What is the most superficial reason you have rejected a RPG for?

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com

Trippy

Legendary Pubber
Joined
Aug 20, 2017
Messages
3,438
Reaction score
5,475
I can’t help it, but it is a real thing for me. Some games I ought to like, system wise at least if not the whole caboodle. But something relatively minor just puts me off.

Examples:

Icons - The art and art direction just makes the game seem too childish to play, for me personally, even though the system is pretty robust.
GURPS - I just never got over the decision to use Imperial measures over Metric - especially for Transhuman Space.
Legend of the Five Rings 5E- I just can’t get over the requirement of custom dice.
Prowlers and Paragons - How many potential titles did they choose to reject before they settled on this one?
Doctor Who - Irregular sized supplements.
Fate - The shilling of RPG.Net’s rating chart in their game index. Colored me negative for years.
Tales of The Loop - why did they have to include an American setting alongside the more original Swedish one?
King Arthur Pendragon 5th Edition - Great game.....but.....it has a giant pig on the cover.
Lords of Olympus - Great game.....but.....it has a giant pig as an author.
Space: 1889 - the original copy I bought by mistake was a German translation, not English.
Mutants & Masterminds - my copy arrived in the post with a dent in the spine.
Nobilis 2nd Edition - The book was too big to fit neatly on my bookshelf.
Marvel Supers - Something compels me to feel I can’t buy it without having a DC game also, to counterbalance it. Erm.
Another horror RPG - It would take my total number of horror genre games on my shelf beyond thirteen.

What are your embarrassingly questionable reasons?
 
Silent legions - I really, really dislike the cover, to the point that I didn't want to have it on my shelves. Pretty dumb reason (especially as I kickstarted it, as Kevin Crawford always delivers, but I never ordered my copy).

Any game that uses cards instead of dice. Which again is pretty stupid because these can be interesting. I try to read them nonetheless as I think you learn more things from games you don't like (but that's another subject). So no Malifaux - Through the breach rpg or Castle Falkenstein for me.

Same goes for diceless games. The mere mention of diceless mechanics makes me loose interest immediately.
 
Last edited:
Savage Worlds - the lack of linkage between skills and their associated attributes. Attributes just... don't... do... anything. I've heard this will be addressed in the upcoming Savage Worlds Omniverse, but who knows when that's going to come out?

I refuse to buy any of FFG's proprietary dice games, but I don't consider that a superficial reason. Really, any of the other games I've "rejected" I've done so on the basis of a strong, deep-seated dislike for either the mechanics-- 5e, DSA-- or the setting-- World of Darkness.
 
Runequest using bronze weapons. It was only much later I learned about the historical effectiveness of bronze versus iron*.

*Steel is better, iron is the same but cheaper, bronze is easier to work with but tin and copper are rarely found near each other thus requiring a civilization using it to have a trade network.
 
Savage Worlds - the lack of linkage between skills and their associated attributes. Attributes just... don't... do... anything. I've heard this will be addressed in the upcoming Savage Worlds Omniverse, but who knows when that's going to come out?

^This

Also don't like the idea of using different dice based on ability level and the potential range of advancement seems kinda limited.

I refuse to buy any of FFG's proprietary dice games, but I don't consider that a superficial reason.

Also, ^This

Any system that expects me to spend extra money and rely on specialized proprietary dice to play the game gets summarily dismissed by me. And not just for superficial reasons, but because it's a silly concept and a silly imposition.
 
Stalker. Well, I've bought it, but I sure as hell can't read more than half a page in one sitting.
 
There's a few things.

I like normal RPG dice. I don't want to play any games where I have to buy funky dice. One of the reasons, that I've never played DCC. I also don't like playing cards or tarot cards.

Where authors have changed the cannon of a product I once really liked. Such as Vampire 5e - I won't touch it.

Material from certain authors who's views I would oppose (generally the 'extremists' on both sides).

Material from large corporations such as Hasbro (I wouldn't buy anything of their product line). But then I don't really like D&D as it feels like a supers game.

Incongruent art. Art should always be appropriate for the setting.

New fantasy settings that are trying to be different but use the same fantasy races. I'm soooo bored of elves.
 
Last edited:
^This

Also don't like the idea of using different dice based on ability level and the potential range of advancement seems kinda limited.
Honestly, I'm 100% cool with different ability levels being measured by different dice types in Cortex and Fight!, so I'd be okay with it in Savage Worlds except for the fact it's got attributes and skills and attributes don't do anything. It drives me nuts.
 
World of Darkness - I don't like dice pools or vampires
Chivalry and Sorcery Second Edition - $35 freaking bucks! Are you kidding me?
 
Honestly, I'm 100% cool with different ability levels being measured by different dice types in Cortex and Fight!, so I'd be okay with it in Savage Worlds except for the fact it's got attributes and skills and attributes don't do anything. It drives me nuts.

