Forums of the Megaverse®

Jay05 wrote:

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:

Jay05 wrote:Can't make a character following the rules? I do just that nearly weekly, without house ruling a damn thing and have been doing so for twenty years. So that statement is completely false in my experience. Which is not to say I don't house rule some gameplay rules. I'm refering to char gen specifically. I figured it out.

Then you aren't using the current rules. You literally -cannot- create a character following the rules as presented in R:UE.

I do use RUE and you are mistaken

Why don't you give us a step by step walk through of how you would make a dragon?

--flatline

Flipping pages does not equate to house ruling to fix something. And as for stats, if you are rolling up a human, the stats are a standard 3d6 they are then altered by a specific OCC. Yes, RCCs vary due to racial differences. Which means you have to flip pages. That is not the same thing as a rule not working

Jay05 wrote:Flipping pages does not equate to house ruling to fix something. And as for stats, if you are rolling up a human, the stats are a standard 3d6 they are then altered by a specific OCC. Yes, RCCs vary due to racial differences. Which means you have to flip pages. That is not the same thing as a rule not working

Again Follow the steps EXACTLY AS WRITTEN. DO not deviate. Let me know how many snags you run into trying to make a dragon.

Daeglan wrote:

Jay05 wrote:Flipping pages does not equate to house ruling to fix something. And as for stats, if you are rolling up a human, the stats are a standard 3d6 they are then altered by a specific OCC. Yes, RCCs vary due to racial differences. Which means you have to flip pages. That is not the same thing as a rule not working

Again Follow the steps EXACTLY AS WRITTEN. DO not deviate. Let me know how many snags you run into trying to make a dragon.

Then just skip those steps, it's not hard.

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Daeglan wrote:

Jay05 wrote:Flipping pages does not equate to house ruling to fix something. And as for stats, if you are rolling up a human, the stats are a standard 3d6 they are then altered by a specific OCC. Yes, RCCs vary due to racial differences. Which means you have to flip pages. That is not the same thing as a rule not working

Again Follow the steps EXACTLY AS WRITTEN. DO not deviate. Let me know how many snags you run into trying to make a dragon.

Then just skip those steps, it's not hard.

Thank you for showing that you understand that the rules, as written, are broken. You have to actively ignore them to create a character.

To create a character.

I.E. Play hasn't even started and you've already had to ignore the rules to even make a functional character.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Daeglan wrote:

Jay05 wrote:Flipping pages does not equate to house ruling to fix something. And as for stats, if you are rolling up a human, the stats are a standard 3d6 they are then altered by a specific OCC. Yes, RCCs vary due to racial differences. Which means you have to flip pages. That is not the same thing as a rule not working

Again Follow the steps EXACTLY AS WRITTEN. DO not deviate. Let me know how many snags you run into trying to make a dragon.

Then just skip those steps, it's not hard.

Thank you for showing that you understand that the rules, as written, are broken. You have to actively ignore them to create a character.

To create a character.

I.E. Play hasn't even started and you've already had to ignore the rules to even make a functional character.

Skip and ignore are two different things, all you doing is bypassing them for this step of character creation, not ignoring.

And I will say AGAIN gad I hate repeating myself. Because of the fact that RCC stats are not the same as humans you mght have to do things out of order. All that means is you might have to use a bit of creative thought. OMG don't ask gamers to think, LOL

It's ignoring.

And really, at a certain level creative thinking is just writing your own roleplay game.

There is an audience who, funnily enough when they buy a roleplay game, don't want to write their own RPG. That audience is speaking now and Palladium is losing that audience.

Maybe Palladium can keep on with folk who keep on pollyfilling every crack with creative thinking as their income.

Even so, to pretend it forfills the audiences need is simply foolishness. No, not everyone wants to pollyfiller every five minutes.

And as I stated before you can't please everyone all the time. So, what those of us who don't mind a little work should have to deal with changes to a system we were comfortable working with because some have a problem with a little brain work? I don't see how that makes any sense.

Jay05 wrote:And I will say AGAIN gad I hate repeating myself. Because of the fact that RCC stats are not the same as humans you mght have to do things out of order. All that means is you might have to use a bit of creative thought. OMG don't ask gamers to think, LOL

It is this kind of elitist attitude that keeps new players from playing rifts. My FLGS no longer carries Palladium. Do you know why? Because players don't buy it because they don't want to spend their time fixing the holes in the system. You are looking at character generation from the eyes of an experienced player. A new player with no one to ask is going to throw up their hands in frustration and go play something else. For example the rules to make a Old World of Darkness were simple enough you could fit them on the character sheet itself at the bottom. How many palladium players do you know? How many World of Darkness players do you know? Be honest. A new player does not want to have to sort out how to make a character. They want to be able to follow the steps in order. They don't want to follow the steps and then find out that they wasted their time and need to start over and do it in a different order. When you cause someone to do that they move to a game system that does not waste their time trying to figure out how to make a character because the rules are wrong.

Well there might be the fact that KS has himself said before that rifts was not designed for new players. Yah the system has some issues with it, but the fact that many people can and do play it suggests that they are not fatal. I have played dozens of game systems, and I have yet to see one that DOESNT have issues. Go ahead, name ONE system that has NO internal inconsistancies, has clear cut rules that cover all possible areas of play, and has clear, concise, easy to understand rules.

Knowing where to go and how to jump back and forth in a book to make a character creates an extra barrier to entry. It's not ideal for new players, that palladium might need - I don't know how their sales are going and how much of it is due to shifts in demographics and technology.

Why would you not design a game to accommodate new players? Isn't that a losing proposition over time? Won't people get hooked on other game systems since they're easier to handle? Of course, the book cover illustrations and the range of creative ideas are good selling points too.. Pity they don't permit conversions to other systems:)

eliakon wrote:Well there might be the fact that KS has himself said before that rifts was not designed for new players. Yah the system has some issues with it, but the fact that many people can and do play it suggests that they are not fatal. I have played dozens of game systems, and I have yet to see one that DOESNT have issues. Go ahead, name ONE system that has NO internal inconsistancies, has clear cut rules that cover all possible areas of play, and has clear, concise, easy to understand rules.

