After 40+ years of playing TTRPGs, my list of design flaws would be (in order)

1. A game that is entirely self-referential in its setting and concept. If the game bears no resemblance to Earth history, mythology, etc., and exists in the mind of its creator, in some alternate reality only he can fully comprehend and appreciate (Numenera is a classic example). Players don't have time to indulge your autism --things need to make sense and be easy to absorb. I'm not going to read your 300 pages of back-story to understand the game world.

2. Complexity is perfectly fine. Confusing rules are not. D&D 5e is not a bad system because it is complex: it is bad because it is a confusing, convoluted mess (wait, how many special actions do I get? What is a creature's "legendary action"? So I have 50 skills and these intersect with my feats? And the feats change the game game rules? I just need a few hours to write up a new character ...)

3. Slow speed of adjudication. If it takes 30 minutes to get through one combat round, you have a big problem with your system. Again, D&D 5e, I am looking at you.

4. Injecting lifestyle choices and real-world politics into the game to placate and pander to identity groups.

5. Depending on derivative content and concepts that have already been explored: lack of originality.

Quote from: MerrillWeathermay on February 14, 2025, 08:29:31 PM1. A game that is entirely self-referential in its setting and concept. If the game bears no resemblance to Earth history, mythology, etc., and exists in the mind of its creator, in some alternate reality only he can fully comprehend and appreciate (Numenera is a classic example). Players don't have time to indulge your autism --things need to make sense and be easy to absorb. I'm not going to read your 300 pages of back-story to understand the game world.

You know, I might have argued with you if you hadn't cited Numenera as an example. I picked up the pdf of that, read through it, could not grasp the setting. So I went and played the CRPG for it. Disconnected with the game in a couple of hours because I couldn't engage with the setting enough to even make roleplaying decisions. Just felt like I was picking random options for the sake of moving things along. That became my classic example as well for a setting which is just too weird to be functional.

Quote from: Chris24601 on February 14, 2025, 07:46:24 PM* 4E scaled up all four of to-hit, AC, hit points, and damage with every level... resulting in a quadratic increase in performance and a narrow band in which various opponents could even be a threat to the PCs without either being trivial (indeed, one high level module for 4E included a veritable sea of ghouls... thousands of them... as being merely DIFFICULT TERRAIN for the encounter) or completely overwhelming (at +3 levels to you, your ability to drop a monster was roughly halved relative an even level one, while the monsters ability to drop a PC was roughly doubled... in a thirty level game that means maybe 10% of the existing monsters can even be used and none can really be placed randomly).

Interesting,  where durability and raw-power are what are primarily scaling but combat skill plateaus much faster.

I tackled that problem from a slightly different angle, where stat scaling was an opportunity cost issue, you could have more HP, but forego better damage, or have better damage but miss out on better AC, combined with a very small level cap of 10, it meant you typically didn't have Demi-God PCs.

but quite the novel approach, I assume the main and primary felt benefit of that is even characters of different levels didn't feel that far apart? and likewise for monsters, those that were considered lower level never quite ceased to be a threat?
 

Quote from: Socratic-DM on February 15, 2025, 01:10:01 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on February 14, 2025, 07:46:24 PM* 4E scaled up all four of to-hit, AC, hit points, and damage with every level... resulting in a quadratic increase in performance and a narrow band in which various opponents could even be a threat to the PCs without either being trivial (indeed, one high level module for 4E included a veritable sea of ghouls... thousands of them... as being merely DIFFICULT TERRAIN for the encounter) or completely overwhelming (at +3 levels to you, your ability to drop a monster was roughly halved relative an even level one, while the monsters ability to drop a PC was roughly doubled... in a thirty level game that means maybe 10% of the existing monsters can even be used and none can really be placed randomly).

Interesting,  where durability and raw-power are what are primarily scaling but combat skill plateaus much faster.

