Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1010940I always thought everyone loved 2nd edition.

I don't. I'd rather play 2e than the WotC editions, but I prefer original D&D or 1e AD&D over 2e. I think the core 2e rules aren't too bad, although where they differ from 1e I almost always prefer the 1e approach. But I found the 2e splat books and options books to be pretty terrible (not to mention the adventures -- just not my cup of tea).

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;1011030I don't. I'd rather play 2e than the WotC editions, but I prefer original D&D or 1e AD&D over 2e. I think the core 2e rules aren't too bad, although where they differ from 1e I almost always prefer the 1e approach. But I found the 2e splat books and options books to be pretty terrible (not to mention the adventures -- just not my cup of tea).

Hey, 2e gave us Ravenloft, the best of the published D&D settings and the best version of it too, the 1990 "Realm of Terror" black boxed set. I know technically Ravenloft debuted as a module in the later days of 1e, but the setting as we know it didn't begin in earnest until 2e.

Though 1e AD&D is better in a lot of ways due to no censorship and less bloat. You could probably run a Black Box Ravenloft game using the 1e corebooks and the Realm of Terror book with fairly minimal mechanical changes.

Can't say I'm a Ravenloft fan either (in its 1e module or later 2e versions). I know a lot of people liked it, and there's no arguing taste. If you're a fan, that's okay with me.

Quote from: Itachi;1010937AD&D 2nd edition. Twilight 2000. Rifts. Ars Magica. Shadowrun. Kult. Deadlands. World of Synnibar, Cyborg Commando, etc.

Taking a closer look at that list, there's not much there I was into. I did enjoy playing Twilight 2000 (although I didn't GM it, and don't recall much about the rules). Already gave my opinion on 2e. Played Rifts a few times (never GM'd or owned it), but wasn't my thing. Never played any of the others. I did look over the Cyborg Commando rules, but they didn't appeal.

Some games I did have fun playing or running include:
Ninjas & Superspies (ran a short campaign with this that everyone liked)
Palladium Fantasy (played, only -- enjoyed it)
Bushido (ran this quite a bit -- had fun)
Rolemaster 2e (ran this quite a bit for Middle Earth -- had fun)

More recently, I've also come to appreciate the Flashing Blades rules. Not sure what year they were published, so it may have been earlier 80s.

My most-played games of the late 80s and 90s were 1e AD&D, a campaign with classic D&D, Call of Cthulhu, Runequest, Stormbringer, and Rolemaster 2e. The RPG industry was going in some other directions that weren't really to my taste, so I just did my own thing.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;1011034Can't say I'm a Ravenloft fan either (in its 1e module or later 2e versions). I know a lot of people liked it, and there's no arguing taste. If you're a fan, that's okay with me.

Understandable, I myself am a huge fan of Ravenloft.

Another good game from the 90's was the Sailor Moon Role-Playing Game and Resource Book, published in 1999 by Guardians of the Order.

The era settings were the best, I give you that. Ravenloft, Planescape, Falkenstein' New Europe, Al Amarja, Shadowrun's Sixth World, Kult's Metropolis. Some insanely creative stuff back then.

Quote from: Itachi;1010937AD&D 2nd edition. Twilight 2000. Rifts. Ars Magica. Shadowrun. Kult. Deadlands. World of Synnibar, Cyborg Commando, etc.

All games from late 80s to mid 90s. All games where complexity for complexity's sake, slow gameplay, and opaque goals were the norm. Could we argue this was the period with the biggest amount of poorly designed games? Specially in contrast to the periods that came immediately before (70s-80s) and after (2000s-now) ? Can someone positively constrast those rules to the kinds of, say... Runequest and OD&D, or the recent entries of OSR and PbtA?

I definitely know what you mean, but the 2e AD&D PHB/DMG/MM doesn't suffer from this and I never bought many 2e supplement books so I avoided it there. I guess the 1e Wilderness Survival Guide & to a lesser extent the Dungeoneer's Survival Guide were exemplars.

Starting around 1982 you see lots of these games where complexity is piled on complexity, often in ways that are simply poor design - you could take out several steps and get the same result. Early examples include for me Daredevils and Space Opera - the books are still fairly short by modern standards, yet the systems are very unwieldy. Later on, stuff like the Aliens RPG, based on a notoriously unwieldy core system. Actually for me I would even count Cyberpunk: 2020*. I did actually get my head around the Traveller: New Era personal rules, though not the starship rules.

I tended to never actually run these systems BiTD, instead use as sourcebooks - we would convert everything over to 1e AD&D and have demigod Cavaliers fighting Araska Security troopers in power armour, or I would run the Aliens setting using Call of Cthulu/BRP.

*Thinking about it, I may just have disliked the 'broken' combat system, where Solos always dominated all other classes and armour could easily make a PC invulnerable.

Quote from: zarathustra;1011008Plenty of terrible systems in any era I'd say.

Agreed. There have been shit-rules published throughout the history of Rpgs, from the 1970s through to the 2010s. And plenty of gems. I don't think any decade has been any worse than any others.

I'd guess that by sheer volume there are more bad rules published now than ever before, but it might have peaked ten years ago it's not like I have statistics.

Q:  Late 80s to 90s: the worst rules the hobby ever produced ?

A: I have no way of knowing as I haven't played every RPG ever made since 1974.

Supplemental A: Also, who cares? Were you forced to play them?

As a long time Traveller fan, I've got to say that Megatraveller and the subsequent Traveller:TNE really turned me off. There is some great stuff in each, but the Striker/Azhanti High Lightning approach to combat and vehicle/starship construction was a horrible overload in Megatraveller and the "house system" for GDW at the time really just didn't sit well with me for Traveller:TNE - what was done with the metaplot in each was also terrible IMHO.

A big part of gaming is personal taste. I do not care for the massive amounts of bookkeeping that 3.e required and 4.e was plain terrible in my mind . If these are games others enjoy fine, I make no judgement on the way you play pretend.

Quote from: S'mon;1011039I guess the 1e Wilderness Survival Guide & to a lesser extent the Dungeoneer's Survival Guide were exemplars [of rules supplement rot].

Yeah, definitely, in my opinion. I have all the 1e hardbacks, but those are in pristine condition because they never leave the shelf.

Quote from: S'mon;1011039I definitely know what you mean, but the 2e AD&D PHB/DMG/MM doesn't suffer from this and I never bought many 2e supplement books so I avoided it there. I guess the 1e Wilderness Survival Guide & to a lesser extent the Dungeoneer's Survival Guide were exemplars.

   Here's a question: By the time 2E got to the hardcover rules supplements (as opposed to just 'books of stuff' like Tome of Magic and the Book of Artifacts), the marketing was that they were meant to be used on a 'pick and choose' and 'build-your-own-game' basis. How did 1E approach things?

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1011095Here's a question: By the time 2E got to the hardcover rules supplements (as opposed to just 'books of stuff' like Tome of Magic and the Book of Artifacts), the marketing was that they were meant to be used on a 'pick and choose' and 'build-your-own-game' basis. How did 1E approach things?

I'm pretty sure Unearthed Arcana was marketed as YOU MUST BUY THIS, which was pretty stupid. So was Deities & Demigods - after all you can't have religion in your game without a monster manual of deity stat blocks!
I don't think DSG & WSG claimed to be necessary, but neither was there a 'build your game' message.