Why do DM's like Dark, gritty worlds and players the opposite?

[Ariosto]

Right, and I don't find puzzles entertaining.

Maybe that's my background coming at RPGs as a fan of fantasy fiction. How many times do fictional characters you read about stop in the middle of a "dungeon" and solve "puzzles?" ... So to me, a lot of the paradigm of playing D&D, especially the dungeoncrawling aspect of it, is jarringly gamist, and therefore not fun.

So naturally you choose an RPG titled DUNGEONS & DRAGONS.

"Gamist"?? It is a game; it was designed to be that "not fun" thing.

This is what drives crazy people who actually find the game fun. There are plenty of other games designed with "anti-D&D" premises, positrons to its electron. It had already been bashed from pretty much every angle 30 years ago.

Oh, well. The bell has tolled. Next on the chopping block: Warhammer FRP. Because of course players were disappointed to find within "A Grim World of Perilous Adventure", just as billed on the cover, right?

 

[The Shaman]

Next on the chopping block: Warhammer FRP. Because of course players were disappointed to find within "A Grim World of Perilous Adventure", just as billed on the cover, right?

"Waddya mean I'm a RATCATCHER?!?!"

 

[Ariosto]

"Unlike most MMOs, though, where killing rats is the newbie step ..."

"Warhammer" and "rat catcher" are An Item. If you've heard about the one, odds are you've heard about the other. The game has a reputation, on the basis of which people can have reasonable expectations. (And, yes, rat catcher is a possible basic career -- that comes with a pretty excellent set of skills for "dungeon delve" pursuits a la the D&D thief.)

 

[DrunkonDuty]

Plus, early in your career you can make money selling ingredients to pie shops.

Oh and I like grim'n'gritty, both as a player and a GM. ANd most of my players over the years have liked my GMing. But not rat-pie.

 

[Dannager]

I have seen a player fall asleep waiting for his turn, and the tedium is certainly not my idea of a good D&D game.

Given how counter this has been to my experience (in a number of games, with a number of different DMs and players), I'm very strongly inclined to believe that this is a classic case of PEBSAC.

 

[The Shaman]

If there is a correlation then there is an underlying cause somewhere.

No, not necessarily.

 

[The Shaman]

(And, yes, rat catcher is a possible basic career -- that comes with a pretty excellent set of skills for "dungeon delve" pursuits a la the D&D thief.)

And a small but vicious dog.

 

[Ariosto]

I'm very strongly inclined to believe that this is a classic case of PEBSAC.

When it comes to games, every like or dislike is that. However, that does not make it not also something to do with the game design.

In this case, we have a single activity taking up BIG chunks of play-session time (and usually several of those, so also most session time, but that can vary) -- commonly 45 minutes or so at a stretch.

That actual-factual state of affairs is in interesting contrast to the hyperbolic "half an hour of game searching the room".

"Too much" of anything can get boring. A one-note game is a lot less engaging if it's the "wrong" note for a particular player. For those who can't get enough of it, it's the best. For anyone else, a bit more variety is probably preferable. Old D&D facilitates that variety, with pacing that many people prefer.

 

[Hussar]

/snip
Some people describe the following scenario as "pixel bitchin'" but, it is now possible for a player to walk into a room and say I search the room - roll a die and either succeed or fail, without really thinking about what that search could mean. Meanwhile we used to walk into a room and have to specify what was searched and how it was searched - no rolls, role playing. I can see where both are appropriate and where a good DM would require the search check to be targeted, but RAW doesn't actually state it has to be, so in an imperfect world (and I think we've proved this one is) there is always some room for debate. (But then again around here I guess that's half the fun.)

BTW - My example was using 3.x skills, successes over failures is worse IMO as the rule just plays wonky...

Put me in the "pixel bitching" camp. I loathe, with the fire of a thousand suns, this sort of thing. Don't mind traps from time to time, but, this level of detail? Nope. Hate it as a player and hate it as a DM.

And that hate pales before my utter and complete hatred of puzzles in game. Yeah, I know they might be a trope in fantasy. I know. I still absolutely hate them. Playing through the Shackled City AP a while back, we came to one of the puzzle problems with colored mirrors.

I tried for about thirty seconds, realized that I do not want to do that, and went and did something else while the party worked on it.

Was I being a dick as a player? Quite probably. But, I do not want to screw around with my very, very rare free time trying to do this. I don't like it and now, I just refuse.

Other people might like this, fine. But, me? Not a chance.

And really, it's because puzzles only challenge the player. There's nothing in my character at all trying to solve this puzzle. It yoinks me straight out of play worse than the grindiest combat slog. Instead of acting in character or trying to at least, I'm forced to focus on the game as myself, solely.

Sorry, not why I game.

 

[Snoweel]

No, not necessarily.

Congratulations for completely missing the point.

We've already covered the Fisher Price My-First-Law-Of-Logic.

While correlation does not imply causation, as we all seem to agree, some of you are missing the fact that the effect of the correlation itself must have a cause.

This correlation (if indeed there is one), and its underlying cause is probably the basis for why many people do not enjoy dark-and-gritty in their Dungeons and Dragons.