Does Anyone Else Find Con Games To Suck?

[Teflon Billy]

Generally speaking games at cons DO suck. Well, unless you are in mine.

This is true. I mostly think Convention games suck hard, but I've played in Keeper's and they are an exception as are Piratecat's, Psion's and August Hahn's (who ran demos of his Armageddon 2089 game at Gen Con).

I've mostly found that I enjoy Conventions more if I largely avoid RPG's and just play strategy or Miniatures games.

Jerks can screw those up way less.

 

[GlassJaw]

You just need to attract a group that wants to have fun with the right idea and have a good DM.

Yeah, a good DM like Varianor.

 

[Nebulous]

I just got back from DragonCon, and i have to say i was not extremely pleased with my 4-hour DnD stint. For one thing, it was advertised as the miniatures game, the plastic ones i assumed from WotC, but that was not the case. It wasn't bad by any means, but turned out to be rather simplistic when all was said and done. It was just a 4 hour fight in a town, which although was fun and had some good strategic elements, wasn't exactly what i wanted. I thought we were going to have oodles of warbands.

In fact, i didn't see ANY mass miniature DnD battles (maybe they were there but i never saw them) or any Star Wars RPG or CoC other than Arkham Horror (which isn't rpg). Warmachine had some sweet setups, as did Warhammer, but i didn't get a chance to play in those.

Maybe next year i'll run CoC there...if i can find a dark corner of the game room...

 

[howandwhy99]

Back when I went to GenCon all the time the RPG slots were all hit or miss. About 50/50 all told. If you knew a good GM, you could pre-register. But many of the popular ones went quickly. Of course, this was all 10-15 years ago at least. A lot of the bad experiences had less to do with the GM than with the other players. Getting a group of 8 proficient players together was uncommon. We just played on.


That said, I think one of the reasons storytelling adventures became so in vogue was because they were the only successful style of Con game. You had a very short time and to really capture a sense of accomplishment it was important to minimize options. So instead of playing a whole game of chess, you practice a certain situation, perhaps to work on your endgame. Sadly, I think this "short leash" style made it into home games because it also meant less prep work. To each their own, I guess.

 

[Hairy Minotaur]

I ran the same RPG game at different conventions, one was a hometown convention (Winter War) and the other GenCon. Both were 4-hour slots, both played with 6 people.

However the local con had 3 18-20 year olds who apparently had $$ to blow and time to waste as the rogue wanted to appraise everything he saw (including door frames, window frames, and frescos. Then tried to take it all with him.) the Paladin played as though he was CN and the third guy played a barbarian (pretty well as he probably had the same INT as the barbarian). The other 3 guys, who were all over 30, RP'd great and it was a struggle pulling half the party through the adventure.

The GenCon game which had the same description as the Winter War game had 6 guys show up and it was a great experience, everyone had fun and RP'd their characters well.

The local con was such an effort that I don't know if I'll ever run another game there, however I would have no problem running another GenCon game. I guess I got lucky at GenCon.

I go to GenCon to try out new games or play in long running events (such as NASCRAG), so I feel that if I goof off or jerk around with the game, then I'll never know if I like it or not. I have too much respect for the other players who paid money to attend the game, to throw the game.

 

[Evilhalfling]

I normally have a good time with Con games - many suck, but there are some good games each time. I have bailed on terrible games, if possible 10 min before the halfway mark. (allowing time to find something else, if Im quick.
I also run a lot of games - at least 4 per con, and usually one sucks and the others range from mediocre or excellent, I retaire the worst ones and revamp or discard the medicore games for the next one.
I would almost prefer that someone who wasn't enjoying the game leave, as my games do not fit everyones taste. The best D&D games have gimmicks, something strange or unusual that could not be done with a regular party. An adventuring party on some quest - ho hum, a 50 yr old nobleman and his family seeking shelter in an abandoned house - a blast.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

This is true. I mostly think Convention games suck hard, but I've played in Keeper's and they are an exception as are Piratecat's, Psion's and August Hahn's (who ran demos of his Armageddon 2089 game at Gen Con).

Thanks, TB!

 

[Teflon Billy]

Thanks, TB!

Where else could I expect to find a situatuion where a GM is handing out character sheets and says "...I'm handing these out based on who I think will do the best job (and have the most fun) playing them..."

...and find that you've been handed a Serial Killer for a PC

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

Ok...I just took the title of this thread TOTALLY out of context. *shakes head to clear it*

I've only been to two cons... the first, MidSouth Con in Memphis in 1990, was awful. I played in one game, a FASA Star Trek game with the most railroading GM I've ever seen, and GenCon '04. I played in 4 games. One was fun, one was meh, one was teh suck, and one was a blast (go Nascrag!)

 

[francisca]

Um. No. All of my Con games have been very fun, except for one, run by a really big gaming group at GenCon, when the DM didn't show up. Otherwise, some have been better than others, but all have been worth my time and money.