DM refuses to switch; players want to

[Nifft]

...Unless the DM doesn't want to even PLAY 4th edition, in which case it's a big problem. It's not easy to leave a friend behind, if they want nothing to do with a given game that you're playing. (...) If the person refuses to play 4e regardless, then there's a hard choice: Who caves in? Or does the group split, or make arrangements for a different game altogether?

I have to say, if one guy refuses to go along with the rest of the group, he's not being much of a friend. If he forces a power struggle about it, that much less.

Try DMing. It's fun and very rewarding. And if your friend refuses to even play 4e, let him go gently -- he'll probably want to come back after he cools down a bit, and it would suck to ruin a relationship over some temporary nerd rage.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Byronic]

Ask your DM and a few other people to join the 4th edition game, even if it's only for a few sessions. The DM might like it, if not then nothings wasted.

At worst you can continue playing 3.5 on Fridays and DM'ing 4.0 on Wednesday. More and varied gaming = sweet. This is not a Solomon's Riddle, it's an opportunity.

 

[frankthedm]

I was wondering if anyone had any experience with transitional strife in their group, and how they handled it.

My group may be sticking with WFRP because of this issue.

 

[Psion]

Another data point contradicting Steely Dan's Theory.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

If someone else can DM/is willing to DM, what would your current DM's take on it be? One suggestion might be for you to offer to run a short campaign (a half-dozen sessions, maybe) just to let everyone have a chance to see the rules system in action. That might help assuage the current DM's fears, and convince him to at least play. If he's adamant about not even playing, then that makes it a very tough sell. As a group, you'll need to work through that, and probably lay down the big issue: If someone is not willing to budge on one side or the other, the group may have to break up.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

You can't force players to play a game they don't like to play, and you can't force a DM to run a system he doesn't like to run.

So, if he doesn't want to run it, figure out if he would at least play it. If he doesn#t want to do even that, figure out if you're willing to do one of the following
- Continue playing 3.5 with him
- Start your own 4E campaign, offering the 3.5 DM to play with him
- Re-organize gaming groups that the 4E fans get a 4E fans, and the 3E fans get a 3E game, and any fence-sitters or "I just want to play" can choose.
- A 3.5 campaign run by the 3.5 DM, and a 4E campaign run by you (or anyone else interested in DMing 4E). You might get to play only bi-weekly in each campaign,but you can still play each week.

No situation is perfect and can lead to problems or dissatisfaction. You should probably make a group vote.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

The most mature way to handle this that works for our group is as follows:

1) Determine who wishes to run and what they want to run.
2) Present all available options to the group.
3) Vote.

An ambivalent vote counts as no vote. Make that clear to everyone beforehand. Saying "I don't care" really means you will play whatever the rest of the group wants. If it's a tie, then compromise. Switch campaigns on alternate weeks or months, etc.

I do agree with the above sentiments that a good friend will stay to play whatever the group wants to play. A good DM will run a game that he enjoys running.

 

[Kheti sa-Menik]

It would be tough for me. I refuse to play the abomination that is 4e. And thankfully my group isn't inclined to switch. But if they chose to, I'd bow out gracefully with no hard feelings. One of the group is my very good friend and the other two are pals. I'm not going to stand in the way of three other peoples' desires for my own preference.

But, that would leave the grup even short than it is now...we have 4 people, so DM + 3 players...we've had VERY bad luck finding a "fifth man." But if I left, they'd have one DM, 2 players.
So I'd feel bad in that regard.

But I will not under any circumstances play or DM 4e.

 

[Agamon]

I have to say, if one guy refuses to go along with the rest of the group, he's not being much of a friend. If he forces a power struggle about it, that much less.

This. I prefer running less-combat oreiented games. Many of my players like to kick a little butt. So I accomodate them as much as possible.

If he's going to be stubborn, especially...well, I won't say what I think of his opinion, he's allowed it, but it sure looks to be uninformed. Anyway, I say let him play with himself if he doesn't even want to try it.

 

[psionotic]

As a player/DM, I would happily play 3.5 forever, even though I prefer what I've seen of 4e. But I hope to never, ever DM 3.x again. I would if that's what people wanted to play, but luckily, my group is pretty keen on switching...

For the OP, any one player or DM who puts system preference over the fun of the group (especially over one they haven't even played!) is pretty damn selfish.