I tackled that problem from a slightly different angle, where stat scaling was an opportunity cost issue, you could have more HP, but forego better damage, or have better damage but miss out on better AC, combined with a very small level cap of 10, it meant you typically didn't have Demi-God PCs.

but quite the novel approach, I assume the main and primary felt benefit of that is even characters of different levels didn't feel that far apart? and likewise for monsters, those that were considered lower level never quite ceased to be a threat?
 

Mostly the latter, that even a low level monster is a potential threat if you don't act to keep it from harming you.

Regarding durability and raw power vs. skill increasing, it should be noted that my system ended up with a separate Edge (non-physical hit points; skill, luck, fatigue tolerance) and Health (actual physical damage) scores.

Only Edge and Threat (how much edge you needed to spend to avoid taking an actual hit) scaled with level.

Health and the Wounds weapons inflicted did not scale at all (Health would increase or decrease if your Endurance attribute changed, but that was it).

Essentially, your Edge and Threat capabilities represent your increasing skill once you hit proficiency with a weapon (the attack roll bonus). You have a greater capacity to turn aside killing blows using less effort and more skill at forcing opponents into leaving themselves open for a telling blow, but sometimes in a given six-second turn the opponent just doesn't give you even a chance to attempt that opening (you fail your attack check) or their efforts so off that it requires no effort at all to avoid the attack (they miss with their attack).

And that ability to turn aside blows IS finite. Even a master swordsman will tire after a long enough battle. Even they can be overwhelmed by enough opponents of basic skill through sheer weight of numbers. Eventually, through fatigue (depleting Edge) or bad luck (criticals bypass Edge to inflict wounds) the master will falter if enough is thrown against them.

Now, the master will probably take many of those weaker opponents with him... because the threat he can deal will quickly overwhelm their Edge, but unless he can stop to rest, the weight of numbers will eventually whittle through his own pool of Edge.

By contrast, with a master vs. a master, both will have high pools of Edge, but also are capable of dealing out more threat with each attack so the battles don't drag on too long.

Roughly speaking, a starting PC warrior could expect to defeat about four typical guards by himself, though he might take enough actual damage in the process to need a day or two to fully recover. By level 15 (the max for PCs) that PC warrior could probably overcome twenty or so such guards at once by himself, with a similar need to recover, but if they came at him in groups of 4 or 5 at a time he'd be able to handle significantly more (because he would likely be able to drop many of those or 4-5 men before they could even act, while he'd only be able to dispatch a fraction of the twenty before they got to act).

That's where the 'every character should have tactical choices to make' comes into play as finding ways to minimize your exposure to attacks while allowing you to efficiently dispatch enemies will often be the difference between victory and defeat.

Quote from: David Johansen on February 14, 2025, 08:20:54 AM5. Making furry erotics game

6. Making self insert NPC in furry erotics game

7. Including your contact information in the npc stat block in furry erotics game.

That seems oddly specific.

Quote from: Hague on February 15, 2025, 05:44:44 PM

Quote from: David Johansen on February 14, 2025, 08:20:54 AM5. Making furry erotics game

6. Making self insert NPC in furry erotics game

7. Including your contact information in the npc stat block in furry erotics game.

That seems oddly specific.

I think it's actually just a play on an old meme about a sci-fi hierarchy of who is cooler with published authors of non-tie-in novels at the top then several branching paths that ultimately converge at the bottom with furry Star Trek fanfic with a self-insert.

Quote from: antonioGUAK on February 14, 2025, 07:51:55 AMHi I want to make a series cositing of 7 thing you should avoit when desining a TTRPG. this is inspired in 7 dealy sins of TCG desing (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR2tVSC-sng&list=PLphu8NE8GQc4ldfNEEFX3dOPv_ihxADvs) please be speficic. I want things that can be applied only in TTRPG. and also it dont have to be realate to the 7 dealy sins of cristianity. I only have 4

2. Trying to make an existing game with little to no changes of your own (clones)

I think the success of OSE and that Warhammer clone prove otherwise. Marketing, building a name and brand are more important.

OTOH, I don't think any of the 5e clones that popped up due to the OGL kerfuffle ever really took off, even though some had branding (like the Kobold one).

