Neither was literally unplayable (I ran more than one campaign of Aftermath!, and at least started a campaign of P&P once) though I think P&P's compulsive special-casing puts it closer to the mark (Aftermath might have been a busy system, but it was a fairly consistent one).My vote is for AH's Powers and Perils, with an honourable mention award going to Aftermath.
While I agree "unpleasant to play" shouldn't be a criteria, I think as a game gets more and more difficult for some people to play it does indeed approach "unplayable". After all the question in the thread title isn't "What system is unplayable" its "what is the least playable."Disappointingly, some people are conflating "difficult/unpleasant to play" with "unplayable" so they can take potshots at their least favorite systems.
I loved me some Aftermath, and would still run/play it with a couple of tweaks; Bushido had a couple of clunky rules (one of which was one of those things that made sense in context, but was a sociodynamic nightmare at the table). Daredevils suffered from the fact it was the same rules set for Aftermath, where a lot of the crunch served some serious purpose, applied to a pulp-adventure game where they really didn't.I'll defend the Charlotte/Hume games. Nothing at all wrong with Bushido. Aftermath was admittedly way too complicated, but it was complete and some people did slog through it and loved it. Daredevils was great, though extended tasks were jargony rules. Not as tedious as Chivalry and Sorcery's enchantment or spell learning.