How Do I Escape D&D?

Although I’ve been writing games (and about them) for over 20 years, I haven’t done much for the Big One. I’ve done a few OGL bits here and there, a Dungeon article for 4e, and a run on the dual statted line for 7th Sea. I talk a lot about the other games that are out there on the panels and podcasts I get to be on and there’s always one inevitable question:

"I love this new game that I bought but I can’t get my group to try it. How do I escape D&D?"

That question has come up a lot on social media since the OGL 1.1 leak. Here are some of the options I’ve seen work well when I’ve suggested them to friends. Different tactics work well on different people so don’t be afraid to keep trying even if you strike out at first. I also hope folks will post their success stories in the comment to offer additional advice.

Don’t Trash The Mothership​

In trying to sell a new game, a lot of people make the mistake of comparing everything to D&D. Usually in a negative way where D&D does it badly and the new game does it well. True as that may be, remember that people have feelings about D&D and those feelings are often complicated. It’s better to focus on the positive stuff that a new game does without needing trash talk. Players are already making those comparisons when considering a new game.

Learn To Love The One Shot​

The true villain of any D&D game is logistics. There will almost always be someone unable to make it or nights where the current DM is unavailable. These nights can be opportunities to try out a different game to see if it vibes with a group. There are a lot of great starter sets out there that make this sort of game easy complete with ready made characters and a story that plays out in a session or two. There are also games built for this mode of play like Fiasco.

Check Out An Actual Play Of The New Game​

Critical Role gets a lot of press in this space but there are a few crews who play games other than D&D. Showing one of these games to a group will help them learn the rules and see what you like about the game. Of course, I would love it if you check out my crew Theatre of the Mind Players but there are some other great shows in this space like The Glass Cannon Network and One Shot Podcast Network among others.

Find The Right Fandom​

While there are a lot of fans of D&D, those fans are also fans of other things. Licensed games are your friend here. If you have a member of the group that’s based their current character on Aang or Spock, they are more likely to try Avatar Legends or Star Trek Adventures. Players into a genre will do the work on learning new rules because they want to experience their favorite world.

Switch Either Genre or System But Not Both​

Some people prefer to ease into the pool rather than jump in. For those folks, switching one element of an RPG might help with the change. Play fantasy with a different system like Savage Worlds or Shadow of the Demon Lord. Or choose another 5e game in a different genre. There are some excellent conversions out there like Doctors & Daleks or works like Everyday Heroes.

Build To A Season Finale​

Jumping out of an ongoing campaign can be frustrating to players who have invested into the story and their characters. Take a page from how TV networks run serial stories. Build to a season finale in the story: a big battle, a dramatic trial, a wedding full of intrigue. Give some storylines closure, hint at some new ones to come, but helping the storyline come to an end for not makes it easier to move to a different one. And, if nobody likes the new game, there’s always room for another season.

 

[MGibster]

Maxim: Screw with the characters. Do not screw with the players.

Bingo. I've only ever done a bait and switch ones and I warned the players it was going to happen. I pitched a campaign concept by telling my players, "It's the Peloponnesian War and you guys can make PCs who are on the side of the Spartans or the side of the Athenians. There's more to the campaign than that, but that's how we're starting." I then turned what looked like a sword & sandles campaign into a sword & planet campaign with aliens and psychic powers based on Pythagoras.

Describing it without comparison requires a more complete notion of why it is good.

When pitching a game, I'll typically describe the setting and what the game is about to tempt people into playing. I only compare it to other games when explaining the rules to people I know already play D&D. One nice thing about the ubiquity of D&D is that it gives players a common ground to speak from.

 

[Umbran]

When pitching a game, I'll typically describe the setting and what the game is about to tempt people into playing. I only compare it to other games when explaining the rules to people I know already play D&D. One nice thing about the ubiquity of D&D is that it gives players a common ground to speak from.

I understand that.

In this context, though, it is more about the human habit of using comparison not to generate understanding, but to tear down the thing you don't like to make the thing you do like look better - "Game X sucks, you should really play Game Y, which is awesome!"

One really should be able to elucidate why Game Y is awesome without reference to Game X. Because tearing down Game X doesn't actually tell me anything about Game Y.

 

[Autumnal]

It’s fascinating to me how hard it is to get 100% on that challenge with the games I love. 90%+, sure, but that remaining bit is astonishingly tenacious. I high means that, as so often, Kevin was onto a good thing.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I understand that.

In this context, though, it is more about the human habit of using comparison not to generate understanding, but to tear down the thing you don't like to make the thing you do like look better - "Game X sucks, you should really play Game Y, which is awesome!"