The ICON system published by LUG was clear, concise, and easy to follow. It held your hand the entire way. It was also stone-simple and easy to understand.

There, i named one.

eliakon wrote:Well there might be the fact that KS has himself said before that rifts was not designed for new players. Yah the system has some issues with it, but the fact that many people can and do play it suggests that they are not fatal. I have played dozens of game systems, and I have yet to see one that DOESNT have issues. Go ahead, name ONE system that has NO internal inconsistancies, has clear cut rules that cover all possible areas of play, and has clear, concise, easy to understand rules.

GURPS is pretty close. But on the other hand I can only name one company that has actually refused to address those issues for 20 years. Every other company puts out errata consistently and rules revisions to address those problems. Claiming that no other system is perfect is a lazy excuse for not actually addressing those problems.

Jay05 wrote:And as I stated before you can't please everyone all the time. So, what those of us who don't mind a little work should have to deal with changes to a system we were comfortable working with because some have a problem with a little brain work? I don't see how that makes any sense.

What are you comfortable with? You are skipping sections! You don't want any changes to happen to the parts you skip anyway?? That's something that doesn't make any sense!

It depends if you're the greater part of the market, or whether a considerable amount of income would come if the system was cleared up, from people who just don't want to spend more money on a system for you to feel comfortable about it.

Daeglan wrote:

Jay05 wrote:And I will say AGAIN gad I hate repeating myself. Because of the fact that RCC stats are not the same as humans you mght have to do things out of order. All that means is you might have to use a bit of creative thought. OMG don't ask gamers to think, LOL

It is this kind of elitist attitude that keeps new players from playing rifts. My FLGS no longer carries Palladium. Do you know why? Because players don't buy it because they don't want to spend their time fixing the holes in the system. You are looking at character generation from the eyes of an experienced player. A new player with no one to ask is going to throw up their hands in frustration and go play something else. For example the rules to make a Old World of Darkness were simple enough you could fit them on the character sheet itself at the bottom. How many palladium players do you know? How many World of Darkness players do you know? Be honest. A new player does not want to have to sort out how to make a character. They want to be able to follow the steps in order. They don't want to follow the steps and then find out that they wasted their time and need to start over and do it in a different order. When you cause someone to do that they move to a game system that does not waste their time trying to figure out how to make a character because the rules are wrong.

man I was a 15 year old pot head with SERIOUS ADD issues when I discovered Rifts. And I figured it out. Now granted, fairly high IQ but for for the Love of... How SIMPLE does it need to be?

eliakon wrote:Well there might be the fact that KS has himself said before that rifts was not designed for new players. Yah the system has some issues with it, but the fact that many people can and do play it suggests that they are not fatal. I have played dozens of game systems, and I have yet to see one that DOESNT have issues. Go ahead, name ONE system that has NO internal inconsistancies, has clear cut rules that cover all possible areas of play, and has clear, concise, easy to understand rules.

Twerps. As I recall, the rule book was a single piece of paper folded to effectively give you 4 tiny pages. Extremely simple to learn and play. If the one action resolution mechanism didn't apply to what you were doing, the result was ruled by GM fiat.

GURPS is significantly more complicated, but I've never run into a situation where the rules contradicted themselves or had multiple possible interpretations. I do have my own set of house rules for specific things (mostly spells), but the house rules aren't necessary to play the game.

White Wolf's world of darkness system was extremely easy to understand and was based on an elegant mechanism (dice pool + target difficulty). It avoided inconsistency by allowing the GM to determine the grittiness of the rules rather than defining things absolutely. Worked well with a good GM, but had the potential to go very badly with a poor GM.

You asked for one system, I gave you three (although Twerps almost doesn't count as a system).

--flatline

Jay05 wrote:man I was a 15 year old pot head with SERIOUS ADD issues when I discovered Rifts. And I figured it out. Now granted, fairly high IQ but for for the Love of... How SIMPLE does it need to be?

I don't know that anyone is asking for things to be dumbed down in any way. My own opinion is that if the rules were better organized, inconsistencies would be easier to identify and correct. It's possible for something to be complicated without being difficult or frustrating to read.

--flatline

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:

eliakon wrote:Well there might be the fact that KS has himself said before that rifts was not designed for new players. Yah the system has some issues with it, but the fact that many people can and do play it suggests that they are not fatal. I have played dozens of game systems, and I have yet to see one that DOESNT have issues. Go ahead, name ONE system that has NO internal inconsistancies, has clear cut rules that cover all possible areas of play, and has clear, concise, easy to understand rules.

The ICON system published by LUG was clear, concise, and easy to follow. It held your hand the entire way. It was also stone-simple and easy to understand.

There, i named one.

Icon is far from trouble free... Dice pools and their variants come with their own unique issues.

Daeglan wrote:GURPS is pretty close. But on the other hand I can only name one company that has actually refused to address those issues for 20 years. Every other company puts out errata consistently and rules revisions to address those problems. Claiming that no other system is perfect is a lazy excuse for not actually addressing those problems.

Gurps fails to meet the criteria as well...

as a matter of fact no system can meet Eliakons criteria... Of being free of imperfections.
To think other wise is foolish. There is NO SUCH THING as the PERFECT system.

flatline wrote:

eliakon wrote:Well there might be the fact that KS has himself said before that rifts was not designed for new players. Yah the system has some issues with it, but the fact that many people can and do play it suggests that they are not fatal. I have played dozens of game systems, and I have yet to see one that DOESNT have issues. Go ahead, name ONE system that has NO internal inconsistancies, has clear cut rules that cover all possible areas of play, and has clear, concise, easy to understand rules.

Twerps. As I recall, the rule book was a single piece of paper folded to effectively give you 4 tiny pages. Extremely simple to learn and play. If the one action resolution mechanism didn't apply to what you were doing, the result was ruled by GM fiat.

GURPS is significantly more complicated, but I've never run into a situation where the rules contradicted themselves or had multiple possible interpretations. I do have my own set of house rules for specific things (mostly spells), but the house rules aren't necessary to play the game.

