Well, I can't say I have much love for World of Darkness (I chalk it up to bad game masters, however... the one time I played with a good Storyteller, I rather enjoyed it) or Marvel Super Heroes.

D&D 3E has to be my favorite game.  D&D 2E (with the Player's Option rules), Alternity (quite possibly the best RPG until d20 came along), and WEG's Star Wars also round out the list.


----------



## Utrecht (Mar 28, 2002)

Doc_Klueless said:
			
		

> [
> *Best:*
> James Bond 007 RPG by Victory Games = Beyond a doubt my favorite rpg ever. I loved that game and played it almost exclusively for about a year. [/B]




Hmmm, mabye I did not play with the right people, but my experience was downright mediocre... not horrible, but not great.  Further, while it was realy neat to use actual Real World equipment, the ability add new stuff seemed limited (however memory could be bad here)

Now to the Champions discussions:  I loove the system in theory and having a good GM that understands the rules in and out is essential...  The problem is that you never get anywhere...... as soon as you hit a combat - that was it for the evening (ok mabye you could get 2-3 combats in)


----------



## Pielorinho (Mar 28, 2002)

DocMoriartty said:
			
		

> *So what is it? What is the worst RPG you have ever played or even just read the rules on? *




I think some folks are losing sight of the original question in this thread, so I thought I'd quote it .

When I respond by saying "Paranoia" rather than "FATAL," it's because Paranoia is the worst game *that I've ever played, or that I've even just read the rules on*.  That means it's not in the same category as FATAL:  I've neither read that game nor played it.

My dislike of Paranoia in no way reflects on your* like of Paranoia, any more than your* dislike of World of Darkness reflects on my like of WoD.

Deep breaths, everybody!
Daniel

*generic "your" -- not you in particular!


----------



## the Jester (Mar 28, 2002)

Holy Crap! I can't believe anyone else has ever heard of this thing! I'm not sure where I got the book, but it somehow ended up in my hands. I passed it on to a friend (without his knowledge) and now he can't get rid of it. Its like a curse! The game was called "Fantasy Wargaming" and the cover proclaimed it "The Highest Level of All!" As I recall the game put a heavy emphasis on your character's astological sign. There were a number of disadvantages, but you simply rolled them at random. I know one of the disadvantages was "Homosexual." Yeesh... 

The funny thing is, I can't recall anything about the actual system. I think it used % dice.



Hey, I used to have it too... or maybe borrowed it from a friend?  I do remember that it had a cool system for on-the-fly spell creation, and I really liked the rules for piety or impiety...


----------



## diaglo (Mar 29, 2002)

well i didn't read all 11 pages of this thread so i don't know if it has been discussed yet.

but to answer the original question. the worst RPG i have ever played is 3ed D&D.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Mar 29, 2002)

It's strange, then, that you hang out at the largest 3e D&D fansite...


----------



## Humanophile (Mar 29, 2002)

diaglo said:
			
		

> *well i didn't read all 11 pages of this thread so i don't know if it has been discussed yet.
> 
> but to answer the original question. the worst RPG i have ever played is 3ed D&D. *




Something tells me that you haven't played the edition before it, in that case.  I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and hope you play enough games to find some real "worst ever" competition out there.

And as pointless commentary, I'll have to say FATAL's the worst game I've ever read, but some houseruled 2e games have surpassed it in terms of pointless sex, violence, gore, and sheer incomprehensibility.

Hmm...  Anyone wanna do a "worst house rules" thread?


----------



## Akunin (Mar 29, 2002)

dagger said:
			
		

> *Anyone recommend a system with similar background as Twilight 2000. Ala modern combat with post accopcalyptic things. *




If you can find it (it's very old) _The Morrow Project_ was a fun game.


----------



## Akunin (Mar 29, 2002)

*Re: Silhouette?*



			
				olethros said:
			
		

> *Speaking of good and bad, what do people think of the Sillhouette system from dream Pod 9?
> *




The Silhouette system makes me weep tears of joy.


----------



## alaric (Mar 29, 2002)

I really think alot of you are confusing "games i don't like", with "bad game design".  I would have to say that Champions, GURPS, Shadowrun, Rifts or Amber may not be your style, but that doesn't make them bad games.  In fact i don't see how  you could possibley consider them the worst RPG ever unless you simply have not seen some of the true horrors of the RPG industry.  Go take a look at FATAL, Synibar (sp?), or Spawn of Fashan.  These are the games that looked like the monkey's at typewriters  approach to game design.  They are so bad you have to wonder if it isn't a joke, and you can't tell which is worse, whether someone might actually be attempting to create a game like this, or that someone would spend that much energy on a joke.  You may not like strict rules, loose rules, no die, tons of dice, whatever, but at least half the games mentioned so far make internal sense, and there are people that actually enjoy playing those games.


----------



## Wormwood (Mar 29, 2002)

alaric said:
			
		

> *I really think alot of you are confusing "games i don't like", with "bad game design"... *




No we are not.

I chose Champions (gasp).

It was well designed, clearly written and internally consistent.

It was also the worst game I've ever played.

Period.


----------



## phoamslinger (Mar 29, 2002)

Cedric said:
			
		

> *In my experience, the people who don't like Champions, are the people who are too lazy to have actually read the book and understand it.
> 
> I'm not trying to make generic offensive statements, I'm just supporting one of my favorite and imo the best RPG out there.
> 
> ...




You forgot Spies, Savages, Space Opera, Sleuths, and a whole Slew of other kewl "S" words.

I'd bet that all the Champions nay sayers also had a problem with math in school.  Multiplying mixed fractions probably gave em all headaches.   Poor kids.

While I saw no point in Wraith, and ran screaming from Tunnels and Trolls. cringed from the polish town names in Twilight 2000, and still can't read the rules to Spawn of Fashawn in a single sitting, I think the game you're looking for is F.A.T.A.L.

