Play Something Else

Theory of Games said:

Eh. That's a bad assumption that playing other rpgs leads to self-knowledge. I played the Marvel Heroic RPG and what I learned was the game is trash. Same with Apocalypse World and the other storygames. I learned those games are trash compared to how well designed the D&D Rules Cyclopedia is. The idea that you need to play an entire campaign with poorly-designed games like FATE is ridiculous. If B/X D&D was your first rpg and your group still playing it fifty years later because you love it, good on you.

"Different" does not mean "good" as you're suggesting here. You don't have to try all flavors of ice cream to appreciate your favorite flavor. If you're happy with what you have you don't need anything else. Did I mention buying more and more games cost M-O-N-E-Y? Are YOU paying for all my shiny new games?

No, experiencing other rpgs is not guaranteed to improve your rpg experience. Especially if those other rpgs are trash but most specifically if I'm enjoying my current system. You're making some ridiculous claims here lol

Click to expand...

While this is phrased on a rather extreme way, I kina see their point. Playing different games requires time, money, and considerable social effort if your group isn't into it, and that can easily be not worth the reward for some folks. I also agree that a long campaign is not required to acquire an understanding of whether or not a new system is of value to you. If it were, trying new things at conventions would be valueless, and IMO that's just not so.

For example, I've played in a few fiction-first games, and I didn't need to play a long campaign to get insight from them, even if that insight was knowing exactly why I strongly dislike that playstyle.

Ralif Redhammer said:

I have not played Monopoly since I was a little kid and at a family game my uncle made a deal with me and then went back on the agreement when his turn to honor it came along.

Click to expand...

You learned some very important things that day.

(Never trust adults, of course, but far more importantly don't play Monopoly.)

Reynard said:

Given your definition of "trash" games, I am comfortable standing by my claim in the OP.

Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with disliking storygames, but I agree that language is somewhat harsh.

wicked cool said:

COC-problem with coc is it’s a big investment if you want to run a group of 5-7 and it really doesn’t work. The starter adventures and most revolve basically fighting cultists and then hoping to survive the bad. The starter set is tailored for really 2-3 players. There’s also very little world building. How much does a newspaper cost in the 20’s or a hotel. Not in the starter box so it’s search engine time etc

Plus almost every space game stinks when it comes to combat etc. Star Wars by wotc was fun but i constantly had to keep the players on 1 planet as just like starfield the video game its hard to plan for multiple planets

Most of these RPGs are not fully fleshed out rules or the rules are clunky or overly complicated . We are on another version of pathfinder because rules are clunky. Or I go to rpg website and research some kickstarter type game and nobody is talking about here
When I was young I went to my local store store and Star frontiers/gamma world was mixed in like comic book shops of old. That doesn’t exist anymore

Click to expand...

I'm not as skeptical or critical as you are but I do agree with the general complaint. 95% of what has been written and is for sale is basically useless to everyone and professionals who are putting out content for sale do way too sloppy of a job way too often. Worse, they spend all of their time doing the easy stuff that wouldn't take me much time to replicate and leave so much of the hard stuff up to me that I wonder why I pay them. I end up regretting almost every RPG purchase I ever make.

But then again, we consumers validate that by preferring apparently to buy content for new games and new systems and incompatible new editions of old games which are just as sloppily constructed as the ones before rather than preferring to buy lovingly revised systems that have been gradually improved through lengthy play and feedback.

Every game I play requires an enormous amount of effort on my part to fix the rules, fix the scenarios, invent the campaigns, and generally do a ton of work and that barrier to entry for new GMs is so high that it significantly hurts the hobby.

That said I can and have ran CoC for 6 players, and I can and have ran Star Wars across a dozen planets, and while there are fundamental issues with most science fiction settings and combat it's not a truism that all sci-fi combat is bad or has to be bad. What is true is that the work required to get those sort of things to come off well is just too high for most participants and there is a steep learning curve to being a GM because so many of the examples of play are just bad that GMs don't have any good template to learn by.

Part of the reason that I'm just not that interested in new systems is the enormous investment in time that comes with a new system. I have no interest in systems. I have interest in games and I have interest in good GMs. I'd pay for that. I'm increasingly uninterested in one's unplaytested sloppy set of rules that they have only ran for their spouse and your best friend using a heavy dosage of rulings to overcome the limitations of their own system and which they can't communicate a single example of good play to anyone, not even the guy running their game at a convention.

While no game is perfect, I'm finding there are many good systems and games out there. Designers have gotten better at designing. There have been many innovations and a wide variety of games catering to a wide selection of tastes. I'm not seeing all these broken, badly playtested games scattered across the gaming landscape. I have many that I've run or want to run that are fantastic.

Most indie games are better designed than 5e, better written than 5e, and better playtested than 5e.

soviet said:

Most indie games are better designed than 5e, better written than 5e, and better playtested than 5e.

Click to expand...

I would bet money that most indie games are barely playtested at all. This is especially true of the vaguely PbtA dross that fills itch. Many have very cool ideas, and some have striking visual design, but many of them are not good games.

And, really, claims like this one just show bias and don't reflect any reality . I'm no 5E proponent but it is probably the most extensively playtested TTRPG in the history of the form.

Ralif Redhammer said:

I have not played Monopoly since I was a little kid and at a family game my uncle made a deal with me and then went back on the agreement when his turn to honor it came along.

Click to expand...

Monopoly is easily on par with Diplomacy for destroying all faith in your fellow human beings.

Reynard said:

I would bet money that most indie games are barely playtested at all. This is especially true of the vaguely PbtA dross that fills itch. Many have very cool ideas, and some have striking visual design, but many of them are not good games.

And, really, claims like this one just show bias and don't reflect any reality . I'm no 5E proponent but it is probably the most extensively playtested TTRPG in the history of the form.

Click to expand...

I suppose that prompts the question if "more playtesting" is the same as "better playtesting", which is what @soviet said.

I'd argue that 5e was over-playtested and that led to the game being kind of watered down in a lot of ways. I think we see similar problems with the approach to the new version/edition/ruleset/whatever.

Sometimes, less is better.

hawkeyefan said:

I suppose that prompts the question if "more playtesting" is the same as "better playtesting", which is what @soviet said.

I'd argue that 5e was over-playtested and that led to the game being kind of watered down in a lot of ways. I think we see similar problems with the approach to the new version/edition/ruleset/whatever.

Sometimes, less is better.

Click to expand...

More playtesting is always better. Letting the general public guide your design? Not so much. Just make the game.