Which RPG do you actively dis-recommend whenever someone asks for a recommendation, and for what reason?

Everything. Every RPG system is terrible, and you shouldn't use any of them.

>he's afraid of a little table
Fun fact: you don't need the tables to run it.

Then the book is overloaded with unnecessary things.

Really ringing endorsement there chief

D&D 5e
Which is a shame, there is some actual improvement and good ideas in there. But it's a half baked game, nothing about it is really finished. The rules are simple enough that not following them causes some significant changes in the game but they have enough holes and hang-ups that make it a real drag to play.
It's the uncanny valley between 3.5 and 2. It's horribly obvious it was made by way of fan input and not by a desire to make a cohesive ruleset.

I don't care about this thread but I want to say that the The Punisher series is shit and I'm not sure if I want to see how bad the latter half is. I think I'd rather just watch the Punisher's scenes in Daredevil looped over.

Do you work for Polygon, by any chance?

They're helpful, not necessary. One of them is "here what your damage will be at certain percentages in case you can't do it in your head". That's not necessary, but it's nice to have.

For people getting into rpgs I dis-recommend all simulationist games. It's usually not what people are looking for, even if they think that's what they're looking for.

This.

3.Pathfinder, there are systems that offer a plethora of options character building without being convoluted pieces of shit. In fact, you're better off running an Eberron game in Mutants and Masterminds than you are in 3.5.

5e isn't a terrible system by any means, but it is the very epitome of average. It's not so much that I dissuade people from playing 5e, at it's core you can make something fun, but I'd rather people at least try a system that isn't the ONE MILLIONTH session of the same tired variation of the same old story in the same old fucking system.

I barely even know what a Polygon is. The Punisher is one third Frank being too busy being given a shitty backstory to brutally punish criminals without shitty gore-obscuring cuts and laughable fake gunfire, one third some asshole and his alleged PTSD that I don't care about, and one third an unbelievable vaguely brown strong independent womyn that they spend too much time trying too hard and failing to pass off as hyper-competent. Nice assumptions though, fagtron.

Shadowrun, The Dark Eye, 3.5, and PF. All of them are too complex for their own good. Probably would have to include GURPS then, but people outside of Veeky Forums hardly know it anyway. Then there's FATE, which as it's own system is way too bland. More specific ones get a pass though, although not for beginners

5e is a more complete and well thought out game than any previous edition, besides maybe 4e which was a bloated mess.
I agree it is bland though and it has a lot of shit rules.

>there are systems that offer a plethora of options character building without being convoluted pieces of shit.
Like what?
> In fact, you're better off running an Eberron game in Mutants and Masterminds than you are in 3.5.
Mutants and Masterminds doesn't have any of the same character options nor any of the same monsters.
You're asking me to homebrew a ton of shit when a system that works just fine is built for that exact setting.
Fuck off.

Shadowrun 5e, Pathfiner, and 3.5, primarily out of negative experiences with all of them. Partly because a lot of my friends trying to get into RPGs ask me about one of them, and all three are terrible introductions to RPGs.

Yeah, I'm not the biggest fan of 3.5, but a lot of Eberron's design is based around doing its best to make all the janky bullshit of 3.5 justified in setting. It's kind of hard to divorce the setting from 3.5

I tried Fate Accelerated and it didn't click for me.
It's basically freeform.

Any version of Dungeons and Dragons.

Because it's not that great, and it's all anyone plays, and I think the hobby would benefit from more diversity in that regard.

At the same time, Eberron is very much a setting with an action-movie high-fantasy feel, which 3.5 sucks dick at.

Just pretend that the daily powers or something are fueled by some meta narrative mechanic. If you're totally into simulationism, then obvious 4e fails, but it's easy to see a hero "pulling out all the stops!" for some critical engagement.

Happens all the time in media. In addition, the unification of power design over all the classes massively improved balance.