So, did noncognitivism.com finally die the death it deserved?  What a pity.


----------



## Rowenstin (Mar 30, 2002)

Just read F.A.T.A.L. 

Yes, is that bad. 

It can´t be worse.

I´m not sure that game is not a joke.


----------



## LostSoul (Mar 30, 2002)

I'm surprised that many people have listed WEG's Star Wars as the worst game ever.  I love that game.  

Oh well, tastes vary.

The worst game I've ever played (there haven't been many) was AD&D.


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Mar 30, 2002)

Bushido 1st edition rules.  Wow.  Bad.

Didn't the original Space Opera rules neglect to include a melee combat system?


----------



## NiTessine (Mar 30, 2002)

The worst I've ever seen must be F. A. T. A. L.. That game was one sick puppy.

The worst I've actually played was RuneQuest, though that might be partly because of the DM.


----------



## Voneth (Mar 30, 2002)

alaric said:
			
		

> *I really think alot of you are confusing "games i don't like", with "bad game design".  I would have to say that Champions, GURPS, Shadowrun, Rifts or Amber may not be your style, but that doesn't make them bad games. *




Amber, SAGA, Everquest, LARP, and Castle Falkenstien -- no dice, oh my! The heresy!

I can't see how someone could say they were well versed in RPGs and not a try a diceless game. It's like saying you like a sport, but avoid watching games from certain stadiums.

Out of the above diceless games, LARPing gave me the worst expeirence. Out of the several games I played there was too much meta gaming, too much favortism, too much of the cliche plots and it seemed that every other ST was trying to make a business out it. 

Your milage may vary.


----------



## Azimer the Mad (Mar 30, 2002)

*In Defense of (Some)Champions*

Champions is the fastest super-hero system on the market. It has easy to understand rules that take up only 55 pages, including full martial arts and mecha creation rules. PCs can be created in 20 minutes or so. And the combat system is fast-paced, with most fights in my game lasting less than three rounds.

If you use the Fuzion version that is. 

My group's been using the New Millenium Fuzion rules, and having played basically every other superhero gaming system, it's the best.  I have a copy of the Big Blue Book of the old Champions, using the Hero System.  We get it out to torment people.  I swear, it has the best GMing advice I'm ever seen, and a personality/origins sheet that every should have to fill out for character in every campaign...but the numbers make my eyes bleed.  The Hero system looks like my old statistics homework.

And what kind of superteam has a shirtless wandering AUSTRALIAN ninja wearing a sash and poofy pants in the middle of San Fransisco? My god.  :rollseyes: And all the ready made villains look like the dorks that would get killed by Scourge in Marvel 80's comics.

So, if you want to play Champions, use the 1st edition New Milenium rules, with bits of the second edition (has some good changes, but missing some sections.  Very superior lifting/throwing/breaking tables).  IF you have the two sourcebooks, them all you need of the second edition is the new strength table, and I've seen it online in GM screen PDFs.

The system's free at www.thefuze.com and http://www.mecha.com/~conkle/fuzion/
At only 55 pages of rules that can be used to play NYPD Blue, G.I.Joe, Ninja Scroll, Call of Cthulhu, and soon my Changeling Fuzion game, I fully recommend it.

As to MY worst game...Robotech.  I swear, I've played or GMed almost ever Palladium system, but TMNT is the only one I'd ever want to return to.  I played in a Robotech game that lasted six hours.  It took a minute of game time.  Six hours for ONE MINUTE!  AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!
Misslesmisslesdodgemisslesmisslesdodgemisslemisslemybrainisfallingout....


----------



## hong (Mar 30, 2002)

*Re: In Defense of (Some)Champions*



			
				Azimer the Mad said:
			
		

> * The Hero system looks like my old statistics homework.*




Speaking as a professional statistician, I'll thank you not to compare my craft to the Hero system.

... unless you meant to say that statisticians can leap tall buildings at a single bound and all that jazz, that is. If so, please carry on.



> *
> And what kind of superteam has a shirtless wandering AUSTRALIAN ninja wearing a sash and poofy pants in the middle of San Fransisco?*




Too right. No right-thinking Australian ninja would be caught without a stubby in his hand.


----------



## rounser (Mar 30, 2002)

> No right-thinking Australian ninja would be caught without a stubby in his hand.




Poofy pants would be okay if they were tracky-dacs.  Ugg boots would complete the picture.  Not sure about the sash though...


----------



## ConcreteBuddha (Mar 30, 2002)

WORST = METASCAPE

BLEH!!!


----------



## hong (Mar 30, 2002)

ConcreteBuddha said:
			
		

> *WORST = METASCAPE
> *




I have heard that the latest Metascape, version 6.2 using the Mozilla rendering engine, is actually quite good.


----------



## Barovan (Mar 30, 2002)

Wow, you all brought me to post, I have been reading these boards for weeeks and I never posted but I could not keep myself from being suprised noone mentioned the worst game ever played by my group.  That bad part is we LOVE it.  And what game is it you ask (I hope):

Millennium's End.   

I do not know who it is by.  But it is one of the most unweildy systems I have ever seen.  So over researched it is painful!

Barovan


----------



## Black Omega (Mar 30, 2002)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Poofy pants would be okay if they were tracky-dacs.  Ugg boots would complete the picture.  Not sure about the sash though... *



Heh heh, too right!  Of course, Seeker was created back in the day when the US perception of Australia was based on Crocodile Dundee.  These days Croc Hunter would be more on target.

The BBB (AKA 4th Ed Hero System) was released back in 1989 so I'm not to tough on it's iconics.  They were pretty on track for comics back then.  I suspect the iconics for 5th Ed will look very different.


----------