You really should be able to elucidate whey Game Y is awesome without reference to Game X. Because tearing down Game X doesn't actually tell me anything about Game Y.

While I don't disagree, sometimes it requires particular emphasis to make it clear that you're not doing another D&D knockoff.

 

[Umbran]

While I don't disagree, sometimes it requires particular emphasis to make it clear that you're not doing another D&D knockoff.

If you can't make that clear otherwise, are you sure it isn't another knockoff?

 

[aramis erak]

Yeah. New tool for the same job or new job with the same tool are both not good ways to get a fun game.

New tool for a new job.

There is, however, something to be said for the use of a good and thematic adaptation where both setting and mechanics are familiar but not 100% the same.

• Pugmire and Monarchies of Mao are similar enough to D&D to require little relearning at level 1, but show their differences as one levels up, and the feel is different from the small differences at level 1. They're still D&D adjacent setting-wise, too. A small difference in mechanics, and a small difference in adventure types, with a couple bigger divergences in setting.
• Wyvern's Stargate SG-1 is an excellent adaptation of 5e... for the first 5 levels, it's very much like D&D 5E mechanics, but at 5th level, further advancement is by direct purchase of new feats. The mechanics changes are just enough that it does require some change.

If we look back in the 80's and 90's...

• AD&D and Gamma World. It was easy to use both as one setting, or to use GW as a place accessed by planar travel...
• AD&D 2E and Buck Rogers XXV C - same core mechanics, very different settings and classes.
• 1st ed GURPS - the various sourcebooks changed the costs for various items, and tweaked the «bleep» out of the mechanics at times. Alas, by 3rd's release (not even 3R), the mode changed to just alter the setting to fit GURPS...
• Chaosium - every game except Pendragon used the same core mechanics devised by Ray Tourney and Steve Perrin, originally for Greg Stafford's Glorantha seting... but tweaking them for Ringworld, ElfQuest, Superworld, Stormbringer... and particularly heavily tweaked Pendragon.
• Palladium uses the same core mechanics in all but 3 games (Amber, Recon, and Valley of the Pharaohs). Tweaked, somewhat, for each setting. it makes mashing them up and hopping between them much easier.
• Hero Games - Champions, Fantasy Hero, Star Hero, Justice, Inc., Robot Warriors... it was early 90's when the switched to monolithic core and separate setting books. But those also make changes to the core mechanics; not as steeply as the standalones of the 80's.

I'll note that, in the late 80's, Palladium Fantasy was a good way to break AD&D fans away from the clunkiness... and then, once they got into it, hop them over to other Palladium games, and from there, to other genres in other systems.

I'll note also that Buck was a total failure. It came out without any concurrent media exploration in the same version of the setting. It was close enough time-wise to the 1981-82 show that it being grounded in the 1940's comics version was a big fumble... It wasn't hard to get people to try it... but it was hard to get people to grok the setting within. Thus, it was a poor choice for most.

 

[Thomas Shey]

If you can't make that clear otherwise, are you sure it isn't another knockoff?

From just a blurb, its next to impossible in many cases. It requires spelling out (at least in broad) your mechanics approach, and specifically that you're not doing certain things, and the shorter your available space the harder that is without saying nothing else.

 

[Umbran]

From just a blurb, its next to impossible in many cases.

The original statement from P-cat wasn't in the context of writing blurbs - it was in the context of messageboard posts. And I bring it up in that same context.

If you drag down someone else's favorite game to build up your own, you are pretty much inviting and starting conflict. That conflict will get in the way of actually discussing your favorite game.

 

[Thomas Shey]

The original statement from P-cat wasn't in the context of writing blurbs - it was in the context of messageboard posts. And I bring it up in that same context.

If you drag down someone else's favorite game to build up your own, you are pretty much inviting and starting conflict. That conflict will get in the way of actually discussing your favorite game.

Okay, that I can't disagree with. Though it can sometimes be difficult to explain why you consider a particular choice good if it really does come down to "I saw this other way of doing it in Game X and thought it was awful in play". That does likely mean you're making a negative decision (avoid doing things in fashion X) rather than a positive one (do it in fashion Y) at least in part, but sometimes "avoiding fashion X" is a value in and of itself. While I can sometimes roll my eyes at "no classes or levels!" (its not 1975, people, this is not a new idea) its legitimate to think classes and levels are bad mechanics to represent character definition and advancement (though you can go down a rabbit-hole of definitions there).

 

[MichaelSomething]

I actually found that a good PowerPoint presentation can be a really useful tool in teaching new TTRPGs to people.

Each slide can focus and explain a specific concept, and can help you organize the ideas in your head.