Two generalized suggestions I always make"

Don't play anything made by White Wolf before 2004 including the remakes of those games. The systems were always bad but the fluff hasn't aged well and attempts to reconcile it with the modern day have just made the writers look like a bunch of out-of-touch morons. Also if you must play Exalted don't play with people immersed in the community. They are all awful.

The other game is DnD 3.PF. All other versions of DnD have some merit or value as a play experience that's different from the others. 3.PF's most easily replicated play experience is a depthy Diablo clone with lots of widgets. At least 4E had the good sense to just be that instead of pretending it wasn't. I won't play 4E but it's a better play experience than 3.PF can ever be.

>Mutants and Masterminds doesn't have any of the same character options nor any of the same monsters.

Have you even read a MnM book in your entire life?

1. 2e had a whole supplement for fantasy games

2. 3e doesn't even need a supplement because the system is ridiculously flexible with character/setting building and even if you somehow have trouble making it with the base book, Power Profiles and Gadget Guides both offer a massive list of different examples of how you can make spells and magictech shit.

3. Several people I've seen here before have already used it for Eberron

4. Even I ran a campaign that was straight up Eberron-like with armor with exploding runes, dwarves wearing more loot than you could find stashed in a dragon's hoard, and hell, even summoning giant monstergirl elementals that smashed enemies with their tits.

Eh, it took like a year and two post-core books for 4e to feel feature complete. The fact that it didn't launch with its Background element is pretty ridiculous. Plus the missing 'classic' options that annoy people, though that never really bothered me personally.
I think 5e and Rules Cyclopedia are the most 'together' versions. Which isn't to say that everybody should like them, just that you aren't missing anything "necessary" if you have just the core text.

>that they spend too much time trying too hard and failing to pass off as hyper-competent
Really? I felt they went out of their way to make her incompetent. She's laughably bad at her job because she's got a pet project that she's got tunnel vision on until that happens to cross over into doing things she's supposed to actually do as part of her position. Sam Stein had to badger her into paying attention to shit, partly because the entirety of his character was 'exposition in a suit.'
Punisher's biggest problem is that it was at least three episodes too long.

Except it was balanced because it neutered wizards, not because of its gay-ass artificial structure.

>You can only cast X number of spells because...because...well shut up

>1. 2e had a whole supplement for fantasy games
Okay. Cool.
>2. 3e doesn't even need a supplement because the system is ridiculously flexible with character/setting building
I didn't say I COULDN'T make it, just that there is no reason to when 3.5 is all right there and ready to go. You sound like a GURPS fag.
>3. Several people I've seen here before have already used it for Eberron
Okay. Several people I've seen here have played FATAL, that doesn't mean it's a good idea.
>Even I ran a campaign that was straight up Eberron-like with armor with exploding runes, dwarves wearing more loot than you could find stashed in a dragon's hoard, and hell, even summoning giant monstergirl elementals that smashed enemies with their tits.
That sounds like the stupidest fucking shit I've ever heard of and makes me want even less to do with your gay-ass system, which by the way I have played briefly.

GURPS; because no matter what the question is, the answer is always GURPS.

Because spells take time to prepare, and use up magical energy that takes 8 hours to refresh. This has been part of D&D lore since like 1e AD&D.
If fighters were explicitly magical in their abilities, then it would be fine for them to obey the same rules.

This. I don't understand why anyone that says 4e's powers are narrative-breaking doesn't realize how dumb that sounds as a defense for 3.5 or 5.
Personally, I'd prefer some sort of mana pool everyone has and give wizards and fighters different ways to apply it, but NO WE CAN'T HAVE MAGIC FIGHTERS BECAUSE I WANT MY SUPERWIZARDS AND EVERYDUDES AND NEVER THE TWO SHALL MEET.

4e because I personally don't like it. They tried to simplify the game and broke it. I personally play 3.PF and dislike 5e, but 5e is a good way to start so I'll actively recommend 3.PF as my personal favourite, admit there are merits to 5e even if I don't like it personally, but avoid 4e at all costs

>Barbarians can only rage so many times per day because...because...well shut up

>Because spells take time to prepare, and use up magical energy that takes 8 hours to refresh.
Martial Powers:
>Because it takes time to consider which skills you'd prefer to focus on using in this particular combat situation and using them exerts physical effort, which takes time to refresh
Not really that hard, DESU, but I still hate it when people who refuse to compromise with magic fighters like you mentioned.

