The Problem I Find Myself In (Long, Sorry)

[Dausuul]

Get the group together and say you're not happy with 4E as a DM and not willing to run it any more. If they want to keep going with your campaign, it's switching back to 3E; otherwise, you will step down and hand the DM screen to somebody else. That's your privilege as DM, no matter what the players think. You are never obligated to run something you don't want to run.

The players will probably want to discuss this and voice their opinions. Let the group bat it around for a bit. Once everyone has had a say, ask if anyone else wants to step up to DM, and if someone does, take a vote on which way to go. If no one wants to step up... well, then, 3E it is, unless the gang wants to knock off D&D entirely and play Settlers of Catan or something.

 

[IronWolf]

Definitely time for a group meeting to discuss options. I think running the system that the DM thinks is most fun is apt to lead to the best game in the end. So it likely comes down to the group switches back to 3.x with you as the DM or the group switches to 4e with someone else running. In either case you may lose a player or two depending on how set they are to play their system of choice, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing if you are finding out the group doesn't mesh well.

 

[Cor_Malek]

(...)
a. Run it in Pathfinder (requiring another conversion) - Making the players happy and me miserable.
b. Run it in straight up 3.5 with no splat books - Making the players somewhat unhappy and myself somewhat unhappy.
c. Run it in 4E (or essentials even) - Making myself happy and the players unhappy.

I don't think there is a winning combo there, so perhaps the fourth option:

d. Don't DM anything, just play in a Pathfinder game - making everyone happy (except I am skipping out on DMing duties).

I think the best thing to do is get everyone together and discuss it.

A and B have IMO a fatal flaw in them. You assume that even though you, the storyteller will be miserable - you'll be able to make others happy. And I'm afraid that it's very hard to pull off (as in next to impossible). But it seems you already have everything under control, and have good idea what to do.
Just explain that 4e is the system you feel comfortable with to be a GM. They might choose to take part in it or if they are so keen on one system - include only this system supporters in DM rotation. It's not like you're bailing on doing it - but rather that you can't do it the way you want to.
The very fact that you have DM rotation suggests that you all understand that it's not a piss to be GM, and if someone has to do it as a chore (even a pleasant one), at least let them do it the way they want to.

 

[Dausuul]

I think the best thing to do is get everyone together and discuss it.

Like Cildarith says, the DM should decide what to run; players have the option to "vote with their feet" if they don't like it. Discussion is good--everyone likes to feel they've had a say--but at the end of the day, the only choices available should be c) or d).

I've let myself get talked into doing things as DM that I didn't really want to do, and always ended up regretting it.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Unless Player #5 is prepared to feed, wash and look after you when you're ill - the wife definitely wins

Depending upon the player, the wife probably would still win.

I have a similar problem in that the table I play with is Pathfinder, but I really disliked DMing 3.x and my turn is coming up to DM.

Same advice applies:

1. Play what you want to play; life is too short for games you are not enjoying.

2. As long as a GM can draw happy players to the table, he or she can run anything her or she likes, in any way he or she likes.

3. Someone else can always DM his game of choice, and you can indicate that you are fully willing to play if he wishes to do so.


RC

 

[Herschel]

Also keep in mind that I think the fact that I'm not very tactically-minded I think accounts for my distaste in part.

While I do think it's "talk time" with the group, not being tactically-minded is a tough road to hoe if you're playing 4E, let alone DMing. Just like I don't like a lot of rules or minutia "cluttering" my non-combat so 3E wasn't a good fit for me. Some times that needs to be the deciding factor. We all want everyone to have fun, but we're part of everyone.

 

[Haltherrion]

Like Cildarith says, the DM should decide what to run; players have the option to "vote with their feet" if they don't like it. Discussion is good--everyone likes to feel they've had a say--but at the end of the day, the only choices available should be c) or d).

I've let myself get talked into doing things as DM that I didn't really want to do, and always ended up regretting it.

It's a tough call. Obviously the DM has the final say in the matter but DMs who do not consider their player's interests do not stay DM for long.

As Dausuul notes, running something you don't feel like running is a real enthusiasm killer so that needs to be a prime consideration. If you are 60/40 4e/3e then it is worth looking at the rest of the group and maybe tipping to the 40 if it helps with player motivation and attendance. If you are solid 3E, there really can be no question if you intend to keep ref'ing (an option is to let someone else ref).

If you are more on the fence, a meeting with the players can help. At the least, it gives everyone their say and hopefully people will be able to move forward from there regardless of which system is decided on. But if you don't really want to run 4E, you have all the information you need. Definitely don't hold a meeting purporting to be about selecting the next rule set if you have already made up your mind.

As a separate point, you might want to talk to player #5 and see what's up with him. While it is never pleasant to get negative feedback, your game usually improves for it. Even if you don't really agree with what the person has to say. Understaing different perspectives helps.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

3 Simple Truths garnished from 33 years in the hobby:

1. DMs choose the system they're running. They may listen to input from others, but the decision is theirs to make. Theirs is the hardest job, and the fun of others will depend upon their mastery of the system they're running; upon their comfort with its mechanics and fluff; upon how a given system helps or hinders their efforts to run the campaign they've designed.
2. No non-DM can be allowed to hold the group hostage to his preferences. This is selfish, and sets a bad precedent.
3. If someone doesn't like a given system, he can offer to run a game in his preferred system. He may also opt not to play in systems he doesn't like.

An additional note on #3: in the 1990s, I gamed with a group in Austin that, for a variety of reasons, adopted a rule that everyone in the group was responsible for designing and running a campaign in the system of their choice, and what game was being played at a given session was decided by vote. In the long run, that meant that everyone in the group got to play in a system they really enjoyed, even if it was only on the DM's side of the screen.

I was the one who proposed that rule.

Because of it, I got exposed to several dozen RPGs I never would have played otherwise. Some of them I disliked. Some of them I loved. But I played them all, and had a good time running my PCs in each one, despite my dislike of a given system, because of the people I was gaming with.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Switch back to 3e. There's a three-to-one majority in favor - #5 wants 4e, whereas wife and DM want 3e. Everyone knows the DM's vote counts double.

Give us a tougher one next time, that was too easy.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I have a similar problem in that the table I play with is Pathfinder, but I really disliked DMing 3.x and my turn is coming up to DM. Now, I know we want to run "Red Hand of Doom" as the story, and I worked up a conversion already for it to 4E, so there is no problem there, but the bulk of the group doesn't want to even try 4E. So without pissing anyone off, I could either:

a. Run it in Pathfinder (requiring another conversion) - Making the players happy and me miserable.
b. Run it in straight up 3.5 with no splat books - Making the players somewhat unhappy and myself somewhat unhappy.
c. Run it in 4E (or essentials even) - Making myself happy and the players unhappy.

I don't think there is a winning combo there, so perhaps the fourth option:

d. Don't DM anything, just play in a Pathfinder game - making everyone happy (except I am skipping out on DMing duties).

I think the best thing to do is get everyone together and discuss it.

Yeah, you're right, option d is the only one possible. You don't like running Pathfinder, group only wants to play Pathfinder ergo you cannot run a game for them.

This is a tougher dilemma than the one Andrew presented us with, because there is the problem of feeling that you are shirking your duties. However, I think d is the lesser of several evils.