Yeah, attributes not doing anything is a bigger issue for me. I'd be willing to give it a shot if attributes and skills stacked or something. SW seems to have some interesting concepts.
 
Savage Worlds - the lack of linkage between skills and their associated attributes. Attributes just... don't... do... anything. I've heard this will be addressed in the upcoming Savage Worlds Omniverse, but who knows when that's going to come out?

There is no direct linkage between attributes and skills, i.e. you can have a low Agility and still have a high skill in an Agility-based skill, *but* that comes at a cost in the in-game currency of Advancements.

To raise a (say) Agility skill from d6 to d8 costs more if your Agility is d6 as opposed to d8. In terms of fluff you can see it as someone who is not very agile having to invest more time in improving an Agility-based skill, while someone who is more Agile would have been able to level up two Agility-based skills in the same time.

That said, I think if this aspect of the rules bugs you, I wouldn't call it a superficial reason.

Personally I would not buy a set of rules if the author was obnoxious on a forum I read, regardless of how good the rules are.
 
For me the pettiest reason I’ve had for not buying an rpg was D&D 4e. I saw the core books as a bundle at an auction, bid on them and won the bidding, had the auctioneer count “going once, going twice, sold ...” and THEN someone yelled out a higher price and they got it, despite the bidding actually being over. Not only did I not keep bidding (partly because I considered that I had already won the bidding but also because I had reached my ceiling) but I refused to ever buy the game later on as well.

There's a few things.

I like normal RPG dice. I don't want to play any games where I have to buy funky dice. One of the reasons, that I've never played DCC. I also don't like playing cards or tarot cards.

Haven’t funky dice been part of rpgs some nice their inception? Unless you go all d6 all the time you’ve got some funky dice.
 
For me I think proprietary dice would be it. I find it a big negative and a turn off as well when the rules use proprietary dice symbols.

I get the flavor aspect, but if the game requires a fair number of sets...I like to be able to roll all the the dice every PC and NPC at once, so if 5 people each need to roll 3 dice each want to have 15 dice, not re-roll one set of three 5 times...it smacks to me of hubris or gimmick, or if there is a simple map to dice numerals, a money grab. It's not like I can't afford the dice...so that is why I consider it more superficial than practical.

Although I do buy games with proprietary dice if like the rule concepts, but don't play them...but I rarely play most of the RPGs I buy.
 
I don't like the author for the things they've done or the ways they've acted. (Example I won't buy from a certain company anymore because the head stepped into squash a charity bundle to help a certain group who are often disenfranchised in gaming circles.)

A product inflates its size by using more white space and effectively gives less content for the price compared to other games.

The artwork is abysmally bad. If I can manage to draw something better than whoever they've hired/worked with, its probably a no, and I'm aware my art isn't good enough for games.

Negatively portraying my belief entirely. (Negatively portraying past bad instances from groups in my faith is fine, portraying all of us with that brush is not the same.)

Trying to sell me on it having no classes/levels as a significant plus when that's been around since Traveller and Runequest first came out. I don't mind classes, I don't mind them not being there either, but it worries me when they act as they've thought of something "new." When, uh, it's been done already and that's not a selling point.

Intentionally playing up how adult a game is when it reads like what juvenile mind thinks is adult.
 
Oh, another two.

Fat games. That is to say, huge tomes. I no longer have the time or will to go through a 500 page rpg book. Especially, when you could say the same with a third of the words.

Games that are overly politically correct, or where the author is trying to force a specific 'code of conduct' down your throat or say you can't play in a way you want. As a grognard and Punk rocker I thoroughly reject this notion. A) Because it's only a game and people are supposed to be having fun. B) I'm an adult and I trust myself to do the right thing. I don't really need big brother over my shoulder.
 
Oh, another two.

Fat games. That is to say, huge tomes. I no longer have the time or will to go through a 500 page rpg book. Especially, when you could say the same with a third of the words.
I don't think that is a particularly superficial reason though, that seems an eminently reasonable decision.
 
Intentionally playing up how adult a game is when it reads like what juvenile mind thinks is adult.

This! I'm a bit tired of things labeled as "mature" when all it does is focusing on sex and gore (making something about child abuse or rape doesn't make anything "mature"). This is a big turn off for me as well.
 
Honestly, I'm 100% cool with different ability levels being measured by different dice types in Cortex and Fight!, so I'd be okay with it in Savage Worlds except for the fact it's got attributes and skills and attributes don't do anything. It drives me nuts.

Vigor is what you use to soak damage, Strength is used in melee damage and both Str and Agi are used to avoid/resist certain effects (like being grappled), and Agility is used in Tricks. Smarts is used in social combat and to resist supernatural attacks. It's also used for Tricks, while Spirit is used in social combat and to resist supernatural effects.