It just needs to have a market whose needs weren't being met. OSE took over because LL was more or less dead, and OSRIC doesn't try to compete like a real RPG, and S&W sucks. (And other OSR games often have really crappy licenses that probably hurt widespread adoption)

Personally I would say

1) Not making odds of dice rolls obvious

Like I was reading Tiny Cthulhu, which uses the Tiny D6 system. Basically all skill tasks can be handled by either rolling 1-3d6s and if any comes up a 5 or 6, it succeeds. But what are the odds? I was trying to figure them in my head and couldn't past the 1d6. Using pencil and paper though, it's like 55% for 2d6, and 70% for 3d6. If you are going to do something like, tell the GM, so the players also know.

2) Even skilled people failing frequently

This is a common problem, like in the above, even someone good will fail 30% of the time. BRP also has a problem with this. You can sort of handwave it away, not requiring rolls for things, or doing d20's "Take 10 or Take 20"

3) Characters should be wildly different even if they have the same profession

Sherlock Holmes, Philip Marlowe, Philo Vance, and Dr. Thorndyke are all private detectives, but do things differently. You can extend it to detectives like Miss Marple or Ironsides

4) Not doing research, especially when it comes to weapons and such.

Some history people get mad at Gygax from taking his armor descriptions from a certain book and using things like chainmail and banded mail instead of "maile" and what not, but he at least picked real books and stuck with them.

But what bugs me is gun stats. I can live with abstract ones like light pistol, heavy pistol, etc. But some go into specifics and are just wrong. Like a .45 doing more damage than a .357 magnum.

But also space might be cold, but it's also a vacuum. You won't instantly freeze to death, because it's like a thermos.

5) Game rules should at least try to make sense in the setting. Or the setting should reflect the ramifications of the game rules.

The most obvious one here is demi-humans in fantasy living so much longer than humans, but not ruling the world. D&D did it originally with level limits, then just handwaved it away when 3e hit.

Conversely, Mystara decided that there would enough maximum level magic-users to have their own nation, especially since they are effectively immortal (since in B/X D&D, potions of longevity had no chance of failing)

6) Not providing enough source material for gamemaster to run the game

A random dungeon generator doesn't cut it. If you are going random table, do it like Kevin Crawford.

7) Games written with some sort of weird fetish, but not making it obvious so people without that fetish can avoid it.
 

I basically only feel like 3.

1) Using the time of the GM, the players, or worst of all, the entire troupe at the table poorly. All RPG gameplay is ultimately limited by the amount of time you can stick your butt to the seat. I am not saying that all mechanics need to be ultralight, but in the words of Kurt Vonnegut, you should, "use the time of a total stranger so they don't feel it was wasted."


2) A lack of creative ambition. I get not wanting to make too many changes to an established core mechanic, but half the time when I'm reading through new projects I am left wondering if the author wants to design games or if they want to have designed something popular.

3) Overdone worldbuilding. Most GMs and players are fantastic at worldbuilding if you give them the Bob Ross broad strokes. They are less good at coming up with things that reinforce game tone and genre. This means that making an RPG can be like mixing many quickbreads; don't overmix it. Add just enough worldbuilding to make the game come together and then walk away and let the players or the GM take it from there.

Top five things that will make me not play your RPG.

1.  Weird or proprietary dice. We already have enough dice that cover everything. If I need a 5-sided dice with three skulls, a bullseye, and a star on the sides, I'm out. 

2.  Esoteric ways to roll a random number.  They're just dice, man.  Just roll them and do elementary math at best.

3.  A page count over 150.  250, tops.  This is a personal preference, but I don't need rules for sword fighting in the rain, left handed, with low morale. 

4.  Any game written with a specific morality pre-ordained for the players.  You shouldn't have to be a squeaky clean paragon who rescues oppressed black kittens from evil trees because the trees are owned by a MAGA hat wearing NPC.  I kill bad people.  For money, typically.  I'm flexible.