Didn't 5e try to do something similar with Superiority Dice but 3.grognards whined about it?

Anima: Beyond Fantasy.
No game should be this complicated.

Actually the opposite happened. Pretty much everyone like the Superiority Dice (and the Dragon Sorcerer's original form) but they both were killed for some retarded reason.

>Dragon Sorcerer's original form
I'm not familiar.

Everyone liked them after the fact.

During the playtest events they held which were mostly attended by grognards who were pushing for more 3e-centric stuff (same grognards who shat on the idea of just having a mage class and the different arcane caster types being variants of it), they said it was god awful.

Rough recollection here, but as I recall, the original dragon sorc used MP and had to balance their MP usage against a willpower mechanic. Using MP in bursts gave benefits of their draconic heritage, use too much and they go full man-dragon and become a melee beast.

Yes, because the designers just decided to apparently nerf it because, I don't remember, the class that fights did too much damage(?!?). My hatred shall ever burn.
Same thing that happened with Samurai,
>Samurai is OP
>Okay
>So let's make him worse than Battlemaster so you'll just choose Battlemaster again
>(Sigh)
Whoever designed Wild Shape needs to be dragged out into the street and shot

Because they get tired, nigger.
THEY ALSO GET MORE RAGE DURATION BASED ON THEIR CONSTITUTION.
There is NOTHING explaining why fighter can do his cool disarm / preciase double damage swing once per day. It's just bullshit.

And 4e fans do the same shit every time...
>Well, well, because he's tired afterward
Then why can't he get more uses of the ability with a higher Con?
>Cause that'd break the game and be stupid, numbnuts.
...Okay
>Also, it's because he was in a certain instance when he could use that maneuver
Oh... so how come he can set off the power whenever he wants? It doesn't require a situation to be set up, like the 3.5 tactical feats.
>well, well, it's because it just happens to work out that way
So in the millions of 4e games out there, the characters just happen to choose to use an ability when it's best?
>w-w-w-w-well, no, players have narrative control
Outside of their characters? Doesn't sound like a roleplaying game to me. Also doesn't explain why it's always ONCE per day that they get into these situations. Seems like 4e's power system is arbitrary and bullshit. Wizards can get away with once per day spells because magic has its own rules unconnected from the reality we know. It's unfair, but that's the way it is. Unless you're saying martials are spellcasters (which they are in 4e, mechanics-wise), in which case they are drawing from some pool of martial power that isn't ever really explained. Also goes against the assumptions of a D&D fighter. And 4fags will just go "wahh you're just salty we slaughtered your sacred cow" as if that is an argument by itself.

>Because it takes time to consider which skills you'd prefer to focus on using in this particular combat situation and using them exerts physical effort, which takes time to refresh
Explain why I can't try to disarm someone two rounds in a row? Why that I can only use it once per fight because that situation where I can disarm them only comes up once per f ight, but I get to choose when it comes up and it comes up in every fight if it's an encounter power.

Load of fucking bullshit.

>I barely even know what a Polygon is

TIL user failed geometry

>Using MP in bursts gave benefits to their draconic heritage, use too much and they go full man-dragon and become a melee beast

what the fuck that sounds amazing

>Wizards can get away with once per day spells because magic has its own rules unconnected from the reality we know.

Okay. 4e fighters are Muscle Wizards now.

I fixed the game for you. You can go ahead and enjoy the best that D&D has to offer now.

>then why can't they get more uses of the ability with a higher con
because that's not how the game works? You honestly sound like you're cherrypicking two different editions at different times to make your points.

>Barbarians get more duration in this edition
>So why doesn't a different class do something similar in a different edition?

