Campaigns you *don't* want to play in

[Lord Zardoz]

Nothing specific comes to mind..

I have yet to play in a D&D setting that I found to be absolutly intolerable.

But there are two games I ran characters in for one session that I did not particularly care for.

1) Hyper power inflated.
I played in a 2nd edition game where there was an absurd amount of munchkinisim. The sad thing was that one of the players was more familiar with the rules then the DM, and had gotten the DM to allow an absurd amount of alternate and custom rules he found on online. The one session I participated in had some "Super Demons" with 7 attacks per round with vorpal weaons. They only existed because the DM wanted something that had a chance at killing the munchkin.

2) Players vs DM's pet characters.
Although I did have an excellent time and invented one of my most memorable one shot characters as a result, the campaign had issues. Any campaign where you encounter one of the DM's old characters from a previous campaign is bound to go badly. Especially if things escalate into a fight between that character and the party. You just cannot win.

As for gaming systems, I did play a single session of Harn. I truly hate the combat in that system. While very well detailed, it simply is to stat intensive. The upshot is that I managed to cause the DM to discard his planned notes about 10 minutes into the session. Game demo's at gaming conventions are just great.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Tsyr]

Re: Nothing specific comes to mind..

2) Players vs DM's pet characters.
Although I did have an excellent time and invented one of my most memorable one shot characters as a result, the campaign had issues. Any campaign where you encounter one of the DM's old characters from a previous campaign is bound to go badly. Especially if things escalate into a fight between that character and the party. You just cannot win.

Worse is the cases where you always seem to wind up being "underlings" for the DM pet character because he has "important work to do, but sees promise in you". God I hate those. Used to have a DM... great friend of mine, had been for years, still is even, but I won't game under him anymore. Because that is all he seems to do is break out his pet characters.

 

[Haradim]

I avoid half-baked games, which, unfortunately, is all we have in my group. Nobody (save maybe myself, and that's a stretch ) is willing to go to all the effort and work needed to create a campaign that is more than just a concept or idea.

Which just isn't acceptable to me anymore, as every game I've been in has collapsed due to inadequate preparation, effort, and actual will to run a game, on the part of the DM.

There's just about no RPG I wouldn't at least try if I could trust anyone I know to run a game for more than a handful of sessions, with more than just an idea for a campaign. Unfortunately, my group is full of players, and despite boasts on skill at RPing/DMing/creating campaigns, nobody ever steps up to the plate to run something, save myself (and I'm loathe to run games, as I don't believe I have enough play experience to do so).

 

[Teflon Billy]

Hey Teflon Billy!

Are you also at UBC?

No, I'm well past the age where I can learn anything new

 

[Kilmore]

My games (and those of our former DM) are soaked to the skin in humor, and I don't think I'd be too interested in a game that took itself too seriously. But on the other hand, the adventure is always real, and even if there's slapstick elements in the combat, there is also peril and nobody wants to die for a laugh.

Personally, I'm not to keen on ****punk games. Cyberpunk, Gothpunk, whateverpunk. Okay, I might give Steampunk a whirl, but I'd call it something else.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I don't think I'd like any setting that took itself too seriously.

Harn, I'm looking at you. I don't roleplay as a simulation.

White Wolf, I'm looking at you. I don't roleplay to tell a deep story about my inner wus.

And I couldn't LARP with a straight face without feeling like a complete looser for the life of me, I think.

No offense meant, of course. Honestly, I might even give something like these a whirl, with the right group. I'm open to trying it, anyway. But those are my biases right now.

Basically, I play D&D for entertainment. A story about swords, sorcery, killin' things, and enjoying it, with elements of drama, comedy, a bit of realism, etc. is what it takes to keep me entertained for 4-5 hours a week. Who could ask for more than that?

 

[JohnClark]

I also dont like the ultra-weak party with the exception of spycraft, and there I don't like an ultra-weak party, I just like a party that knows that an armed enemy is something to be feared, so that if 5 guys with assault rifles surround them they dont try to fight their way out.

 

[Reprisal]

I'll have to echo the sentiment on silly games; though a fried I know would immediately question the definition of "silly."

At this point, I'm not too interested in games where what I do is more important than why I do it. (Though it's quite all right if they're equally important; a subjective quality I know, but one I'm rather attached to...) I'm not in it to win it, so to speak. I think it has something to do with my being the primary GM/DM in our group.

I'd also like to play a proactive character -- as long as the GM/DM would allow it -- to show the others that it can be done. I'm often frustrated by the degree of "So what do we do now?" syndrome in some players. Even if there's a lack of information, there are always ways of getting that information, and barring that, there's always something you can do to move the game along...

I'd also like to play in a game where consciously making mistakes in game aren't somehow outlawed by the players at large. To me, some of the most interesting characters are the flawed ones. It seems to me that players are often forced to make the "optimal" decisions out of peer pressure, or even pressure from the DM, and that's just not right in my opinion. Of course, I suppose it depends upon the style of campaign one's playing, but it's my belief that a character should survive as long as s/he is interesting and a positive force in the overall entertainment of the group.

We can all wish, can't we?

- Rep.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Far out, those are pretty much my thoughts Reprisal.

I see too much, "duh, I polish my sword and wait until someone panicked rushes up to me with a bag of gold".

 

[Chauzu]

A campaign I don't want to play in? One with geeks as players...

Oh, wait...