So there are things I really like about various editions of Dungeons and Dragons. There are things I detest about various editions of Dungeons and Dragons. There are things I love about World of Darkness. There are things I detest about World of Darkness. There are...you get the picture.
So how come somebody doesn't put together a game that actually uses all the stuff that is most liked and gets rid of all the stuff that isn't liked? -C joking said that we should just cobble a game system together that includes all the stuff we seem to like - detailed lock picking methods, crit tables, exploding dice, HP kickers, trap searching descriptions, limited mini-use combat - just to name a few.
So how does one do this and still maintain some conformity of system? I guess we could just use a dozen different rule books, or get the pdfs and print out the sections we wanted, combined into a binder, but damn if that doesn't seem like a recipe for disaster, not to mention rules abuse. While I have confidence in our current group not having a problem playing appropriately, we've had so many players want to "lawyer-up" to "win" the game. I still don't think they have figured out that RPG's are not about winning.
So what should we do? Suck it up and deal with the aspects of a system we don't like? Spend hours/days trying to piecemeal a system we like, only to find huge gaping holes once we start playing it? There is no perfect system, but is there a perfect solution?