Basically for the same reason the Lucky Feat refreshes on a rest. Or why magic items refresh on sunrise. Because you get this opportunity to exploit. It's (boy I know this is gonna cause some rage) a narrative power. The character gets advantage on THIS attack or THIS save because he's thinking about his poor widowed mother who needs medicine that the goblin stole. The Fighter is able to disarm THIS time because he's able to see a point of weakness at THIS particular story moment.
Same reason why HP is literally plot armor and Wizards get more of it as they get older despite the fact that they're probably getting weaker if IRL rules applied.
>We can't use this magic an unlimited amount for story reasons
>We can't take more than X damage or die for story reasons
>If you roll a 20 on a death saving throw you return to 1 for story reasons

I discovered RPGs with this game due to my weaboos friends. Every other games seems so simple now.

>when a system that works just fine

Mage: The Awakening, a game for wankers.

9/10s of the fanbase are autistic idiots who want wave their "Wikipedia doctorates" at each other on how to make the most broken effect with the less amount of the Arcanums.

1/10 of the fanbase as pretentious idiots that think the 90s ideology of the edgy faggot of Dave Brookshaw is some mind-shattering revelation.

At least with Ascension, most fans agree Phil Brucatto is a hack.

Eh, honestly expected this response.

FFG Star Wars is so dumb I hate it. In the first session it was like everyone came from clown school and pc’s and npc’s dropped their guns. The whole weird loose system and my playersvseen making enemies drop their guns was the best thing to do so that’s all they did.

I also hate how it needs so many books to be playable. Absolute waste of time and money. Even needs gimmick dice.

>The whole weird loose system and my playersvseen making enemies drop their guns was the best thing to do so that’s all they did.
This is the other reason why disarming every turn isn't really supported by the system.

>thread is full of petty shitflinging, nitpicking and butthurt

You can have fun with basically any game so I tend to butt the fuck out when it comes to that. I'll argue for systems if someone hasn't made the choice yet.

It is/was but this was during the closed part of the test where people complained about anything that wasn't like 3.5e.
After the bitching the dev team even talked about holding the sorc back so they could make it unique in another way, which led to people bitching about how they didn't want another 4e where "core classes" were locked behind later books.

Except it is it’s listed as a thing you can do. Go read the book. Not that I expect you damn Star Wars ffg fans are so bad at reading mechanics in a system it’s lucky they have enough brain power to roll dice let alone the "complexity" of seeing how basic and shit the system is. So easy to cheese and it expects the players to do all the creative work which can back fire with some groups like mine.

There are literally hundreds, if not thousands of RPGs out there.

4e
13th Age
Strike!
Valor

Nothing good comes of those.

End of the World is such a fucking nothing system. I can't believe anyone had the balls to charge money for it.

What games would you say fall under the "simulationist" banner?

Sorry, I forgot to link that to a previous post. Supposed to be continuing from

>it was balanced because it neutered wizards
So it did a good job?

It really depends on the context.

I generally encourage people to look outside of 3.5 and Pathfinder, though, so I tend to tell people not to play those. It's not because I have a particular hateboner for them, it's really just that I feel there are a great many RPGs which are underappreciated because those are the ones that everybody sticks to for whatever reason.

Can't help but to agree, user. I add PbtA and Fate to the list too, as the fanbase of those two are not as heavily medicated as they should be.

Fuck d%
Take. That. Back.

I love d100s but Runequest fucking sucks.

Is Basic Roleplaying any good?

3.5
Pathfinder
FATE
SW

That's why 40krp is where its at my nigga.

>Don't play anything made by White Wolf before 2004
Unless you want to be 90s.

Let me be frank here and say that I enjoyed reading your position. I dot agree for some, and for some your disadvantages I even see as advantages. I love to use FATE for Superheroes and Kino settings like Supernatural and X files rounds for example, so I would agree that it's good for those types of rounds.

Thanks for taking the time.

Yes. Then again I like RQ, so..

Why did you only post a quarter (or is it a sixth) of the sheet?

Yeah, I got turned right the fuck off The Punisher when FRANK FUCKING CASTLE started being merciful.