White Wolf's world of darkness system was extremely easy to understand and was based on an elegant mechanism (dice pool + target difficulty). It avoided inconsistency by allowing the GM to determine the grittiness of the rules rather than defining things absolutely. Worked well with a good GM, but had the potential to go very badly with a poor GM.

You asked for one system, I gave you three (although Twerps almost doesn't count as a system).

--flatline

This line causes White Wolf to fail the litmus test proposed.
Name one system that is problem free.
You cannot do it because if it existed we would not be playing any of the other systems that do exist just that one "perfect" system.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

flatline wrote:

eliakon wrote:Well there might be the fact that KS has himself said before that rifts was not designed for new players. Yah the system has some issues with it, but the fact that many people can and do play it suggests that they are not fatal. I have played dozens of game systems, and I have yet to see one that DOESNT have issues. Go ahead, name ONE system that has NO internal inconsistancies, has clear cut rules that cover all possible areas of play, and has clear, concise, easy to understand rules.

Twerps. As I recall, the rule book was a single piece of paper folded to effectively give you 4 tiny pages. Extremely simple to learn and play. If the one action resolution mechanism didn't apply to what you were doing, the result was ruled by GM fiat.

GURPS is significantly more complicated, but I've never run into a situation where the rules contradicted themselves or had multiple possible interpretations. I do have my own set of house rules for specific things (mostly spells), but the house rules aren't necessary to play the game.

White Wolf's world of darkness system was extremely easy to understand and was based on an elegant mechanism (dice pool + target difficulty). It avoided inconsistency by allowing the GM to determine the grittiness of the rules rather than defining things absolutely. Worked well with a good GM, but had the potential to go very badly with a poor GM.

You asked for one system, I gave you three (although Twerps almost doesn't count as a system).

--flatline

This line causes White Wolf to fail the litmus test proposed.
Name one system that is problem free.
You cannot do it because if it existed we would not be playing any of the other systems that do exist just that one "perfect" system.

If you want a system that doesn't give the GM any fiat ability, then you'd better be looking at tactical war games or video games. GM fiat is what makes RPGs interesting. Some systems depend on it a great deal (and are more vulnerable to poor GMing), other systems depend on it just to fill the gaps (and are less vulnerable to poor GMing, but benefit less from good GMing), but all RPG systems depend on it to some extent.

Tastes may vary, but in my experience, more mature groups do better with more GM fiat while less mature groups do better with "crunchier" systems that depend less on GM fiat. YMMV.

--flatline

flatline wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

flatline wrote:

eliakon wrote:Well there might be the fact that KS has himself said before that rifts was not designed for new players. Yah the system has some issues with it, but the fact that many people can and do play it suggests that they are not fatal. I have played dozens of game systems, and I have yet to see one that DOESNT have issues. Go ahead, name ONE system that has NO internal inconsistancies, has clear cut rules that cover all possible areas of play, and has clear, concise, easy to understand rules.

Twerps. As I recall, the rule book was a single piece of paper folded to effectively give you 4 tiny pages. Extremely simple to learn and play. If the one action resolution mechanism didn't apply to what you were doing, the result was ruled by GM fiat.

GURPS is significantly more complicated, but I've never run into a situation where the rules contradicted themselves or had multiple possible interpretations. I do have my own set of house rules for specific things (mostly spells), but the house rules aren't necessary to play the game.

White Wolf's world of darkness system was extremely easy to understand and was based on an elegant mechanism (dice pool + target difficulty). It avoided inconsistency by allowing the GM to determine the grittiness of the rules rather than defining things absolutely. Worked well with a good GM, but had the potential to go very badly with a poor GM.

You asked for one system, I gave you three (although Twerps almost doesn't count as a system).

--flatline

This line causes White Wolf to fail the litmus test proposed.
Name one system that is problem free.
You cannot do it because if it existed we would not be playing any of the other systems that do exist just that one "perfect" system.

If you want a system that doesn't give the GM any fiat ability, then you'd better be looking at tactical war games or video games. GM fiat is what makes RPGs interesting. Some systems depend on it a great deal (and are more vulnerable to poor GMing), other systems depend on it just to fill the gaps (and are less vulnerable to poor GMing, but benefit less from good GMing), but all RPG systems depend on it to some extent.

Tastes may vary, but in my experience, more mature groups do better with more GM fiat while less mature groups do better with "crunchier" systems that depend less on GM fiat. YMMV.

--flatline

If the game is "perfect" then GM skill level would not make a difference.

flatline wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

flatline wrote:

eliakon wrote:Well there might be the fact that KS has himself said before that rifts was not designed for new players. Yah the system has some issues with it, but the fact that many people can and do play it suggests that they are not fatal. I have played dozens of game systems, and I have yet to see one that DOESNT have issues. Go ahead, name ONE system that has NO internal inconsistancies, has clear cut rules that cover all possible areas of play, and has clear, concise, easy to understand rules.

Twerps. As I recall, the rule book was a single piece of paper folded to effectively give you 4 tiny pages. Extremely simple to learn and play. If the one action resolution mechanism didn't apply to what you were doing, the result was ruled by GM fiat.

GURPS is significantly more complicated, but I've never run into a situation where the rules contradicted themselves or had multiple possible interpretations. I do have my own set of house rules for specific things (mostly spells), but the house rules aren't necessary to play the game.

White Wolf's world of darkness system was extremely easy to understand and was based on an elegant mechanism (dice pool + target difficulty). It avoided inconsistency by allowing the GM to determine the grittiness of the rules rather than defining things absolutely. Worked well with a good GM, but had the potential to go very badly with a poor GM.

You asked for one system, I gave you three (although Twerps almost doesn't count as a system).

--flatline

This line causes White Wolf to fail the litmus test proposed.
Name one system that is problem free.
You cannot do it because if it existed we would not be playing any of the other systems that do exist just that one "perfect" system.

If you want a system that doesn't give the GM any fiat ability, then you'd better be looking at tactical war games or video games. GM fiat is what makes RPGs interesting. Some systems depend on it a great deal (and are more vulnerable to poor GMing), other systems depend on it just to fill the gaps (and are less vulnerable to poor GMing, but benefit less from good GMing), but all RPG systems depend on it to some extent.

