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

[Ruin Explorer]

I picked the following for my groups, particularly my main one:

• Disinterested in other genres/settings
• Current system fulfills a character power dynamic
• "Crunchy" vs "Rules Lite" reasons

And it's mostly been the last, and it's mostly been the group coming down on the side of preferring games with more straightforward rules vs. more crunchy games - middle ground is fine, but Champions: The New Millenium (a FUZION adaption of Champions) just absolutely broke my main group on rules-heavy systems that weren't rewarding in other ways. I'm amazed we managed to run Shadowrun 5E for quite a few sessions before everyone (especially me, DMing,

My main group is pretty open-minded and will try almost any system once so long as character creation is reasonable, but the other thing I've seen cause them to reject games is genres/settings which don't vibe with them - it's fairly rare but for example I've really wanted to run MASKS, and all but one of these bastards reads comics including or even primarily comics about teen supers, but just wasn't into MASKS (and the one who doesn't, she was fine with it!). There have been other cases too where a systems setting was like, just too silly or too annoying for the group as a whole to be interested, like usually 1-2 of them will be but...

Re: "power dynamic", I've never seen them outright reject a game because their current system let them do stuff character-wise, particularly power-wise, but they've definitely been unfavourable to games because of this. Indeed 5E has a caught a lot of flack from two players who frankly, had a much better time in 4E. My main group definitely does notice the "rules texture" of games, in a serious way - I think being exposed to a very large number of systems over the last 30 years, and having a lot of people who think about rules and systems in the group will do that!

Weirdly limited time to learn rules, which has 63% at time of writing hasn't actually ever reached the point of blocking a game. Several times we've learned the rules, then played the game, then abandoned it after a session or three because of the rules. And now there's a distaste for crunchy systems as noted, but it's not because no-one has time/interest to learn them, it's because we generally haven't seen them provide fun experiences (4E being the most crunchy exception I can think of, but even that eventually bogged down).

 

[Nebulous]

I find it mostly time. I get to play once a week for a few hours and we are playing 5e right now. We have a campaign going that advances slowly enough with the 1/week frame. Throw in a few missed weeks for whatever and then I really want to play the next week, and not skip 5e to play another game this week to get back to the campaign in 5e maybe next week.

Right, same here. I could only switch if the 5e campaign was over, not try to shoehorn in something else.

 

[Deset Gled]

The drawn out release of 5e204 hasn't helped. We've pushed the conversation of "Should we try another system?" back for over a year now.

"There's a D&D update coming next year? We'll just keep playing 5e for now, and wait to see what the next editions is like."

"We have the new PHB, but we won't have the DMG for a while. Might as well stick with 2014 until then."

"I've got the new DMG, but they haven't even released the new Monster Manual yet. I'd rather wait for that to come out before we talk about changing anything."

 

[Velderan]

Lack of time to really get into different game systems is really all that stops the group I play with from branching out further. We typically stick with 1 system for extended campaigns and then try out easier to run systems for one shots. Starter Sets/Beginner Boxes with short, easy to understand and run scenarios like the Call of Cthulhu set are a good gateway to us slowly using more rules from the full ruleset.

 

[Kannik]

While I'm fortunate that we play tonnes of different games in my primary gaming group (right now we have 3 main games ongoing, each using a different system), I'm going to watch this because I'm super curious what the hurdles are out there for "many/most" groups to venture outside of 5e (either strict D&D or simply out of using the same d20 system).

 

[Wolfpack48]

Sunk cost fallacy, mostly. People start with a heavy game like D&D5E and think that all other games work like that so the idea of dropping $150 or more to switch systems and learn a new game they might not play is just a no-go. So, better to stick with the game they've already spent $150 or more on and deal with whatever quirks they're already used to instead of whatever quirks them might not like even more than what 5E has.

It's interesting to differentiate between actual dollar cost and perceived cost of getting into a new system. Dollars spent on D&D can potentially be much higher than for other systems, but I wonder if players believe all systems are equally pricey.

It may be perceived effort vs actual effort as well.

 

[payn]

3E was a lot to figure out. My group at the time just got a handle on it so they didn’t want to change. I wouldn’t say it was one thing it was all the typical things, buying more stuff, learning a new system, not liking the look feel, etc…

After Covid, I fell into a system hopper group. That was new to me. The group had an insatiable appetite for new systems and adventures. Though, like clockwork, folks would start to lose steam and get itching for the next big thing. I left eventually, I just got tired of never finding a good fit or seeing an adventure to the end.

 

[grimmgoose]

I’m not sure if this is what you’re asking, but I’m blessed enough to have two groups that love learning new systems.

That being said, when we do reject a new system, it’s usually because it doesn’t fit our vibe (which is pretty “beers and pretzels”). We’ve put two systems on our “no” list: Genesys (it was too exhausting to decipher every dice roll) and Pathfinder 2E (it’s fun, and arguably brilliantly designed, but it’s just too much).

Other than that, we usually always circle back to Savage Worlds, but we’ll cycle out to other systems to try them out.

 

[uzirath]

My main group doesn't usually reject systems. Whoever is GMing chooses the system. I usually run GURPS. Others have run GURPS, 5e, Cthulhu, Blades, and various ultra-lights (most recently, "Death was the Only Road Out of Town").

 

[Wolfpack48]

I’m not sure if this is what you’re asking, but I’m blessed enough to have two groups that love learning new systems.

That being said, when we do reject a new system, it’s usually because it doesn’t fit our vibe (which is pretty “beers and pretzels”). We’ve put two systems on our “no” list: Genesys (it was too exhausting to decipher every dice roll) and Pathfinder 2E (it’s fun, and arguably brilliantly designed, but it’s just too much).

Other than that, we usually always circle back to Savage Worlds, but we’ll cycle out to other systems to try them out.

All good. It's nice to have perspectives from all sides. Might do another poll for groups who have broken into new games.