That's on top of the attribute being used to determine how expensive it is to raise an associated skill.

The design is definitely more about skill than attribute, though. They wanted training to be more important than raw ability.

1620581544368.png

EDIT:

To answer the original question, art is one of the most superficial reasons I won't play a game. I also won't play one that has certain people attached but I'm not sure that's superficial as much as not wanting to support them or their products.
 
Last edited:
....Fat games. That is to say, huge tomes. I no longer have the time or will to go through a 500 page rpg book. Especially, when you could say the same with a third of the words....
Don't think that is superficial if the 500 pages is mostly rules, however if the rules are like a small portion and the majority is just a fulsome bestiary, spell lists, pre-designed vehicles, etc. (basically accouterments ) then yah consider that superficial :smile:
 
Vigor is what you use to soak damage, Strength is used in melee damage and both Str and Agi are used to avoid/resist certain effects (like being grappled), and Agility is used in Tricks. Smarts is used in social combat and to resist supernatural attacks. It's also used for Tricks, while Spirit is used in social combat and to resist supernatural effects.

That's on top of the attribute being used to determine how expensive it is to raise an associated skill.

The design is definitely more about skill than attribute, though. They wanted training to be more important than raw ability.

...
Well that is why the rejection is "superficial" it is not like Attributes are not meaningful, just not in the way one likes :smile:

My superficiality is the opposite, I do not care for mechanics where each skill is tied to an attribute just as a matter of taste, so in that regard it is superficial.

I do have non-superficial reasons for it related to how such mechanics often play out, but that means I should take each game as its own. I believe it is a near impossible design choice to do well (oh I do know how bog standard it is) but doesn't mean it can't be done or hasn't been done and just have yet to see it.
 
Don't think that is superficial if the 500 pages is mostly rules, however if the rules are like a small portion and the majority is just a fulsome bestiary, spell lists, pre-designed vehicles, etc. (basically accouterments ) then yah consider that superficial :smile:

I'm fine with a large tome, just as long as there is plenty of good stuff inside. Just not reams and reams of flavor text or just endless mechanics. :smile:
 
I didn’t like the company or author producing it. There are a few things out there that I refuse to buy because of it.
I don't think that's unreasonable at all - it's your money, after all, and they are not entitled to it just for publishing a game product.

"Separate the art from the artist" is a fine concept, but it's up to each individual person whether they feel it's appropriate in any given situation, and ultimately both choices are reasonable.
 
Sometimes the fans of a game just annoy me to distraction (Fate, OWoD...)
Sometimes I think the person/people behind the game is a codpiece (Fred Hicks, Pundit, Daniel Fox...)
Sometimes the game is full of itself or comments negatively on other games...
Sometimes just seeing some forum guy I dislike endorsing a game...
Sometimes if a game describes itself as 'pulp'...

One of those on its own MIGHT not be enough, but my pettiness can stack up pretty high.
 
Last edited:
1. It has big fighting robots.
2. It has cartoon art.
3. It is darker than a coal pit during a total eclipse at night, under a cloudy sky
4. Too many skills in the list
5. It uses d100

I don't consider any of these reasons as superficial.
 
Last edited:
* The character sheet doesn't have a space for your Initiative bonus or mechanic, if one exists in that game. It leads to people having to be reminded every single fight how to calculate it.
* I don't like the author or the publisher (Although I don't feel this is superficial at all)
 
Vampire. Because Goths. Which is odd because my roommates around that time were in a Goth-Metal band. Go figure.
Maybe it’s not weird at all. Maybe he is the underlining reason behind your resentment of Goths.
 
Sometimes the fans of a game just annoy me to distraction (Fate, OWoD...)
Sometimes I think the person/people behind the game is a codpiece (Fred Hicks, Pundit, Daniel Fox...)
Sometimes the game is full of itself or comments negatively on other games...
Sometimes just seeing some forum guy I dislike endorsing a game...
A couple of these stacking up will definitely put me off a game.

Certain games also have the problem of being condescending to their audience. I've read a few books in the last 10 years that have addressed me, the reader, like I'm a small child. That's a "one strike and you're out" situation I'm afraid. Also, it usually walks hand-in-hand with the next point...

Games, or writers/designers, who think that they are just so incredibly clever and they really want to tell you about it too. Just so you don't miss it because, as established in the previous point, you know... you're not very smart. Unlike them. There's too many games out there that harp on about how their game (or perhaps it's themselves) is doing or saying something that has never been done before. Whether it's a mechanic or a philosophical approach matters not. In almost all cases I've seen it before. Several times usually.

A bit of humility, self-awareness, and empathy will go a very long way with customers.
 
Last edited:
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top