payn
Glory to Marik
Well, I see two different things here. One is a board game with clear objectives in which you can see the end and know you are not going to make it. Also, you have hours to go. Thats sucks I agree. It even sucks in games with bad run away leader problems. I see RPGs a little differently. I dont see a process of start and finishes with clear objectives. For me, its try and survive while soaking in the genre and expected experiences.I have a very clear line of where I'm okay with it. A competitive board game with a traitor mechanic, I can handle about 2-3 hours. I don't want to invest myself in it more than that. A 14-hour RPG that took an entire weekend was excessive for this style of play (for me). To be fair, I also wouldn't want to do a 14-hour session of a deathtrap dungeon with expendable characters.
If I'm going to be playing 4 or more hours, I want a decent chance of success in a mission. This is why games like Arkham Horror don't appeal to me (6+ hours just to know you're all going to lose at the 2 hour mark, and you have 4+ hours of sitting there feeling hopeless).
The typical RPG leveling idea makes this seem more board game than anything. I mean, why bother playing a character that is never going to get improvements and rewards? Well, some experiences just suffer under that dynamic. Call of Cthlhu for example, has always seemed odd to me because its so lethal. I know folks run campaigns with it, but I have never been able to break the cognitive dissonance with the gameplay and the genre. Now, if you run a one shot contained scenario, with plenty of replacement characters, high lethality has a great risk reward element without you losing the game or having to stop playing. Playing into the genre and scenario is its own reward.