Worst RPG Rule?

Consonant Dude · January 02, 2007, 02:32:44 PM

Quote from: James McMurrayFVLMINATA?

Google it.

It was a roleplaying game taking place in ancient rome with some fantasy elements added. It was released by a small company (I hesitate to use the term "indie" as some dumbass is sure to associate this with the FORGE) around 2000, I think.

Initiative was in order of social class. So a crippled noble would get the jump on a well-trained gladiator every time.

I've never seen anything so fucking stupid.

Consonant Dude · January 02, 2007, 02:37:48 PM

Quote from: WilI haven't gotten that far in CORPS yet, but how bad is it? I understand that it is tied to the skill level of the person taking the action and at least that makes a lot of sense to me.

Yeah, it's one of those things that takes time to clarify. The basic principle, which you mention, is absolutely fine. It gets bad in the way it super-micro-manage time.

The combat example takes six pages. That's out of 140-something rulebook, IIRC! People battle it out with several actions in a single second. The way you determine all this becomes extremely tedious.

I can't even explain it anymore because it's so crazy. Just check it out. It should be noted that I love the game and I have great admiration for Porter and several of his designs. But time handling/initiative in CORPS is just not for me.

James McMurray · January 02, 2007, 02:41:16 PM

Quote from: Consonant DudeInitiative was in order of social class. So a crippled noble would get the jump on a well-trained gladiator every time.

That definitely wins the stupidest rule ever contest hands down. And if it doesn't win, I shudder at what would be worse than that.

Mcrow · January 02, 2007, 02:41:21 PM

Quote from: James McMurrayOur group loves them, but we've got a bunch of guys that started out as wargamers.

yeah, thats where I started too... but I like to keep my RPing and Minis in seperate piles.

James McMurray · January 02, 2007, 02:43:41 PM

Lots do, and I won't fault you for it.

RPGPundit · January 02, 2007, 02:45:19 PM

Quote from: Consonant DudeInitiative was in order of social class. So a crippled noble would get the jump on a well-trained gladiator every time.

I've never seen anything so fucking stupid.

I actually read this book ages ago, but I don't recall: did they give any reason why this was so?

RPGPundit

Spike · January 02, 2007, 02:49:32 PM

Quote from: Consonant DudeYeah, it's one of those things that takes time to clarify. The basic principle, which you mention, is absolutely fine. It gets bad in the way it super-micro-manage time.

The combat example takes six pages. That's out of 140-something rulebook, IIRC! People battle it out with several actions in a single second. The way you determine all this becomes extremely tedious.

I can't even explain it anymore because it's so crazy. Just check it out. It should be noted that I love the game and I have great admiration for Porter and several of his designs. But time handling/initiative in CORPS is just not for me.

I love that game book, one of those games that I will never ever get to play, but would dearly love too.

And you have hit the nail on the head why. I can make characters all day long, grasp wether or not I succeed at a typical skill use fairly simply... but I'll be damned blasted if I can make heads or tails of the combat system and I have the advantage of a well illustrated combat example to use! I think I had a few other minor issues with it as well, but combat really broke it for me. If i can't grok it, I don't play it.

jhkim · January 02, 2007, 04:05:43 PM

Quote from: SpikeI love that game book, one of those games that I will never ever get to play, but would dearly love too.

And you have hit the nail on the head why. I can make characters all day long, grasp wether or not I succeed at a typical skill use fairly simply... but I'll be damned blasted if I can make heads or tails of the combat system and I have the advantage of a well illustrated combat example to use! I think I had a few other minor issues with it as well, but combat really broke it for me. If i can't grok it, I don't play it.

The killer for CORPS is the multiple actions in a single second based on skill. So you can do multiple actions as long as you keep accepting a -2 to your skill. It's confusing. Still, I don't think that remotely qualifies as the worst RPG rule ever.

It's got competition like the unarmed combat rules from AD&D1. Or to pick a more recent example, the "Stun Effects" rule from the Lord of the Rings RPG -- where if you're good with a sword, you're much better off hitting with the flat of the blade instead of the edge.

jdrakeh · January 02, 2007, 04:30:07 PM

Quote from: RPGPunditFor example, I detest "Attacks of Opportunity", it almost ruins my experience of any D20 game that uses them.

Ditto. Some games make them easy to ignore, but in many d20/OGL games, they're an integral part of the system.

Re: FVLMINATA. . .

I recall this game being fairly well received at the time of its release. Is it worth $5 for a peek (I ask, 'cause I know where there's copy I can trade some stuff for).

jrients · January 02, 2007, 04:48:39 PM

I thought AoO's were a pain in the but until my local druid started turning into a bear and grappling everything in site. The grappling rules in 3.5 are a much bigger pain in the ass, IMHO.

jdrakeh · January 02, 2007, 04:52:31 PM

Quote from: jrientsThe grappling rules in 3.5 are a much bigger pain in the ass, IMHO.

They're nearly a verbatim port of the painfully bad AD&D 1e grappling rules that John Kim mentions above. Of course, they have 3e verbiage grafted on in place of 1e terminology. That didn't fix the actual confusion, amazingly :rolleyes:

Warthur · January 02, 2007, 05:04:05 PM

The World of Synnibarr had a rule that if the players caught the GM "cheating" - fudging a diceroll, misapplying or ignoring a rule, contradicting himself or deviating from his/her adventure notes - the GM had to rewind the action back to the point where the cheating occurred. Everyone reverted back to the state they were in at that time (although I think there was an XP award for the person who pointed it out).

And all adventure notes had to be handed over to the players after the adventure, so they could check that the GM hadn't cheated.

droog · January 02, 2007, 05:08:50 PM

I don't know if I've been lucky or smart in the games I know best, but I don't seem to have anything worse than 1e grappling. I had to grapple (hur) with those in my first few months of GMing, and they were a major pain.

Um, the fatigue rules in RQ3 are really dumb! I think I remember exactly one occasion when they had any mechanical effect.

arminius · January 02, 2007, 05:24:03 PM

Quote from: droogUm, the fatigue rules in RQ3 are really dumb! I think I remember exactly one occasion when they had any mechanical effect.

Funny, if anything I remember them being too effective. I.e., someone wearing what would be reasonable soldier's panoply (equivalent to a Greek hoplite) would fatigue way too quickly in battle, or so it seemed. But I bow to your experience with the system.

The AD&D1e grappling rules are awful by popular acclaim. Funny thing is, the example in the book was pretty cool.

I remember hating the Top Secret 1e martial arts rules. By our analysis, it was always best to give the other guy a finger in the eye, and that was extremely deadly.

droog · January 02, 2007, 05:31:24 PM

Quote from: Elliot WilenFunny, if anything I remember them being too effective. I.e., someone wearing what would be reasonable soldier's panoply (equivalent to a Greek hoplite) would fatigue way too quickly in battle, or so it seemed. But I bow to your experience with the system.

For all the tracking, it's very rare for anybody to lose enough fatigue to get into significant penalties in the time it takes for a combat. So you end up ignoring it.