TTRPG Genres You Just Can't Get Into -and- Tell Me Why I'm Wrong About X Genre I Don't Like

[RenleyRenfield]

Does anyone else have similar genres that turn them off? Do you have more self awareness than I do as to why? Or is it just a "doesn't float my boat" instinctual thing?

I didn't know I had any rpgs I could not play and enjoy until recently.

I tried Paranoia.... I can't find the fun in genre of making everyone else miserable, frustrated, and back stabbed pointlessly. Paranoia is not fun for me.

Teens or kids... I think the genre and game Kids on Bikes is cool, and other such similar games like Masks. They seem well designed. But for me, there is no fun in playing a kid or interacting with kids or teens. The whole experience is miserable and tedious.

 

[Aldarc]

Sci-fi horror. Don't care about the Alien franchise at all. Mothership is a great design but I don't want to play or run it. The other genre that leaves me cold is cyberpunk. I think those are the only 2 genres that really turn me off.

My list:

• Sci-fi Horror
• Cyberpunk
• Vikings
• Post-Apocalyptic Zombies
• Any game involving playing at the time of the Confederacy
• Any alternate universe where the Confederacy survives

Romantic fantasy, like Blue Rose, is not romance. It tends to be idealized settings like Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar series or Elizabeth Haydon's Rhapsody books. In fact, Blue Rose pulled a lot from Valdemar when building it.

I am not sure I would even call those settings romantic fantasy any longer with the advent of the new romantasy books, which are just pure romance with a fantasy skin.

There are rules for romance and relationships in Blue Rose AGE.

 

[DEFCON 1]

It's interesting you frame things in the manner of combat. One of the main reasons ive drifted from Fantasy is after combat im not sure what is left? While its true that the climax of Supers stories is often an all out combat, the journey to that combat is usually an interesting story. Particularly the dynamic between hero and villain. One of the reasons ive sworn off Supers all these years is the attempt has always been to port fantasy combat dungeon crawler systems over to Supers making them largely about combat. Its been a misfit, ime, so Ive never enjoyed it.

For me personally, I see a separation between the "genre" of fantasy and the prototypical "fantasy TTRPG", which is Dungeons & Dragons. Brandon Sanderson, George R. R. Martin, Tolkien etc. are a lot more about politics, relationships, travel and so forth, and much less about fighting for fighting sake. So I don't find fantasy in and of itself inherently about combat for me. But the problem of course being that the primary fantasy TTRPG to play is D&D, which is designed and built to be a monster fighting combat game. So it can be easy to merge the two together in one's mind-- D&D is about combat, and D&D is fantasy, and thus fantasy is about combat. And I would imagine also that most players of D&D (in its various forms, fashion, editions, and offshoots) are possibly less-inclined when choosing to play a different TTRPG to play a different fantasy one, rather than change genre. The thinking being "if I'm going to play a fantasy TTRPG I'll just go back to whatever version or adjacent version of D&D I normally play." As a result we as a player base might find the "non-D&D-monster-fighting" version of the fantasy genre to be one of our least-played gaming experiences.

 

[payn]

For me personally, I see a separation between the "genre" of fantasy and the prototypical "fantasy TTRPG", which is Dungeons & Dragons. Brandon Sanderson, George R. R. Martin, Tolkien etc. are a lot more about politics, relationships, travel and so forth, and much less about fighting for fighting sake. So I don't find fantasy in and of itself inherently about combat for me. But the problem of course being that the primary fantasy TTRPG to play is D&D, which is designed and built to be a monster fighting combat game. So it can be easy to merge the two together in one's mind-- D&D is about combat, and D&D is fantasy, and thus fantasy is about combat. And I would imagine also that most players of D&D (in its various forms, fashion, editions, and offshoots) are possibly less-inclined when choosing to play a different TTRPG to play a different fantasy one, rather than change genre. The thinking being "if I'm going to play a fantasy TTRPG I'll just go back to whatever version or adjacent version of D&D I normally play." As a result we as a player base might find the "non-D&D-monster-fighting" version of the fantasy genre to be one of our least-played gaming experiences.

I guess for me, relationships and politics is germane to any RPG I play; regardless of genre. One of the sticking points has often been adding to the social pillar of D&D as many are opposed to it. So, all im left to look at is combat and survival sim for fantasy in the D&D space. Its oversized influence has much to do with it, as there are fantasy RPGs that move away from combat dominance, but get much less play as you point out.

 

[KYRON45]

Romance focused or romance secondary.

Couldn't any game be romance secondary? That would be entirely up to the parties involved.
My question was/is are there games where there are mechanics for "romance"?
I'm genuinely asking if these games are considered Romance RPGs?

 

[nyvinter]

Don't expect many people to agree with me here about this: but for me it's dungeon crawls. They bore me to sleep. I need NPCs and interactions and all that in ways that don't shatter any resemblance of suspension of disbelief which — for me —dungeon crawls does in a heartbeat.

 

[overgeeked]

Don't expect many people to agree with me here about this: but for me it's dungeon crawls. They bore me to sleep. I need NPCs and interactions and all that in ways that don't shatter any resemblance of suspension of disbelief which — for me —dungeon crawls does in a heartbeat.

Weirdly, I hated dungeon crawls right up until I rediscovered the notion of the mythic underworld. That made them interesting enough to not reject out of hand, but anything more than a 5-10 room dungeon…snooze.

 

[Aldarc]

Couldn't any game be romance secondary? That would be entirely up to the parties involved.

Secondary in the sense that the game may also focus on something else but also have rules for romance and relationships, like having a college Major in Fantasy Adventure but a Minor in Romance. For example, you will be doing fantasy adventure in most of your Blue Rose games but rules for relationships, romance, and bonds are also an important part of the game and the genre.

Romance in a game like D&D would be tertiary, if even that.

My question was/is are there games where there are mechanics for "romance"?
I'm genuinely asking if these games are considered Romance RPGs?

And I answered.

 

[Reynard]

It's interesting you frame things in the manner of combat. One of the main reasons ive drifted from Fantasy is after combat im not sure what is left? While its true that the climax of Supers stories is often an all out combat, the journey to that combat is usually an interesting story. Particularly the dynamic between hero and villain. One of the reasons ive sworn off Supers all these years is the attempt has always been to port fantasy combat dungeon crawler systems over to Supers making them largely about combat. Its been a misfit, ime, so Ive never enjoyed it.

Who's attempt? Do you mean the people you have tried to play with? Because I have never seen a supers game try that.

 

[KYRON45]

Secondary in the sense that the game may also focus on something else but also have rules for romance and relationships, like having a college Major in Fantasy Adventure but a Minor in Romance. For example, you will be doing fantasy adventure in most of your Blue Rose games but rules for relationships, romance, and bonds are also an important part of the game and the genre.

Romance in a game like D&D would be tertiary, if even that.


And I answered.

Yes, yes you did.