What game design/system mechanics do you hate the most?
Worst for me:
>Single die resolution (e.g. roll over TN on 1d20, roll under TN on 1d100)
>Luck mechanics that force you to take the re-roll
>Different subsystems for everything (magic, physical combat, virtual combat, etc.)
True Line of Sight.
>roll 2d6 for any check, plus useless bonuses
>6- is an arbritrary "fail forward" failure, 7 to 11 you kinda got what you but you get screwed, 12+ you get what you want for true but no one roll a 12 ever
Is this a game for people who likes to get fucked over by the gm and don't want to admit it?
>Single die resolution (e.g. roll over TN on 1d20, roll under TN on 1d100)
What, you prefer "roll until you fail"?
What game is that?
>12+
Did you mean 10 or is there really a game that makes it 12?
>I want everything to take forever
>I don't want to make actual decisions
The third one is actually reasonable as long as it doesn't go against the fluff.
the*World games Too bad cannot into statistics and thinks y he should be rolling without the "useless" bonuses.
Although it IS a game for people who like to get fucked by the GM.
In my experience, the players in Apocalypse World and especially Dungeon World succeed at most things they try
I thought it was different:
1-6: Failure.
7-9: Partial success.
10-12: Full success.
In my experience players in Broken World fail a lot. Also "yes, but..." can be a bitch too.
The point is that Apocalypse World is that the mechanics are meant to flow on from each other.
Firstly, gaining XP is easy, you just roll shit at least once per scene, done.
Anyway, on a 6 or lower, the GM makes things go worse or be more complicated for you.
On a 7-9, you kind of get what you want, but things still get complicated.
On a 10-12, you totally succeed.
Most of the time you roll a 7-9.
Now here's what most retards end up missing:
The game has 'Advanced Moves', as well as stat-ups. Advanced moves make something happen on a 12 and up.
And the 'something that happens' is that you have a permanent, unqualified success.
The entire point is that you keep spiralling into crazier and crazier shit... but eventually, you've levelled up enough that you start rolling 12+ and making things better and coming up on top, as long as you don't die first.
Obviously if you don't like the idea of "shit getting crazy" then you won't like the system.
I played it a relatively long time ago, may have fucked up the numbers without me noticing. But his description of the end states is pretty spot-on.
It's not 10-12 is a full success, it's just 10 and up (because you might roll up to a 15).
That said, enough experience lets you "open" certain moves, meaning a roll of 12+ gets you something epic.
here...just now read the rest of 's post and he's also pointed out the advanced moves thing. It's probably past my bedtime.
ehh for the separate systems thing, you kind of need that to an extent. I honestly don't think i have ever seen a game with a truely universal resolution system for everything. Similar systems yes, that's good, you want the separate systems to tie together and be coherent.
It's because everything doesn't work the same way and trying to abstract it as such tends to require a massive cognitive disconnect or simply be dull
For me it's:
>Dice that you have to add together to compare their result to a target number
>Luck mechanics that force you to take the reroll
>Subsystems that have no mechanical relationship to the rest of the game
Poor phrasing but this guy is right: narrativist games whose system was made by a 12-old should be banned.
A broken dice roller/random number simulation that only lands on a certain few numbers
Cannot stand Rifts. Hate the system, hate the setting, hate the mechanics of both Stat Gen and levelling. I'd burn the books before I'd play with them.
If you have a bonus of 0, every roll above or equal to 7 let's you do what you were trying to do. Thats 21 out of 36. 58% of posibilities of achieving what you wanted to achieve.
Yeah, a big chunk of that (results from 7 to 9) is going to be a "Yes but...", but no matter how screwed you are, you still get what you want.
The rest is narrative. You should try it user, we play games with it, role playing games.
Meant to answer
That sounds a little like Fate, m8.
My problem is with all PbtA games, be official, clones or fanmade. Those guys can't see how flawed thier "narrative exercise" is flawed as a game, and they pretend it is really a game. Shameful.
d20 save or die.
Why must the burden of failure by on the attacked, instead of the attacker?
A fighter can miss a swing with his sword, a wizard cannot miss with disintegrate, and it's up to the attacked party to save or die.
How is that fair? Fuck that old system, I'm glad I moved on.
He's talking about multiple dice for resolution, like GURPS' 3d6 roll under.
Would you rather a DM roll behind the screen and then announce that you die? The problem with "save or die" isn't the "save" part, it's the "or die" part.
Dice as conflict resolution mechanism.
For garbage, by garbage.
>Save or die
>One shot kills regardless of medium
>Sandwich abilities
>custom dice
More than 5 minutes to create character sheet.
Show us where Baker touched you, my dear butthurt user.
>Sandwich abilities
What?
Stuff you can pop then leave the table for five, fifteen minutes.
The d20 System in general with its combat and skill systems in particular. And reminder to all the uneducated swine on this board that only 3.X and PF are straight d20 System D&D games and 5e is a modified d20 System D&D game. OD&D, BECMI, B/X, RC, AD&D, 4e etcs are not d20 System games.
For a system that I like (Unisystem Classic) there are redundant options brought by splat proliferation. For example, there are two Qualities with the same point cost: One lets you (at the ZM's discretion) roll to see if your gut tells you that something's fishy about the environment; another lets you pretty much auto-detect any hazards you encounter.
>More than 5 minutes to create character sheet.
A toon, then.
Apocalypse World is good because of the tone and the way the game uses it's mechanics.
It's Dungeon World that mixes them with 4e combat maneuvers and confuses their function, while slapping on Hit Points and similar garbage, that gives the AW engine a bad name.
Trying to use PbtA for every kind of game is fucking retarded and Reddit needs to burn in hell for the amount of shilling they have done for that game. It's good but even Baker would admit it's not good for EVERYTHING.
AFMBE is total shit but I like the idea of it.
>4e combat manuevers
You're high.
Look at some of the fighter and ranger "moves" and tell me that those are meant as narrative vehicles to propel the story.