Quote from: Tyberious FunkAre you refering to my criticism? If so, I can assure you I have actually played Palladium (well, Rifts).

I don't know if I'd criticize the Palladium system purely based off Rifts.  Rifts can very easily turn into an experience of playing every Palladium system simultaneously.  It's main attraction can quickly become it's greatest problem.  A good GM and player group can make it better by narrowing it's focus.  The more you expand it the more unwieldy it can get but it seems so sexy with the myriad of possibilities.  

With other Palladium products that focus is provided more and it works much better.  A friend and I have talked continuously about running some Rifts and how to improve the experience.  It's usually just a matter of scaling it back to other Palladium products usually Heroes Unlimited because its flexibility is easier to port over directly.  The Palladium system still may not be your cup of tea but it might not seem as unwieldy as Rifts.

Quote from: GunslingerWith other Palladium products that focus is provided more and it works much better. A friend and I have talked continuously about running some Rifts and how to improve the experience. It's usually just a matter of scaling it back to other Palladium products usually Heroes Unlimited because its flexibility is easier to port over directly. The Palladium system still may not be your cup of tea but it might not seem as unwieldy as Rifts.

Well, I played Heroes Unlimited just recently... and while it seems marginally better than Rifts, some of the idiocy still remains.

Quote from: GabrielIn the latest version of the Palladium system rules (Rifts Ultimate Edition), KS himself writes that the extended and outright overlong character generation is a conscious design decision.  He equates length of time spent searching for skill percentages and such with character depth, and feels that any character made up quickly will lack any play value.

Gosh, Kevin Siembieda refusing to accept there might be a problem with his game system.  There's a fucking newsflash in no mistake :rolleyes:

I've played all of these, but I don't think I can put them in order.

Aftermath - too much!
Daredevils - ditto.
GURPS - I've tried to like GURPS. Lord knows I've played enough of it. But it just keeps on coming up as a cold and flavourless game.
Wild West - some neat ideas, but a ridiculously involved ystem that required a ruler to use. Hey, that was FGU too....

Quote from: WarthurYeah, that was probably the worst aspect of the old Storyteller system - I can't believe it was retained for as long as it was.
 
I believe the current Storyteller system has a setup where you botch only if you roll no successes *and* you roll a 1 - no more "total the successes and subtract the 1s" slowing the game up, and botches are much rarer as a result.

No, it's even easier. You can botch (called a dramatic failure now) when you roll a 1 on a chance die (when your dice pool is reduced to 0 or less).
 
However, Certain Vampire clans have a weakness were 1's subract from successes in certain situations (Social for Nosferatu and Mental for Gangrel). Mages can also inflict "bad luck" curses on people that give them this rule as well. However, they do not cause you to botch.

Hello folks,

The deadline for votes is in a little less than 3 hours (5pm GMT today). Once that passes, I'll stop counting votes, process the data, and start a new thread for the results.

The vote is now over.

re Wild West

How did you use the ruler?

V.