Tastes may vary, but in my experience, more mature groups do better with more GM fiat while less mature groups do better with "crunchier" systems that depend less on GM fiat. YMMV.

--flatline

Well leaving aside discussions on what is or is not 'crunchy' or 'mature' There is no link between 'crunchness' and 'fiat' HECK some of the highest crunchy systems out there (GURPS, Rolemaster, Harn, Champions) require lots of fiat if only to decide what optional rules to use or not. And of course its your opinion that fiat is what makes it interesting, I have been in groups that liked fiat, and groups that didnt. As for error free, or intent free, I can tell you from personal experiance that GURPS has areas where its broken as all heck, same with WW, which has issues with scale, opposed vs unoposed tests, Area effects, etc. Again each system is a matter of taste for the group involved.

Johnnycat93 wrote:Hiding behind the statement "no system is perfect" is pointless. Because there are people who legitimately enjoy the system and wish problems would be fixed, not just ignored and house ruled away.

I am not 'hiding' behind it, I am making the simple statement that no system IS perfect. Sure I would love it if there were fixes to the system, but ask yourself this would you rather get a better 2nd ed, and new books....or keep getting new material for the 1st ed and deal with the issues it has? As has been pointed out in many threads over the years, fixing the 'problems' would require nothing less than a total rewrite of the rules. I prefer to deal with a broken system, rather than start over with a new system and recover all the old ground.

Johnnycat93 wrote:

eliakon wrote:

Johnnycat93 wrote:Hiding behind the statement "no system is perfect" is pointless. Because there are people who legitimately enjoy the system and wish problems would be fixed, not just ignored and house ruled away.

I am not 'hiding' behind it, I am making the simple statement that no system IS perfect. Sure I would love it if there were fixes to the system, but ask yourself this would you rather get a better 2nd ed, and new books....or keep getting new material for the 1st ed and deal with the issues it has? As has been pointed out in many threads over the years, fixing the 'problems' would require nothing less than a total rewrite of the rules. I prefer to deal with a broken system, rather than start over with a new system and recover all the old ground.

Well they tried with RUE and apparently that didn't go over so well. So, yes I would like them to revamp the system before they add more material.

Why?
They tried with RUE, and apparently that didn't go over so well.

Johnnycat93. The problem with what you propose however, is a total rewrite would cause those of us with thousands spent over the years to re purchase new editions to be compatible and up to date. Now I can't speak for anyone else but I'm not rolling in money over here. The prospect of having to re-purchase updated books not because they are worn out from use, but because they no longer apply to the game they were designed for is an unacceptable one. And I bet I'm not alone. At least RUE with it's changes didn't TOTALLY invalidate the older books!

Damian Magecraft wrote:

flatline wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:

flatline wrote:Twerps. As I recall, the rule book was a single piece of paper folded to effectively give you 4 tiny pages. Extremely simple to learn and play. If the one action resolution mechanism didn't apply to what you were doing, the result was ruled by GM fiat.

GURPS is significantly more complicated, but I've never run into a situation where the rules contradicted themselves or had multiple possible interpretations. I do have my own set of house rules for specific things (mostly spells), but the house rules aren't necessary to play the game.

White Wolf's world of darkness system was extremely easy to understand and was based on an elegant mechanism (dice pool + target difficulty). It avoided inconsistency by allowing the GM to determine the grittiness of the rules rather than defining things absolutely. Worked well with a good GM, but had the potential to go very badly with a poor GM.

You asked for one system, I gave you three (although Twerps almost doesn't count as a system).

--flatline

This line causes White Wolf to fail the litmus test proposed.
Name one system that is problem free.
You cannot do it because if it existed we would not be playing any of the other systems that do exist just that one "perfect" system.

If you want a system that doesn't give the GM any fiat ability, then you'd better be looking at tactical war games or video games. GM fiat is what makes RPGs interesting. Some systems depend on it a great deal (and are more vulnerable to poor GMing), other systems depend on it just to fill the gaps (and are less vulnerable to poor GMing, but benefit less from good GMing), but all RPG systems depend on it to some extent.

Tastes may vary, but in my experience, more mature groups do better with more GM fiat while less mature groups do better with "crunchier" systems that depend less on GM fiat. YMMV.

--flatline

If the game is "perfect" then GM skill level would not make a difference.

Nobody asked for perfection. What was asked for was this:

eliakon wrote:Go ahead, name ONE system that has NO internal inconsistancies, has clear cut rules that cover all possible areas of play, and has clear, concise, easy to understand rules.

I gave three examples of systems with "clear, concise, easy to understand rules" that had no significant internal inconsistencies that I was aware of. "has clear cut rules that cover all possible areas of play" is vacuous since we don't have a definition of "all possible areas of play", nor does it seem likely that we have consensus on whether explicitly depending on GM fiat to cover all areas not explicitly covered in the rules would qualify. So I ignored it.

We don't even have a consensus on what "perfect" would mean in the context of an RPG system, so I don't really know what you're looking for.

--flatline

Jay05 wrote:The problem with what you propose however, is a total rewrite would cause those of us with thousands spent over the years to re purchase new editions to be compatible and up to date. Now I can't speak for anyone else but I'm not rolling in money over here. The prospect of having to re-purchase updated books not because they are worn out from use, but because they no longer apply to the game they were designed for is an unacceptable one. And I bet I'm not alone. At least RUE with it's changes didn't TOTALLY invalidate the older books!

Amen, I own virtually every book ever published by Palladium, The conversion from 1st ed to 2nd ed (like spells per day to ppe, and the like) was bad enough, if the whole system changes, I am not going to buy new books, I dont have that kind of time. This is why I stoped playing D&D, I was not willing to replace my collection everytime they tweaked the rules

Johnnycat93 wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Johnnycat93 wrote:

eliakon wrote:

Johnnycat93 wrote:Hiding behind the statement "no system is perfect" is pointless. Because there are people who legitimately enjoy the system and wish problems would be fixed, not just ignored and house ruled away.