5.  Useless gear.  Why go into detail about scale armor vs chain mail, or a longsword vs a broadsword if all the players just want the one that has or does the most damage?  Either make the generic so a short sword and a Falcata are the same, or use traits so a bit of gear is more than just one stat and a cost. A ninja sword is less damaging, but it's easy to conceal it vs a katana.

Stuff like that. 

Right now there are games that break one or two of those, and I'll still play it happily.  Palladium games for example.  But I prefer other games that don't have these issues now.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on February 16, 2025, 08:21:52 PM3.  A page count over 150.  250, tops.  This is a personal preference, but I don't need rules for sword fighting in the rain, left handed, with low morale. 

My caveat here would be that "page" is a near useless measurement.

The amount of material in a 300 page 6x9 book using larger font, generous margins and a full page image every other spread is almost certainly going to be less than 150 pages if the text is small (a LOT of game books seem to love 9 point for some insane reason) on an 8.5x11 page with tight margins and a quarter or half-page piece of art every third spread.

In fact, I'd pretty much guarantee that, because a quick and dirty reformat of my own project that uses the easier to read and better for an ipad/reader 6x9 with larger fonts described above into the latter format (two-column 8.5x11 with a point smaller font) ends up as just 128 pages... but with my preferred layout, it sits at 368 pages (but is a ton more readable to my tired eyes and those of my friends as we all move into our 40s and 50s).

Same information, different formatting, but if judging purely by page count, I'd be disqualified even though by actual amount of material I'd be well below your lower page count if I just used a typical RPG "cram it all in" format.

Something to think about anyway.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on February 16, 2025, 08:21:52 PM3.  A page count over 150.  250, tops.  This is a personal preference, but I don't need rules for sword fighting in the rain, left handed, with low morale. 

ALthough I agree with the sentiment I would say that pages in the bestiary section don't count towards that page count. I love bestiaries. They should be used to define the setting.

Quote from: JeremyR on February 16, 2025, 05:34:28 AMPersonally I would say

1) Not making odds of dice rolls obvious

Like I was reading Tiny Cthulhu, which uses the Tiny D6 system. Basically all skill tasks can be handled by either rolling 1-3d6s and if any comes up a 5 or 6, it succeeds. But what are the odds? I was trying to figure them in my head and couldn't past the 1d6. Using pencil and paper though, it's like 55% for 2d6, and 70% for 3d6. If you are going to do something like, tell the GM, so the players also know.

I would really rather not have probability numbers.  I navigate real life without them just fine.  Knowing them makes an rpg feel more like a game and less like being there, which is the opposite of what I'm after.

Passing off storygaming as roleplaying.

Quote from: MerrillWeathermay on February 14, 2025, 08:29:31 PMAfter 40+ years of playing TTRPGs, my list of design flaws would be (in order)

1. A game that is entirely self-referential in its setting and concept. If the game bears no resemblance to Earth history, mythology, etc., and exists in the mind of its creator, in some alternate reality only he can fully comprehend and appreciate (Numenera is a classic example). Players don't have time to indulge your autism --things need to make sense and be easy to absorb. I'm not going to read your 300 pages of back-story to understand the game world.

Hard disagree.

"Players don't have time to indulge your autism"
Well they fucking better, I'm making a whole world for them to explore over 2-3 campaigns.

If you want to publish something, you need to make sure that a player who never heard of it can bring a concept into your world, and you should probably have a blurb for this offering at least two concepts on top of your page.  Games like Talislanta that are entirely TTRPG-specific (meaning, new to anyone who hasn't seen it before) make sure to do this, with each race (note that the new politically correct edition avoids this term) and such generally giving you something you can pretty much just throw into a party with enough information that you'll have a sense of coming from a place and having an understandable goal.

But if you make sure that the buy-in for a brand new player is there, you should be able to go wild with your creative and alien world.  As long as players have hooks to figure it out, this can and should be a big part of any roleplaying in a place that isn't like Earth. 

I don't consider this a flaw at all; if anything, making things too close to Earth is something I'd consider a problem, because then people bring a bunch of preconceived notions, many of which are ahistoric.