I still like AD&D. I've tried the newer versions and eh....I feel like I'm playing rules ripped directly from a video game. I've never had problems with the AD&D rules set. You accept all sorts of abstractions when you play TT games, it's just a matter of which ones you accept and which ones you reject. To me the big difference in AD&D and "Nu" D&D is the power scale. It's vastly overinflated on the player's end. AD&D could be very unforgiving if your D&D merely exercised restraint. Power growth was relatively slow for the first 6 levels, casters especially. "Nu" D&D kind of says "nah, let's build a ton of power directly into the early game and get the juices flowing." I'm always baffled when people say AD&D inhibits roleplaying while Nu D&D compliments it....Nu D&D structures a hell of a lot more and offers way more numbers candy for players and min/maxing. I don't see how that results in better roleplaying. Proponents of Nu D&D always tell me I can change what I don't like...and it's the same reason they don't play AD&D. No one picks up a ruleset so they can be forced to retcon half the shit they don't like.
Love old WoD, always will. I would just like to run a serious game of it sometime. And by serious, I mean preludes and all that. Characters with purpose. Everytime I try to play WoD, people treat it like another RPG in the WoD setting, rather than trying to play it as a WoD game. They never like intrigue or politics, they just want to fight their supernatural and get their supernatural on. There's so much more to the setting than that, but everyone rejects it as too emo or over-written. Parts of it are both of those things, but people often reject a lot about WoD except the specific mechanics. And even then they'll get pissed about stuff like Humanity. That's stuff is all fodder for roleplaying that, sadly, no one I introduce to WoD wants to engage in.
Haven't played a ton of New Shadowrun but I liked what I did play (messy ass abstractions that half the game is.) I agree that Shadowrun has always been a lil goofy but never failed to be awesome. I remember picking up my first book in a gaming store back in the 90s, and being mesmerized by that skull logo and banner work. It just looked so ominous and bad ass. The rules have always been a mess and the setting funky to say the least, but within the funk are tons of isolated pockets of awesome. Like Dunkelzan.
RIFTS is the same way as Shadowrun, only with an EVEN WORSE SYSTEM. I can't play RIFTS despite my desire to. It's got a flexible character system akin to GURPS, and some of the most awesome character classes ever, like Juicers, Ley Line Walkers and Glitterboys. But the meta rules system is a total train wreck, as it tries to address situations like what happens when conventional weaponry butts up against super structures and non-conventional materials. So you get situations like, how much damage would a fly do to a dragon, or get sucked into working out the mathematics of how much damage a nuclear blast could do a city-wide block if each structure has an MDC of X.
Love CoC. It's one of the few games where failure is an option and the best failure wins the game. It's always refreshing to play an RPG that isn't focused on character advancement and loot. Even people I know that hate "losing" love CoC.
Warhammer Fantasy Role-playing. Haven't played much of it, but I know the rule book pretty well by now and want to run a lite campaign sometime. I like it partly because I like the Warhammer Fantasy World, and there's just a few things about the rule system I find fun, like the career paths and magic system.
Hackmaster is ridiculous fun of the D&D variety. It lampoons the D&D system at many turns while managing to make the rules even more tangled. But it's got so many funny things going on, like dying in character creation. I can take Hackmaster in small doses. People that are drawn to Hackmaster over other things tend to concern me as gamers though.
The Middle-Earth Roleplaying Game. Really old, totally out of print now I imagine. I don't remember a lot of it, but I remember some pretty kick ass critical hit charts and some interesting ways in which your race interacted with your class to produce your skills.
Legend of the Five Rings. By far one of the most polished and interesting RPGs I've ever played. I started originally with the CCG. You have to like Feudal Japanese Culture and Mythology to get into the setting, but once you've gotten beyond that the setting is amazing. The clans are ultra detailed and offer multiple ways to represent them, it's got court intrigue and politics, crazy ass Japanese magic belief systems and monsters, and the rules have their own execution that's just unique from so many other TT RPGs. And the artwork is gorgeous, pretty much across all the books. Of all the games I would most readily jump into, a Legend of the Five Rings game would be the first.
Dead Lands. The Wild West meets Call of Cthulhu, sort of. It's another game that really does it's own thing with rules, incorporating playing cards and all sorts of other junk. I sometimes struggle with it but I haven't played a ton of it. The setting is mostly what I play for, at times I find the rules a little over developed for the sake of being intricate or different.
Author
Topic: Tabletop RPGs: What do you like and why? (Read 6927 times)