Rifts

[Fellfrosch]

Thanks. Too bad I so rarely play the dang game--I've read most of the books cover to cover, but playing time is so scarce.

[Entsuropi]

Reminds me of mage.

[Slant]

I've never understood the appeal of Rifts.  The Palladium system is one of the most cumbersome game engines around.  The characters are nowhere near equal in terms of ability or survival rate, and the whole game seems to be geared towards rampant munchkinism (and this is coming from a guy who played Hackmaster regularly).  I'm not trying to offend anybody's game of choice, I just want somebody to explain the appeal to me, 'cause I just don't get it.

[Spriggan]

The appeal of Rifts is the game settings.  Palladium may not be the best system around but they are one of the best setting creators.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

Really, I though Palladium Fantasy, Heroes Unlimited, Recon,the Mechanoids and After the bomb were flat and featureless.

Robotech and TMNT wern't their creations so they can't take credit.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

Ah, but people play rifts, and while I dont' particularly like it, part of that is probably because I've never read a Rifts volume though, and I certainly recognize that it has a potential appeal. It's more original than many settings, if only because of it's willingness to incorporate so many disparate elements. I think using that setting with a points system like BESM or GURPs would work really well.

[Spriggan]

Saying Palladium fantasy or Rifts is "Flat and Featureless" is akin to calling Pamala Anderson "Flat and Featureless".

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

I never called Rifts flat and featureless, but yes Palladium Fantasy is flat. At least from the perspective of fantasy. Its Generic and very much intended to be so.

The same way that D&D without a campaign is flat and featurless. The neatest concept in the whole Palladium Fantasy is the Wolven empire and these guys are just fur covered Romans.

My problem with Rifts is that it tackles way too much, and that detracts from what could be a great post apocalyptic game, or sci-fi game or fantasy game. While this gives GM's a lot of leeway the advent of man portable double didgit MDC weapons and armor (Triax NGR and Atlantis) and man sized characters with MDC instead of SDC led many of the players in our group (Juicer, Crazy and Dogboy) to hate the game.

The setting isn't hugely original (seeds for the Magic meets tech genre were planted in Gamma World and Shadow Run) and the Original Rifts seemed to be a place where players of all of Palladiums other games could port their character to.  While there were some oriinal OCC's in the first book each successive book showed the lack of organization and shortsightedness that Palladium is famous for.  Bravo for the rifter, and new work that Palladium is doing to unify the game.

[Spriggan]

Wow I can tell you've only read the core rule book.  Because Wolfen are nothign like that.  While there is some generic fantasy aspects, is there any real fanstasy RPG that's not?  If you actualy read through the world books then you'll finsd it's one of the richest fanstasy settings.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

so your saying that I need to buy 200 bucks worth of books to get an idea of how great the setting is? If it was such a great world setting then the main book wouldn't read like every generic fantasy novel ever written.

[Spriggan]

Duh you buy palladium books for their setting content, not for the game.  The core book only contains stuff that was the initial concept for the world, before any of the world books realy came out.   But one or two will do not all.  The land of the damned are exelent.  Also Westren empire is good if you want something different.  It focuse more on role playing political intreage then killing monsters.

[Spriggan]

And Palladium Core books are almost allwayse absent on good setting stuff.  Nightbane;s probaly the best then rifts.

[Fellfrosch]

Aside from the Lands of the Damned, I always saw Palladium Fantasy as pretty bland, too. I didn't play it as much as Sprig, though.

To answer the original question (what is the appeal of Rifts?), I'd have to say...I'm not sure. Obviously the setting appeals to a lot of people--some people (like Jeffe) see it as too scattered, while other people (like me) see it as wide open and adaptable to almost any style of play. The openness is one of the big problems, however, as I pointed out in my review--it's very easy to get bogged down in option overload.

As for some of Slant's concerns, I'm probably not the one to talk to because I've always felt that balance between characters is kind of silly--as long as the characters are working together rather than against each other, who cares if one of them is stronger? That's like complaining that The Fellowship of the Ring was lame because the hobbits had no real skills; as long as they had fun, though, and told a good story, it all works out in the end.

For me, personally, the appeal of Rifts is part setting (which I love) and part nostalgia (I played the game during my formative years as an RPGer, and I've always enjoyed it). It's possible to drown in ridiculous munchkinism, and I have, but eventually you grow as a gamer and realize that it's more fun to play maturely (though I use the term 'mature,' of course, very loosely).

[Spriggan]

Now that PFRPG is actualy being supported it's turning into a very good setting.  The first few books realy don't give you a feeling of how cool the world is, and they cover the most generic fantasy parts of the setting, which I say in my reviews.  But the new ones are realy good.

[Fellfrosch]

The new ones are the ones I mentioned as being good...well, I didn't mention Wolfen Empire, but I haven't read that one.