I am not 'hiding' behind it, I am making the simple statement that no system IS perfect. Sure I would love it if there were fixes to the system, but ask yourself this would you rather get a better 2nd ed, and new books....or keep getting new material for the 1st ed and deal with the issues it has? As has been pointed out in many threads over the years, fixing the 'problems' would require nothing less than a total rewrite of the rules. I prefer to deal with a broken system, rather than start over with a new system and recover all the old ground.

Well they tried with RUE and apparently that didn't go over so well. So, yes I would like them to revamp the system before they add more material.

Why?
They tried with RUE, and apparently that didn't go over so well.

"If you don't succeed, try try again"

"Then give up; don't make a damned fool out of yourself."

Daeglan wrote:

Jay05 wrote:And I will say AGAIN gad I hate repeating myself. Because of the fact that RCC stats are not the same as humans you mght have to do things out of order. All that means is you might have to use a bit of creative thought. OMG don't ask gamers to think, LOL

It is this kind of elitist attitude that keeps new players from playing rifts. My FLGS no longer carries Palladium. Do you know why? Because players don't buy it because they don't want to spend their time fixing the holes in the system. You are looking at character generation from the eyes of an experienced player. A new player with no one to ask is going to throw up their hands in frustration and go play something else. For example the rules to make a Old World of Darkness were simple enough you could fit them on the character sheet itself at the bottom. How many palladium players do you know? How many World of Darkness players do you know? Be honest. A new player does not want to have to sort out how to make a character. They want to be able to follow the steps in order. They don't want to follow the steps and then find out that they wasted their time and need to start over and do it in a different order. When you cause someone to do that they move to a game system that does not waste their time trying to figure out how to make a character because the rules are wrong.

its not elitist attitude, its more experiencethen anything, this system isnt new player friendly and never was, its was for gm and players who like the room, the rules give you, to play how ever you want. I always help new players with the system until they got a handle on it, but with today and the internet, a new player shouldnt have a problem, we see it all the time a new player ask a question and get an answer.

Eclipse wrote:Knowing where to go and how to jump back and forth in a book to make a character creates an extra barrier to entry. It's not ideal for new players, that palladium might need - I don't know how their sales are going and how much of it is due to shifts in demographics and technology.

Why would you not design a game to accommodate new players? Isn't that a losing proposition over time? Won't people get hooked on other game systems since they're easier to handle? Of course, the book cover illustrations and the range of creative ideas are good selling points too.. Pity they don't permit conversions to other systems:)

i dont think it will ever go back to the glory days of pen and paper rpgs while you got xbox, ps3 or pc games out there,

"man i want to play rifts and no one is around, well i go play fallout 3 or new vegas or play WOW, or Call of duty."

Jay05 wrote:Johnnycat93. The problem with what you propose however, is a total rewrite would cause those of us with thousands spent over the years to re purchase new editions to be compatible and up to date. Now I can't speak for anyone else but I'm not rolling in money over here. The prospect of having to re-purchase updated books not because they are worn out from use, but because they no longer apply to the game they were designed for is an unacceptable one. And I bet I'm not alone. At least RUE with it's changes didn't TOTALLY invalidate the older books!

yup, might as well change the coalition to a d-bee loving nation too, because i willnt be buying a new system, because a few players cant figure out how to make a character. sorry you want a easy game to understand then i suggest finding the old TSR basic D&D set on EBAY

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Eclipse wrote:Knowing where to go and how to jump back and forth in a book to make a character creates an extra barrier to entry. It's not ideal for new players, that palladium might need - I don't know how their sales are going and how much of it is due to shifts in demographics and technology.

Why would you not design a game to accommodate new players? Isn't that a losing proposition over time? Won't people get hooked on other game systems since they're easier to handle? Of course, the book cover illustrations and the range of creative ideas are good selling points too.. Pity they don't permit conversions to other systems:)

i dont think it will ever go back to the glory days of pen and paper rpgs while you got xbox, ps3 or pc games out there,

"man i want to play rifts and no one is around, well i go play fallout 3 or new vegas or play WOW, or Call of duty."

I agree, sadly. I'd really like to play Rifts right now.

Galroth wrote:

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Eclipse wrote:Knowing where to go and how to jump back and forth in a book to make a character creates an extra barrier to entry. It's not ideal for new players, that palladium might need - I don't know how their sales are going and how much of it is due to shifts in demographics and technology.

Why would you not design a game to accommodate new players? Isn't that a losing proposition over time? Won't people get hooked on other game systems since they're easier to handle? Of course, the book cover illustrations and the range of creative ideas are good selling points too.. Pity they don't permit conversions to other systems:)

i dont think it will ever go back to the glory days of pen and paper rpgs while you got xbox, ps3 or pc games out there,

"man i want to play rifts and no one is around, well i go play fallout 3 or new vegas or play WOW, or Call of duty."

I agree, sadly. I'd really like to play Rifts right now.

think some of us would too, get some beer , order some pizza and just play until sun comes up and maybe a few more hours.

I'm not sure how long the company can stay in business and keep being profitable with the current system. Eventually they may have to do a new edition. Or at least a streamlined edition. Do I want to buy more books if a new edition comes out no. Yet I do understand that a company like PB runs not only on the goodwill of the fanbase yet also making a profit. Which too many in the hobby forget. Or that goodwill is not a acceptable form of currency at banks or anywhere else. A new edition does not have to make a older material incompitable. Gurps 3E and Hero system 5E books can be used with Gurps 4E and Hero system 6E. The myth that a new edition automatically makes a older material needs to stop in the hobby. Yes sometimes rpg companies do make new editions that are not compitable with older material. That is by design not a something that automatically happens with a new edtion. PB can do a new edition while allowing us to use older material. You can't on one had demand a rpg company keep taking losses because your unable and unwilling to buy a new edition. Yet on the other expect some sort of miraclous pb rennaisance. It's not going to happen. I understand the fear of older boks being invalidated yet does not need to be the case. Not only that if you wanted a cheap hobby well rpgs is not a cheap hobby. Not as expensive as some yet neither as cheap as some others. With respect I'm tired of hearing "you can't implement any changes because I spent x amount of dollars on your boosk". My response if I was a rpg designer would be "I respect that yet no one forced anyone to buy any books and I'm not going to go bankrupt for the fans".

