You want me to play what?

[Davenrell]

Continuing the series of topics that brew discussion in what we do and don't like in games I had a new question come to me. Near our house is a local game store that I hang out in almost every day now as I work next door. Last week as I was looking at their role-playing books I saw one I had not noticed before, Smallville RPG.

I was skeptical about this as I thought the smallville world was fairly enclosed even when they later introduced other super heroes. I picked up the book and browsed through it and came to a conclusion. Why would you want to play this game? In the character creation section it even tells you to define if your a "main character" or "supporting character". Now in my games I often have one or two PCs step up as a major center of the story. However there are NEVER supporting PCs in my game. Each character is going to be a mover and shaker in the world even if it is in ways not always obvious. In the last table top game of thrones game I ran one of the PC's became the last Targaryen capable of providing heirs. Another PC became her husband. A third PC became the leader of one of the major houses. The two remaining PCs were common born and at first mostly followed the nobles and did what they said. As the story progressed these two accrued fame and fortune and themselves became known on a even legendary level.

I admit that I did not give the book much time after reading that but that one point was enough to convince me to put the book back down. Since that day I wondered what kind of things bring out that response in others. So now its time for the question.

What specifically is it about a system, setting, genre, that one all important thing that just turns you off of it?

We have all been approached about a game that we have flat out said no to for one reason or another. I personally do not like the aspects of "superhero" games. I like the life of my PCs to be a dangerous thing where it doesn't take a creature the size of the moon to make me feel threatened. For that reason I rarely say yes to abberant or exalted games, because even if the storyteller challenges my PC, the lengths they have to go to do it always seemed strained.

So lets hear it, and now I will be sad by the number of people that list why they don't like Cyberpunk.

[The Story Guide]

Ah, Anwyn. Probably the bitchiest character I ever played. Luckily her husband was much more a diplomat or she'd have been run out the kingdom, Targaryen or not.

Anyhoo. I like games that are stories. I loved the Game of Thrones game because it felt like an interactive novel in which all of the characters had a chance to shape events and eventually the direction of the entire world. On the flip side, I really don't like games that seem to be a never ending stream of combats and numbers with little to no plot linking everything together.

I'll try any genre at least once, but I tend to favor horror and dark fantasy the most with four-colour superheros and any black-and-white only genre/game taking the lowest spots on my interest. I also dislike games in which the PC's start out so powerful that building a great story about overcoming obstacles and changing as a character is pretty much impossible. I'd love Exalted much more if the power levels between the types of characters wasn't so stark and so quickly ridiculous.

[Mr Fox]

I definitely agree with Mala on the point that a game should be a story. I'm the same way with my TV shows, I much preferred Star Trek DS9 because it had an ongoing plot, over TNG. A series of random adventures that are unconnected to anything are pointless in a game. I want to shape the world, or at least shape the character's story.

As for the other point of not starting off powerful... Actually, I too would prefer to start off a character at low level and build them up over time. In almost all of the Table top games I've run over the years, the characters started out from the lowest you can start. That's the way I prefer it. Sadly, in this PBP environment, it is the rare game that lasts long enough for there to be real growth in a character either in their story or mechanically. Long running, strong games are things to be treasured.

[Ante]

What turns me off about a system: Poor presentation, lack of organization or a shoddy job of editing. If the game system is so fantastic then, please, at least take the time to make it's 'fantasticness' evident. What turns me off more than anything else, however, is a system that just doesn't work well. And by that I don't mean 'when the book gives contradictory or incomplete information'. That's not great, but if the system is, at its core, well-conceived then most such issues can be worked out with little real trouble.

What I'm referring to are systems of mechanical rules that are - at a fundamental level - susceptible to abuse or that contain some imbalance between different classes of attributes or characters. Such as a system in which Strength grants bonuses that are far and above those of other Attributes, or a system in which character classes that use 'magic' are at a significant disadvantage when compared to those who play the more straightforward fighter - or a system where they are at a significant advantage.

