Stubborn

[Nytmare]

I wish I had read your first post before I answered your poll question. They're two totally different things.

In general my group is not against trying something new (aside from the one satellite player who hates 4th Ed because video games) especially since I'm usually the guy buying and running the game. That being said, anything that gets in the way of our already falling to pieces campaign is something that is to be avoided like the plague. Therefore, if we have enough people to play an RPG (barring the satellite), it better damn well be our D&D game.

Beyond that however, and as I said in the other thread, I've easily seen at least 100 people who want to play in a game, but who are, for one reason or another, either unwilling to try something new, or play something that's outside their very limited window of what they've already decided to play.

[EDIT] Actually, now that I think about it, our satellite player also mysteriously ditched on us the last three times we made plans to play Mouseguard, Gammaworld, and Fiasco...

 

[timASW]

Most of my last group was totally unwilling to even try something but D@D which is why unfortunately its the last group and not the current one. The current group has about 50% who dont want to very much but are at least willing to try so we're giving a game of Mage a shot. We'll see how they do with it.

Personally i never understood that way of thinking. It feels like sitting down to play the same video game every time. Sure maybe its a good game but I still want variety.

 

[Jacob Marley]

That's fair. At the same time, however, if someone in the group had the rules with them for a new game and suggested trying it one weekend instead of D&D, would everyone outright refuse?

Probably. But it is really a moot point as it would require someone to acquire the game first, and we have already established that it is unlikely that a new game will be purchased due to the aforementioned reasons.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Personally i never understood that way of thinking. It feels like sitting down to play the same video game every time. Sure maybe its a good game but I still want variety.

There are plenty of video game gamers who are one-game folks or close to it, either because they're casual and only ever bother to play occasionally, or because they're hardcore and they're completely focused on being the best at one particular game.

As to rgs, they can provide much more varied experiences than anything programmed into a computer.

To me, it's pretty easy to imagine one rpg (D&D in this thread) providing dynamic and enjoyable play experiences for an indefinite period of time. Trying new rpgs is something we do for intellectual engagement, or because we enjoy game theory, or simply because they're there.

 

[Agamon]

Personally i never understood that way of thinking. It feels like sitting down to play the same video game every time. Sure maybe its a good game but I still want variety.

If there was a way to make it so Skyrim could take place anywhere and the plot could change each time I played, I'd hardly play any other game.

The game itself is less important than what you get out of it.

 

[CroBob]

If there was a way to make it so Skyrim could take place anywhere and the plot could change each time I played, I'd hardly play any other game.

The game itself is less important than what you get out of it.

I can't claim the same. Part of Skyrim's charm is seeing a new bug or playing with the console with the explosive chickens mod active, to me. The story, while interesting, couldn't exactly be considered deep. More story in different locations I doubt would be deeper. It could be, sure. As an engine, it gets the job done, but the flaws would get tiresome.

 

[Nytmare]

I can't claim the same. Part of Skyrim's charm is seeing a new bug or playing with the console with the explosive chickens mod active, to me. The story, while interesting, couldn't exactly be considered deep. More story in different locations I doubt would be deeper. It could be, sure. As an engine, it gets the job done, but the flaws would get tiresome.

I'm pretty sure that Tim Agamon was trying to draw a parallel between Skyrim and D&D.

 

[timASW]

If there was a way to make it so Skyrim could take place anywhere and the plot could change each time I played, I'd hardly play any other game.

The game itself is less important than what you get out of it.

See I wouldnt. I loved skyrim too but sometimes I want civilization, or GTA, or Madden, whatever. The idea of the same basic thing over and over again sounds horrible to me. I would honestly give up gaming before I would play the same system for more then a year or so, and after 6 months I usually start getting twitchy.

 

[Daniel Grota]

I chose We're not against the idea, but don't to it much. My group likes trying out new games, but we don't play as much as we use to. It's a shame really. I would love to try out Eclipse Phase, Witch Hunter the Invisible World, Low life and Sundered Skies settings for Savage Worlds, just to name a few. "We should try that out sometime!" seems to be a pretty common saying lol.

 

[Agamon]

See I wouldnt. I loved skyrim too but sometimes I want civilization, or GTA, or Madden, whatever. The idea of the same basic thing over and over again sounds horrible to me. I would honestly give up gaming before I would play the same system for more then a year or so, and after 6 months I usually start getting twitchy.

I guess I should have said I wouldn't bother playing any other CRPG, but the point remains the same. I, personally, love reading new RPGS, but I have more than one player that hates learning new rules, buying new books, and getting used to a new game. And it's tough to blame them

Playing new video games and board games is easy, new RPGs take a lot more investment. If you're playing something you like, and it takes a lot to change that, there's less incentive to change.