I have! I played a Time Lord who wore a deerstalker and a pac-a-mac. The system was solid and on par with many games around at that time, but in retrospect there was nothing particularly “Who” about it.
It was similar in a lot of ways to the FASA Star Trek - functional and quite tactical. It was a bit clunkier, and it disn’t include the brilliant chargen system that was probably the best part of FASA Trek (and wouldn’t work for Who).
In retrospect I think that the simulationist approach that dominated RPGs of the generation after AD&D (FASA DW came out in 1985) is absolutely the wrong one for Doctor Who. (And I say that as a committed simulationist most of the time.) Nobody writing a DW story cares whether a Cyberman’s gun does more or less damage than a Dalek’s gun: if you get hit by either, you’re dead unless you’re a main character. If Cybermen and Daleks are shooting at each other, what matters is not which one can stand up better against the other one’s fire, but that this provides cover for you to sneak in and do something frightful to the master computer. That’s why Time Lord and DWAITAS (which clearly owes a lot to TL) are so good: they accept this and simulate not “the real world plus aliens and time machines” but “what happens in a DW story”.
Don’t let Ian Levine hear you say that
…and this is a lot of the reason I don’t like Dr. Who. I don’t think he’s even a real doctor.
Given the history over vets using the term doctor I’d have thought you’d at least cut him a bit of slack there.
Lets just say that if you ‘vet’ something, you check that it’s in good shape. If you ‘Doctor’ Something… well, you get the idea.
So really, doctors should want to be called vets. Vet Who would be way cooler.
Ah, all those unseen adventures that consist of turning up, taking a look round, saying “yup, that seems just fine” and moving on…
At least it would have internal consistency.