Even worse are systems possessing some inherent vulnerability to the vagueries of chance as they pertain to dice-rolling, such as a system of rules wherein a character who is as tough as the game's Power Level allows for can be felled - not by clever actions on the part of that character's enemies or through poor choices on the part of the tough character - but by nothing more than One Bad Roll. To be clear, even the toughest PC should find themselves challenged in a good game and there most certainly should be at least some risk that they will be defeated by an enemy against whom 'mere toughness' isn't enough. But that is completely different than being dropped, not by a memorable and frightening villain or nemesis, but by simple Bad Luck - against which the poorly-designed system of rules being used provide no protection. Any game system that lets the dice push it around like that is not one I wish to waste time on.

What turns me off about a Setting: Lack of depth, detail and originality. I think most people would readily agree with me when it comes to originality, though I find I'm generally more picky than most when it comes to depth and detail in a Game Setting. I am, perhaps, overly dependant on having a good setting to work with, but if I am then I am and I have no intention of changing. The fact is, I love a game with good setting and I can't stand it when the ST/DM/Whatever can't seem to be bothered to adequately describe what is - for all intents and purposes - The World as the characters perceive it!

What Genres turn me off: I do not generally care for dark fantasy or high fantasy, four-color superheroism or "gritty", Liefeld-esque antiheroism, steam punk, schoolyard-shenanigan-games, or dungeon crawlers. While one or two of those genres I simply don't like, the rest I stay away from because of the sorts of players - or at least characters - such games seem to draw to them.

And really, if I'm going to be honest, it's the people involved in a game more than the genre that can turn me off to a game quicker than anything else.

I don't usually like high fantasy or four-color comics style games because they so often seem to cater to players who only seem interested in throwing around Neato Powers or wielding Mighty Magic Weapons of Magicalness - or whatever - and going to great lengths to ensure that everyone and their mothers all know just how freaking awesome their PC really is. And how many stories can hope to compete with a gathering of egos so bloated and overgrown?

I don't usually like dark fantasy or "gritty" games (whether those games are Liefeld-esque comic-style games or Bladerunner-style neo-noir games is really irrelevant) because these sorts of games so often seem to attract players who only seem interested in using their PCs as a sort of cathartic release for all kinds of personal issues that, ideally, they should be dealing with via normal, healthy conversations with close friends or family members, or, if that's not an option, seeking professional counseling for. I play RPGs to have fun and 'fun' for me does not include boatloads of unnecessary social drama, tawdry and cheap sex, angst, or vitriolic dialogue. That might just be me, though (and I would point out that I only have a problem with all that stuff when it's unnecessary ).

Steam punk is a genre that's just never 'clicked' with me. I have no idea why, since I actually like the cyberpunk genre more than almost any other (even though I don't usually like to play in such a genre, for the reasons mentioned above).

I think that the reason I don't care for games set in a high school (or some other type of school) setting is simply because I never especially cared for school itself. This had more to do with my general disgust with the American educational system than it did with anything social - I was one of those who would've enjoyed my social experience of school a lot more if I could have taken the 'school' part of it out entirely. Anyway, I didn't really care for it the first time, so I have no real desire to put myself through it again.

I don't think I will go into all of the reasons why I don't like dungeon crawlers, for fear that I might insult a longtime D&Der unintentionally (btw, Google's Chrome web browser attempted to tell me that 'dialogue' was an incorrect spelling, but made no attempt to correct me for typing 'D&Der' - how's that for irony? ). All I will say is that I really, really do not like these types of games. I don't even like them when they're presented in video game format - no matter how amazing the graphics or smooth the controls are.

I do want to be clear on something though, and that is that I do not think that 'all' players attracted to any of the above genres are automatically subject to the stereotypes and/or personal pitfalls that I enumerated alongside of those genres. Many players - especially many of those players who frequent RPG-Post - are the exceptions, rather than the rule. So if you've read what I've typed above and you find yourself wondering who these people are that I've been talking about, then let me assure you that you are almost certainly not one of them.