Now is the season of our discontent?

[Ashrem Bayle]

Even though I've recently left D&D and made the switch to GURPS, I still check this board because of the great community and wonderful ideas that aren't necessarily tied to the d20 system. So as I pop in occasionally, I've noticed that I don't seem to be alone in my decision to leave d20 behind.

More and more I see people saying they are switching to GURPS, True 20, World of Darkness, Hero, etc, as their system of choice.

As I look back at it, I can't really pinpoint the exact reason I decided to leave D&D behind, but it seems many others had the same thought at about the same time.

What is it about 3.5 that pushed you away?

For myself, it was the d20 system as a whole. Problems with the vague nature of what happens in a six second round, hit points, levels, classes, feats, etc. These things made for a game that wasn't very realistic, or was altogether too confining than I'd prefer. I wanted a good mix of realism and playability, and I didn't want to be restrained by classes. I was also getting tired of paying increasing prices for decreasing quality.

And after writing about 50 pages or so of house rules, I decided D&D just wasn't the game for me anymore.

 

[dmccoy1693]

There is no one reason why people switch from one game to another. But as buzz said in "I'm done with 3.5":

1. Your tastes have changed
2. Your tastes never matched up with D&D 3.5 to begin with
3. You're burned out and need a break from D&D
4. You're burned out a need a break from your group.

And it's not just people leaving D&D and going elsewhere. I left Exalted and went to D&D. Why? After 4 years of playing the game exclusively, I got burned out and need a break from that particular game. It happens. So maybe you're noticing it more since you're in the same boat. Maybe there are more right now. I don't know.

 

[bento]

Problems with the vague nature of what happens in a six second round, hit points, levels, classes, feats, etc. These things made for a game that wasn't very realistic, or was altogether too confining than I'd prefer.

Speaking of realistic, how are those one second combat rounds working out for you?

I went to True20 because my players took to heart that to become more powerful, they must kill and take things. The campaign I was running (OA-flavored) was focused on honor and politics, so I needed rules that helped me reward players for playing smart. I like True20 because it helps shift players away from XP and loot towards resolving conflict and completing adventures. True20 is also a half-step from 3.0/3.5, so my players could adjust to the new rules.

Right now I have a new group, so I'm back playing 3.5. I won't push True20 because I'm not seeing the same problems with this group as I did the earlier one. One day I'll go back to True20, but 3.5 is working for me now.

 

[Mallus]

My group is currently considering branching out into WHFR 2e and the Star Wars Saga Edition. While we're not planning to end our long-running D&D 3.5 campaign, we might be testing the waters.

From my DM-y perspective, I can sum it up like this: D&D is becoming a better game to play and a worse game to run.

As a player, I like the new options. Some address long-standing problems with the rule set. But as DM, I feel like I fighting with the tools that are supposed to help me craft the game. There's too much material, and even sifting through it for 'permitted' options is takes too much prep time that I'd rather be spending on other parts of the game.

And then there's the actually play. I'm not a bookkeeper by trade, and I don't really enjoying playing one when I run a session. Juggling an ever-changing stack of modifiers at 10:00 PM on a Tuesday night isn't my idea of fun.

I know some people can run mid-to-high level D&D with most or all of the options without a hitch. I DM for one of them, but I ain't one of them myself.

Like I said, we're keeping on with our current D&D campaign --fear not fans of "The Chronicles of Burne"-- but as the PC's level reaches the teens, I can see the rules frequently being left behind in favor of pure cinematic winging it.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

Speaking of realistic, how are those one second combat rounds working out for you?

Loving them.

 

[sjmiller]

Speaking of realistic, how are those one second combat rounds working out for you?

I spent 15 straight years plaing with those one second combat rounds, they work great. Thanks for asking! When my group started playing D&D 3.0 when it first came out, I had to adjust to doing a huge amount of activity each combat round. Even then, you seemed to be doing a great deal of activity in a six second round. I much prefer the one second GURPS combat round. I don't see why people have an issue with it.

 

[Razz]

Isn't GURPS that game where it's just a huge thick rulebook with a million reasons to roll dice for and with rules that are just a bit too...realistic?

I keep hearing about people playing GURPS and then had a friend tell me they tried to get into it but it was so heavy with a rule for EVERY single thing in the game that they realized how simplistic D&D truly was.

 

[Eltharon]

Its a huge thick rulebook for character creation, but the actual rules are no more complicated then D20. The basic task mechanic is changed from D20+mods to beat DC to 3D6 to get lower then DC + mods, but that shouldn't make it more complicated. Combat is a but more detailed, but the advanced rules are optional (like hit location, etc). I don't find it any different. What turns people off is the huge options for character creation that can drive lesser men insane...

 

[Ry]

I wrote my system, and it's fast, it's easy, and I can start gaming in a few minutes. We can get through what would be in D&D a 3-4 session module in about 4-6 hours. For me, speed of play has always been a factor, but I also always play fantasy and I'm enamored with high production values. That's why my relationship with D&D has always been on and off.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

The only time I've run a game of straight D&D 3e (insofar as Spelljammer qualifies as 'straight D&D') was so I didn't have to convert world material for Spelljammer purposes. With Saga looking easy to convert to, I would use that instead because it appears to be a much improved rulesset without the compatibility headaches I got from True20 and Mutants and Masterminds.

Prior to that, I ran Basic D&D because it was the quickest, easiest game I could find, and AD&D 2e for the sake of Spelljammer - albeit fairly briefly.

Nowadays, I'll *play* in a D&D 3.5 game, at least on a session-to-session basis, if that's what the local group is doing at the moment (although I'm at least as likely to go home and play a console game). As a player, it's not egregious to me the way some other systems (AD&D) would be - mostly, I avoid D&D games because of setting issues rather than mechanical ones, although newer, less shackled games like d20 Modern and True20, and especially Mutants & Masterminds and Star Wars Saga, show how much room there is to upgrade within the d20 system.

Certainly it wasn't the 3.5 rulesset or the d20 system that drove me away; both are better ways to play the same old D&D - I'm just not terribly fond of the same old D&D to begin with. I'd rather play a D&D 3.5-based steampunk sci-fantasy game than a Star Wars Saga-based high/epic fantasy game full of D&Disms, for example, though I'd rather play a Saga-based steampunk sci-fantasy game than either.