Sureshot wrote:I'm not sure how long the company can stay in business and keep being profitable with the current system. Eventually they may have to do a new edition. Or at least a streamlined edition. Do I want to buy more books if a new edition comes out no. Yet I do understand that a company like PB runs not only on the goodwill of the fanbase yet also making a profit. Which too many in the hobby forget. Or that goodwill is not a acceptable form of currency at banks or anywhere else. A new edition does not have to make a older material incompitable. Gurps 3E and Hero system 5E books can be used with Gurps 4E and Hero system 6E. The myth that a new edition automatically makes a older material needs to stop in the hobby. Yes sometimes rpg companies do make new editions that are not compitable with older material. That is by design not a something that automatically happens with a new edtion. PB can do a new edition while allowing us to use older material. You can't on one had demand a rpg company keep taking losses because your unable and unwilling to buy a new edition. Yet on the other expect some sort of miraclous pb rennaisance. It's not going to happen. I understand the fear of older boks being invalidated yet does not need to be the case. Not only that if you wanted a cheap hobby well rpgs is not a cheap hobby. Not as expensive as some yet neither as cheap as some others. With respect I'm tired of hearing "you can't implement any changes because I spent x amount of dollars on your boosk". My response if I was a rpg designer would be "I respect that yet no one forced anyone to buy any books and I'm not going to go bankrupt for the fans".

Gurps 3rd books can be adapted to 4th yes, but how many D&D 2nd edition books work with 3rd? It can work both ways, and it heavily depends on what your going for a rewrite. If people want the system to be 'fixed' to the point that all the 'problems, inconsistancies and errors' are eliminated, its going to require such a rewrite that the only thing the same will be the systems. As for being inconsistant, *I* am perfectly fine with the system as it is, and will buy new books as they are released, I would even be willing to look at a tweak, but I will NOT buy a compleatly new system that will mandate me rebuying all my old books.

Johnnycat93 wrote:

Sureshot wrote:I'm not sure how long the company can stay in business and keep being profitable with the current system. Eventually they may have to do a new edition. Or at least a streamlined edition. Do I want to buy more books if a new edition comes out no. Yet I do understand that a company like PB runs not only on the goodwill of the fanbase yet also making a profit. Which too many in the hobby forget. Or that goodwill is not a acceptable form of currency at banks or anywhere else. A new edition does not have to make a older material incompitable. Gurps 3E and Hero system 5E books can be used with Gurps 4E and Hero system 6E. The myth that a new edition automatically makes a older material needs to stop in the hobby. Yes sometimes rpg companies do make new editions that are not compitable with older material. That is by design not a something that automatically happens with a new edtion. PB can do a new edition while allowing us to use older material. You can't on one had demand a rpg company keep taking losses because your unable and unwilling to buy a new edition. Yet on the other expect some sort of miraclous pb rennaisance. It's not going to happen. I understand the fear of older boks being invalidated yet does not need to be the case. Not only that if you wanted a cheap hobby well rpgs is not a cheap hobby. Not as expensive as some yet neither as cheap as some others. With respect I'm tired of hearing "you can't implement any changes because I spent x amount of dollars on your boosk". My response if I was a rpg designer would be "I respect that yet no one forced anyone to buy any books and I'm not going to go bankrupt for the fans".

On the note of people not wanting to buy books for a 2nd ed. Wasn't everyone super excited when Vampire Kingdoms Revised came out? I recall that a lot of people where glad because it revised the old book and fixed a lot of the problems with the old book. And now PB is going through and revising all of their old books and everyone seems to be supporting them. So why is it so difficult to talk about 2nd ed?

I dont know about everyone but I do know that many were unhappy with the new edditions of SB1 and VK. Because of exactly this point. I already paid for those books, I dont want to have to shell out the cost for the same stuff in new format just because a few things have been tweaked. I would MUCH rather pay for a VKII, and a Republicans book, that are new, cover new ground and dont make me pay for the old book...again

eliakon wrote:

Sureshot wrote:I'm not sure how long the company can stay in business and keep being profitable with the current system. Eventually they may have to do a new edition. Or at least a streamlined edition. Do I want to buy more books if a new edition comes out no. Yet I do understand that a company like PB runs not only on the goodwill of the fanbase yet also making a profit. Which too many in the hobby forget. Or that goodwill is not a acceptable form of currency at banks or anywhere else. A new edition does not have to make a older material incompitable. Gurps 3E and Hero system 5E books can be used with Gurps 4E and Hero system 6E. The myth that a new edition automatically makes a older material needs to stop in the hobby. Yes sometimes rpg companies do make new editions that are not compitable with older material. That is by design not a something that automatically happens with a new edtion. PB can do a new edition while allowing us to use older material. You can't on one had demand a rpg company keep taking losses because your unable and unwilling to buy a new edition. Yet on the other expect some sort of miraclous pb rennaisance. It's not going to happen. I understand the fear of older boks being invalidated yet does not need to be the case. Not only that if you wanted a cheap hobby well rpgs is not a cheap hobby. Not as expensive as some yet neither as cheap as some others. With respect I'm tired of hearing "you can't implement any changes because I spent x amount of dollars on your boosk". My response if I was a rpg designer would be "I respect that yet no one forced anyone to buy any books and I'm not going to go bankrupt for the fans".

Gurps 3rd books can be adapted to 4th yes, but how many D&D 2nd edition books work with 3rd? It can work both ways, and it heavily depends on what your going for a rewrite. If people want the system to be 'fixed' to the point that all the 'problems, inconsistancies and errors' are eliminated, its going to require such a rewrite that the only thing the same will be the systems. As for being inconsistant, *I* am perfectly fine with the system as it is, and will buy new books as they are released, I would even be willing to look at a tweak, but I will NOT buy a compleatly new system that will mandate me rebuying all my old books.

The thing i You would not actually need to change the rules for a 2nd ed of rifts. Just fix the glaring holes.

