Have you decided to change systems?

[Son_of_Thunder]

I like coming back here because people talk about a number of topics beside D&D/D20/OGL, and the D20 threads that there are often come up with fascinating and unorthodox ideas and angles on the core mechanics. This is an incredibly friendly and welcoming site and it has been part of my nearly-daily routine since a little before 3e came out. I tend to post in fits and starts, but I have been made to feel welcome and have always enjoyed the comraderie of the community.

Agreed. The community here is with few exceptions when emotions are high, one of the best on the sites I visit.

 

[Son_of_Thunder]

I like d20 because of how malleable it is. We play Arcana Evolved, and that's the only real 3.5 rules we play by right now. Of course, i do have some problems with D&D, but nothing unsurmountable. Actually, i would love to play Warhammer, Ars Magica, Runequest, Mutants and Masterminds, and any other number of games, but it just doesn't seem to happen.

It's funny you say that because AE was the last d20 game I ran before we switched. I much preferred Monte's take on things than core D&D.

As for what problem I had with d20 prep time was some, implied level of magic items was another, the characters who are no longer mortal was another. But the main thing for me was the amount of rules. You could just as easily say ignore what you want, Rule 0 and all. I realized then I'd just be running like I ran 2nd so that's what we went back to. It helps in my mind that 2nd is a "dead" system, barring Hackmaster, and for some strange reason I can't explain it has made DMing fun again. Go figure.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Nonexistant in my experience. I have never seen a player so concerned with the rules used that they left the group. In fact, I've seen gamers who bashed a system at every opportunity & swear up & down they'd never play that system happily start making a character the moment someone offered to run the verboten rule set.

That's really interesting to me.

My experience has been the exact opposite. Even people who aren't hugely negative on a system (like myself toward 3e D&D) excuse themselves from campaigns using that system on a regular basis. A couple of people in my group had bad experiences with HERO and won't play it; another is a d20 Modern fan and is reluctant to play any other system; about half don't like GURPS and prefer not to play it; two prefer other systems to D&D and tend not to play it, although they occasionally have. The same is true of other games. Some of us rarely or never play Magic; others rarely or never play RPGs. Some play board games, others don't.

Of course, these players aren't leaving the group, they're declining to play in one ongoing game, either in favor of another game or of taking a break from gaming. Perhaps the reason it's vanishingly rare in your experience is because the two are considered synonymous?

 

[McBard]

Playing an RPG is easy...GMing, on the other hand, is an enormous committment.

In general, I agree. However, I DM 95% of the time, but it wasn't until I was a player the most recent time in a 3.5 campaign (Age of Wyrms) that the desire to DM OR play core 3.5 finally died. I discovered that DMing a 3.5 campaign is a chore, and playing in one (that is a chore) is boring.

So, I've pretty much stripped down/boiled down 3.5 in similar ways C&C and True20 do--in the end, it's a homebrew 3.5ish system that suits our group's tastes: intricate system "away from the gaming table" (i.e. plenty of character building choices, feats) but very fast game mechanic "at the gaming table" (i.e. sitting down to play out combat goes MUCH faster in our system...and we even use minis). C&C speeds up game-play prep (away from the table), but it's too thin in play. True20 does a fair job in both.

3.5 is a great game away from the gaming table (frankly, a hobby in itself), but a horrible one at the gaming table. For our group's purposes, I'm getting close to perfecting both aspects with my homebrew system.

 

[diaglo]

According to that, looks like diaglo has posted on dragonsfoot precisely once in the months I've been a member.

i was there much more heavily before. i mostly lurk now.

when they had an Editions War forum i was there all the time.

 

[dragonlordofpoondari]

there's no end in sight for our D&D/d20 habits for now, with Ptolus and all). See what I mean?

Seriously. Me too. Ptolus is of a higher quality that is several orders of magnitude than any gaming product I've ever seen. This single product alone is enough to keep me from wanting to try anything else. I guess I could always adapt the setting to another system ... but I'm not sure the adaptaptation would compensate for the extra effort required to run 3.5E.

It is nice to have a change of pace from time to time. I think I'll probably continue to run 3.5 (or a very rules-lite system), but I'd be happy to play in any system.

 

[Son_of_Thunder]

i was there much more heavily before. i mostly lurk now.

when they had an Editions War forum i was there all the time.

I know. I kind of miss that old edition war forum.

 

[Imaro]

Of course, these players aren't leaving the group, they're declining to play in one ongoing game, either in favor of another game or of taking a break from gaming. Perhaps the reason it's vanishingly rare in your experience is because the two are considered synonymous?

I'm glad I waited to respond to your other post, because I think the above statement is very telling. You are in, what I would consider anyway, a situation that is not common to most gamers. I know I am the GM in my group(unless we're playing C&C and then everyone is willing to take a turn GM'ing...guess that's another reason I like it.). The others in my group aren't interested in absorbing the amount of rules, in most rpg's, that it takes to run a game. So the unwritten compromise is I usually suggest a few systems I enjoy, along the genre I want to run, and the majority vote wins. I've never had a player decline to play, because I think for my group they trust and know that if I'm suggesting something or want to run something, I'm going to do my best to make sure they are having fun...and for us that's the point. I'm sure some players prefer certain systems to others, but for us it's a social activity for family and friends. I guess I draw a comparison to zombie movies. My boy B. Lovin(Yeah that's his real name ) ) loves em, while I'm more meh, on most. I will go see them just to hang out with him though, cause in the end it's still fun.

Note: The fact that my players have grasped the rules of C&C, from just playing a couple of games, well enough that they wanted to run it is something I took notice of. I think that the basic simplicity, along with the fact that all the rules for C&C fit in two books smaller than the PHB for D&D 3.5 was less intimidating for them to read. This situation made me realize that for us at least, the amount of complexity and rules in 3.x we're a hindrance. They come to the table for a fun game and D&D just wasn't giving us that anymore, it was becoming more akin to work outside and inside of play. I also find it easier to add complexity to a simple system, rather than subtract it from a complex system.

 

[drscott46]

it is my choice and preference.

At the risk of sounding three years old: BUT WHY?

 

[diaglo]

At the risk of sounding three years old: BUT WHY?

why do i drive a Chevy pickup truck?
why do i work in a lab at CDC?
why did i get married to my wife?


because.

edit: i hope to run 4 sessions at Gen Con this year as a pickup game. if you come by be sure to join us.