What are the primary reasons your players reject other systems/settings/games?

[Dannyalcatraz]

In my most recent (and longest lasting) gaming group, the main reasons are time investment, resistance to change, disinterest in other genres, and hostility towards certain other systems. We’re all adults over 45 with serious time commitments, which is a natural progression and limiting factor.

But the other factors are more important in this case. In the slightly less than 20 years together, we mostly played D&D 2Ed and 3Ed/3.5Ed. There was one multi-year 4Ed campaign, and short-lived games in RIFTS, Monster of the Week, and Mutants & Masterminds 2Ed. That last one was one I wanted to do in HERO, but outright mass refusal only eroded because M&M was an evolution of 3.5Ed.

They didn’t even want to play other FRPGs based on the 3Ed or 3.5Ed systems.

It’s a stark contrast to a group I was in a few years before joining my current group. In that group, everyone ran something, and everyone had PCs for each campaign. So we played D&D 2Ed, GURPS, HERO, RIFTS, WoD games, a slew of various mecha-centric RPGs, and even a couple of playtests. (Probably stuff I’m forgetting, too.)

 

[MGibster]

In my most recent (and longest lasting) gaming group, the main reasons are time investment, resistance to change, disinterest in other genres, and hostility towards certain other systems. We’re all adults over 45 with serious time commitments, which is a natural progression and limiting factor.

I've found the time I could devote to gaming has varied quite a bit over the years. In my early 20s, I had a decent amount of time to game because I had very few obligations. Once I hit my mid-20s, I was establishing a career, getting married, and other people my age were starting families. Now that many of my peers are pushing 50, their lives are a lot more stable. They've established careers, their kids are older and in some cases off to college, and they're able to make time to game on a regular basis.

 

[Jd Smith1]

I've found the time I could devote to gaming has varied quite a bit over the years. In my early 20s, I had a decent amount of time to game because I had very few obligations. Once I hit my mid-20s, I was establishing a career, getting married, and other people my age were starting families. Now that many of my peers are pushing 50, their lives are a lot more stable. They've established careers, their kids are older and in some cases off to college, and they're able to make time to game on a regular basis.

Me, too. I prefer older gamers, because their lives have stabilized. Definitely no college students, because every semester there's a schedule crisis.

 

[TheSword]

"If it ain't broke..."

Ah, I see. The way that ‘resistance to change’ was phrased seemed a bit negative. I think it’s possible to be open to change but still really enjoy the system you’re using. updated the vote.

I would second the idea that VTT support makes a massive difference for me. I would probably convert an adventure to a system I use rather than use a new system that didn’t have good VTT support. Character wizard, most rules as a compendium etc. I don’t mind creating elements but the majority has to be in there already.

 

[Doc_Klueless]

While there are a couple of reasons for the resistance (Lack of time to learn something new, investment in the characters/campaigns, rather play than learn a new system), lately it has boiled down to: "Does our VTT support it?"

 

[Wolfpack48]

Ah, I see. The way that ‘resistance to change’ was phrased seemed a bit negative. I think it’s possible to be open to change but still really enjoy the system you’re using. updated the vote.

I would second the idea that VTT support makes a massive difference for me. I would probably convert an adventure to a system I use rather than use a new system that didn’t have good VTT support. Character wizard, most rules as a compendium etc. I don’t mind creating elements but the majority has to be in there already.

Good point, I could add another entry for "Open to change but enjoying current system" but not sure how much it would affect the poll. The real trends seem to be in scheduling and time investment. It might affect that last pick "If it aint' broke" to make the distinction.

 

[Wolfpack48]

While there are a couple of reasons for the resistance (Lack of time to learn something new, investment in the characters/campaigns, rather play than learn a new system), lately it has boiled down to: "Does our VTT support it?"

Ooh, that's an interesting one. Okay, I'm going to tweak the poll a bit.

 

[Distracted DM]

"Does a VTT support it?" is generally more of a question for me as the GM when considering games, not my players. But I'm sure it's different for everyone.

Ooh, that's an interesting one. Okay, I'm going to tweak the poll a bit.

 

[billd91]

I'm not privy to all of the internal thoughts for the people I play with but I did answer based on a few known cases.

Disinterest in other genres/settings: For one group, when we decided to experiment with Masks after some D&D, one of the players chose to sit that stretch out because she wasn't interested in superhero games. For my other group, I can't get one of the players to play Call of Cthulhu because he doesn't like the style of horror game where, at best, you're kind of fighting a delaying action and bear long-term sanity costs. And as for myself, I have absolutely no interest in playing Vampire, so when the group has played that game, I sat out.

Open to new systems, but enjoying current system: This was the reaction for one group I was in when 4e came out. We were playing D&D 3.5 and had been willing to branch out to other systems like Feng Shui and Champions before for a variety of one-shots/short campaigns. But we were happy with 3.5 and actually shifted to Pathfinder (since it was close but better enough). There was really no significant interest in 4e at all.

"Crunchy" vs "Rules Lite" reasons: We have one player who has developed disabilities (specifically, long-haul COVID) relatively recently who suffers from chronic fatigue. She has limited willingness to try overly crunchy games. Crunchiness is also one of the reasons we shifted from an early version of Champions to Villains and Vigilantes back in the 1980s. V&V was a less crunchy (in many ways) learning curve to climb, particularly in character generation.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

So I have to respond as per the past, not now.

Years ago, my group had a system they were fine with. Was it great? no. Was it D&D? no. It was simple, they knew the rules, and it worked across the genres they were interested in. It took maybe 10 years for me to understand new systems well enough to run a new game for the group in a way that was fun and not 'learning new maths'.

For the first few years- they complained

But after that, they decided they loved the new systems better. They realized they could test a few new systems from time to time and suffer less and play the fun bits more.

Now they don't want to ever go back to their old system.

So yeah, now, now we play LOTS of stuff. New games every few months.