Arrange the rules for making a character for Rifts in the order you actually need to do it in. IE step 1 choose a RCC/OCC. Step 2 roll your stats based on that and so on. Not a major change but it is important to have people not be forced to decipher how to make a character. One should be able to follow the steps in a logical progression and make a character.

The Combat rules need to include ALL of the combat rules in the combat section. they need to on paper allow you to do more than make an attack roll. Yes we all know they mean "Take an action"
the number of attacks in a round need to be divided up in a manner that is equal across the combat round or some form of logic. Mostly it just needs to be layed out in a manner that a new person can easily learn the rules. They aren't complicated. They do need to be clear though. We should not be have long drawn out kicking and screaming matched about what the rules are like we do. There should be no question about what RAW is and RAI should be clear as well. No no system is perfect. But one should not be fighting against the concept of the rules being clear to everyone and for everyone to come to the same conclusion on what the rule means.

None of these changes would actually invalidate any books. As all we would be doing is making the rules clear concise and consistent.

We go through this "the system needs an update or replaced!" discussion about every 3 moths or so... does anyone ever bother to consider just how long it would take the company to do that?
we are looking at Palladium going at least 2 years with NO NEW PRODUCT.
In its current state that is not a feasible proposition.

I have been working on re-organizing the rules for awhile now...
And it is no easy task. I have to stop myself from trying to add in my own bias as to how certain rules function.
Because before the "fixes" can be added the baseline of what was there before must first be-established.
So to all you who say its a simple matter to do I say...
"put up or shut up"
If you are as a big a fan as you claim to be and you have the companies best interest at heart...
Then Give them a hand.
Prove to us its a simple process and "create the Palladium mechanics bible" yourself and then submit it to Big Kev.
Otherwise you are just one more in a sea voices on the internet.

Damian Magecraft wrote:We go through this "the system needs an update or replaced!" discussion about every 3 moths or so... does anyone ever bother to consider just how long it would take the company to do that?
we are looking at Palladium going at least 2 years with NO NEW PRODUCT.
In its current state that is not a feasible proposition.

I have been working on re-organizing the rules for awhile now...
And it is no easy task. I have to stop myself from trying to add in my own bias as to how certain rules function.
Because before the "fixes" can be added the baseline of what was there before must first be-established.
So to all you who say its a simple matter to do I say...
"put up or shut up"
If you are as a big a fan as you claim to be and you have the companies best interest at heart...
Then Give them a hand.
Prove to us its a simple process and "create the Palladium mechanics bible" yourself and then submit it to Big Kev.
Otherwise you are just one more in a sea voices on the internet.

Thank you

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Galroth wrote:

Mech-Viper Prime wrote:

Eclipse wrote:Knowing where to go and how to jump back and forth in a book to make a character creates an extra barrier to entry. It's not ideal for new players, that palladium might need - I don't know how their sales are going and how much of it is due to shifts in demographics and technology.

Why would you not design a game to accommodate new players? Isn't that a losing proposition over time? Won't people get hooked on other game systems since they're easier to handle? Of course, the book cover illustrations and the range of creative ideas are good selling points too.. Pity they don't permit conversions to other systems:)

i dont think it will ever go back to the glory days of pen and paper rpgs while you got xbox, ps3 or pc games out there,

"man i want to play rifts and no one is around, well i go play fallout 3 or new vegas or play WOW, or Call of duty."

I agree, sadly. I'd really like to play Rifts right now.

think some of us would too, get some beer , order some pizza and just play until sun comes up and maybe a few more hours.

Man if I had that opportunity I' d even play with a CS lovin nut like yourself! (J/K come on) but Seriously, give me a kill hound, CS Juicer, or maybe a Stalker my dice a slice a brew and a good gm and I would be HAPPY to play a CS sympathetic game if it was live at this point.

Johnnycat93 wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Johnnycat93 wrote:"If you don't succeed, try try again"

"Then give up; don't make a damned fool out of yourself."

Realist v Optimist, the eternal battle

"If at first you don't succeed, determine why your first effort failed, test your new understanding of the problem, and verify that your new plan to solve the problem is correct. If solving the problem is worth the amount of effort your new plan requires, try again."

Pragmatists make the world go around.

--flatline

Damian Magecraft wrote:We go through this "the system needs an update or replaced!" discussion about every 3 moths or so... does anyone ever bother to consider just how long it would take the company to do that?
we are looking at Palladium going at least 2 years with NO NEW PRODUCT.
In its current state that is not a feasible proposition.

I have been working on re-organizing the rules for awhile now...
And it is no easy task. I have to stop myself from trying to add in my own bias as to how certain rules function.
Because before the "fixes" can be added the baseline of what was there before must first be-established.
So to all you who say its a simple matter to do I say...
"put up or shut up"
If you are as a big a fan as you claim to be and you have the companies best interest at heart...
Then Give them a hand.
Prove to us its a simple process and "create the Palladium mechanics bible" yourself and then submit it to Big Kev.
Otherwise you are just one more in a sea voices on the internet.

I cant afford to put in the 400-600 man-hours i estimate it would take me to rewrite and reformat the rules on spec.. hell not even on spec, but on "gee i hope Kev likes it and will pay me". Otherwise, i'd do it in a heartbeat. I even live close enough to commute to their headquarters occasionally if i had to.

Sureshot wrote:Gurps 3rd books can be adapted to 4th yes, but how many D&D 2nd edition books work with 3rd? It can work both ways, and it heavily depends on what your going for a rewrite. If people want the system to be 'fixed' to the point that all the 'problems, inconsistancies and errors' are eliminated, its going to require such a rewrite that the only thing the same will be the systems. As for being inconsistant, *I* am perfectly fine with the system as it is, and will buy new books as they are released, I would even be willing to look at a tweak, but I will NOT buy a compleatly new system that will mandate me rebuying all my old books.

Again while some versions of D&D are not comptalbe with other versions does not necesarily mean they can't work on a new edition or a major streamlining. Gurps and Hero System and World of Darkness (with their conversion guides) have shown that a new edition does not mean a auto invalidation of older books. Personally I'm not sure if the system will ever gain more populairty without a new edition. And if some don't want to buy the new edition and it's books than don't. PB can't keep taking a loss forvever to make some fans happy.