I went in expecting The Punisher being a hammer and punishing criminals in increasingly violent fashion. What I got was poorly written intrigue spygame bullshit. I couldn't care about basically any of the side characters, and it's the least Punisher incarnation of the Punisher ever to grace the light of day.

Garbage. Pure garbage.

I bought FFG's Force and Destiny because I thought maybe they would come up with some original effects for their special dice crap. What I got was 500 pages of nigh-unreadable shit that overexplains fucking everything. I even bought a supplement becausethe thing is a slog to read and I thought it might provide a more bite-sized bit of options to help me better consider the mechanics (plus, more stuff).
No such luck.

>Shadowrun 5e,
thirding Shadowrun, it's exclusively for people who like DnD 3.5 who wish the system had 10x more bullshit to keep track of and a more poorly written rulebook

Superiority dice in general got whittled down because they decided they wanted to have a simpler base design.

k den, Kanye.

Any D&d and pathfinder

The reason is:

>d&d is created and get famous
>its the first rpg so (since its famous) you have all those extreme amount of rpg players with different point of view of how a rpg should be, playing the exact same rpg
>after some amount of time playing some players discover some stuff they think are flaws, while discover some rules they think are really awesome
>because they have very different views on what a rpg should be (despise playing the exact same rpg), what some guy think is a good idea wont be considered a good idea by the other player, what some consider a shitty idea will be considered a good idea by other rpg
>new system is made based at this enviroment, and create a mess of a rpg system.
>many of those players quickly jump into the new system, expecting fixed to what they think are flaws
>because the players have very different opinions on what rpg should be (despise playing the same exact system), what is a flaw to some is a fix to another, and what is a fix to another is a flaw to someone. So the system CAN'T be fixed.
>all those extreme amount of players quickly jumping to this new system, bring new (to rpg) players to the new d&d system
>this make the game have an extreme amount of rpg players with different point of view of how a rpg should be, playing the exact same rpg
>because they have very different views on what a rpg should be (despise playing the exact same rpg), what some guy think is a good idea wont be considered a good idea by the other player, what some consider a shitty idea will be considered a good idea by other rpg
>new system is made based at this enviroment, and create a mess of a rpg system. No one knows what the system/d&d is suposed to be, because it was created based on a mess.
>the story continue ad infinitum

>Yeah, I got turned right the fuck off The Punisher when FRANK FUCKING CASTLE started being merciful.

I mean, he's done that in the actual comics, not every Punisher story is The Punisher War Journal. The Punisher has often been tied very heavily to society, when War Journal came out there was a major societal dissatisfaction with criminals actually getting punished while right now stuff like decriminalisation, PTSD in veterans and the role of police are major societal things.

But yeah, the Punisher has had entire storylines where he's not actually killed anyone (He's used less-than-lethal rounds enough that they actively refer to him having 'Mercy Bullets' in the comics at various points).

GURPS because honestly it has the most fatal flaw any RPG can have: it's just fucking boring.

>HP is literally plot armor
Plot armor is influenced by how healthy you are?

Yup.
Increases plausible deniability for surviving wounds.

>GURPS is pretty good but it only works for "heroic realism" games and trying to use it for anything else is retarded.

You must be bad at the system, then.

>HURR 4E SUX GUIS
>Has never actually played 4E

Stuff like GURPS. If your rules for combat look like the 3.x grapple rules in terms of steps to complete each turn you're dealing with a simulationist game. There are some that do what they do better than others, but if the game is trying to mimic each progression of events "I grab, I control, I pin, I disarm, they get to resist each time" rather than "I attack" it's simulationist.

>simulationism = complexity

See "Last Action Hero"
>Just a flesh wound!

Oh hell yes. A beaten down, hurt character is much more likely to catch a bullet in fiction than one fresh and raring to go unless the author wants to go 'Look, this is for serious yo'.

>being this much of a brainlet
Do you need L and R on your fucking shoes or something?

That's why.

GURPS