Damian Magecraft wrote:We go through this "the system needs an update or replaced!" discussion about every 3 moths or so... does anyone ever bother to consider just how long it would take the company to do that?
we are looking at Palladium going at least 2 years with NO NEW PRODUCT.
In its current state that is not a feasible proposition.

Not a feasible proposition now. Yet something they may have to look into eventually. The company imo can only take so many losses before they either close their doors. Or they may have to attempt something drastic like a new edition or a true streamlining. I'm not saying right now. Yet it needs to be done.

Damian Magecraft wrote:Then Give them a hand.
Prove to us its a simple process and "create the Palladium mechanics bible" yourself and then submit it to Big Kev.
Otherwise you are just one more in a sea voices on the internet.

Leaving out all the insulting elements of the post that are not worth responding to. Or even relavent to the topic at hand.

Sure I will give them a hand if they are willing to pay me to do so. I'm not spending all the extra time to reorganize the rules for PB out of the goodness of my heart. If I do something like that I will have my best interests and PB best interests side by side. Sorry I'm not a non-profit organization.


Why is it threads like this no matter how constructive they maybe always have someone telling others not to discuss the flaws of the system. Always. I get and respect that some disagree. Yet let others like myself actually have a thread where we can discuss. Without for once being told to leave. rewrite the system or not be called a true fan. Than the fans who like the system get offended that they have such a poor reputation on the internet.

Johnnycat93 wrote:

Jay05 wrote:Johnnycat93. The problem with what you propose however, is a total rewrite would cause those of us with thousands spent over the years to re purchase new editions to be compatible and up to date. Now I can't speak for anyone else but I'm not rolling in money over here. The prospect of having to re-purchase updated books not because they are worn out from use, but because they no longer apply to the game they were designed for is an unacceptable one. And I bet I'm not alone. At least RUE with it's changes didn't TOTALLY invalidate the older books!

I understand the REALISTIC limits of doing a 2nd ed. However, I still believe that the system would benefit from one. On top of that, none of this changes the fact that there are issues with how the system works now, and I don't know about everyone else but when I see a problem I make an effort to fix that problem. And when I say fix I mean beyond a simple house rule done by a GM.

The problem is, while it may be best for the system in terms of mechanics, I don't think it'd be best for the business. they'd have to pay for new runs on every product they wanted to upgrade, not to mention hire a whole staff of new writers sinse there is no way in hell kevin will have time to re-write everything and get it done before 2098.

And on top of that, it would drive many longtime fans from bothering to buy the new edition after the huge upfront expence, and if they don't attract an entirely new market--a new market that's a lot more crowded than when palladium broke in the first time, and competing with MMO's and other digital time wasters that eat into most RPG gamer's free time (the eairly 80's was before all this).

In short, a third edition may make mechanics look pretty, but it has a very high chance of killing the company outright.

Sureshot wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:We go through this "the system needs an update or replaced!" discussion about every 3 moths or so... does anyone ever bother to consider just how long it would take the company to do that?
we are looking at Palladium going at least 2 years with NO NEW PRODUCT.
In its current state that is not a feasible proposition.

Not a feasible proposition now. Yet something they may have to look into eventually. The company imo can only take so many losses before they either close their doors. Or they may have to attempt something drastic like a new edition or a true streamlining. I'm not saying right now. Yet it needs to be done.

Damian Magecraft wrote:Then Give them a hand.
Prove to us its a simple process and "create the Palladium mechanics bible" yourself and then submit it to Big Kev.
Otherwise you are just one more in a sea voices on the internet.

Leaving out all the insulting elements of the post that are not worth responding to. Or even relavent to the topic at hand.

Sure I will give them a hand if they are willing to pay me to do so. I'm not spending all the extra time to reorganize the rules for PB out of the goodness of my heart. If I do something like that I will have my best interests and PB best interests side by side. Sorry I'm not a non-profit organization.


Why is it threads like this no matter how constructive they maybe always have someone telling others not to discuss the flaws of the system. Always. I get and respect that some disagree. Yet let others like myself actually have a thread where we can discuss. Without for once being told to leave. rewrite the system or not be called a true fan. Than the fans who like the system get offended that they have such a poor reputation on the internet.

Sureshot, it is a known fact that PB cannot afford to hire new employees at this time. If they could and could offer a competative wage/salery, I have a feeling they'd have people beating down the door for a job. As it is they have 6 very dedicated staffers who from everything I hear frequently work themselves sick to get what they can done and often they are rewarded with just enough cash flow to keep the doors open, and production continuing. How in the hell do you propose those six people stop what they're working on to reboot the whole damn line?! Which btw would likely alienate a large % of their core fan base. People complain about lack of product now. Rebooting would grind it to a halt for a time. Perhaps too long. Seems we agree here Nekira

flatline wrote:

Johnnycat93 wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Johnnycat93 wrote:"If you don't succeed, try try again"

"Then give up; don't make a damned fool out of yourself."

Realist v Optimist, the eternal battle

"If at first you don't succeed, determine why your first effort failed, test your new understanding of the problem, and verify that your new plan to solve the problem is correct. If solving the problem is worth the amount of effort your new plan requires, try again."

Pragmatists make the world go around.

--flatline

Well, that gets us to the important question: why didn't RUE solve the problem?

Killer Cyborg wrote:

flatline wrote:

Johnnycat93 wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Johnnycat93 wrote:"If you don't succeed, try try again"

"Then give up; don't make a damned fool out of yourself."

Realist v Optimist, the eternal battle

"If at first you don't succeed, determine why your first effort failed, test your new understanding of the problem, and verify that your new plan to solve the problem is correct. If solving the problem is worth the amount of effort your new plan requires, try again."

Pragmatists make the world go around.

--flatline

Well, that gets us to the important question: why didn't RUE solve the problem?

How would a person fix/solve something he doesn't use in the first place?
Listen to the faithful who seem to worship it as written?

Rifts:Unfinished Edition wasn't a good change over from what I have seen.
You demonstrated quite nicely how borked the character creation was.