Tabletop Roleplaying Games (D&D, Pathfinder, CoC, ETC.)

DnD players feel way too coddled. I put them in another game (Pulp Cthulhu) for a tutorial session and they take ages to make one choice when it turns out every action has a reaction, and they really cling to their characters when there's a threat of bad things happening or death. I've been watching recent DnD games and it looks every action has a safety net and/or couple of warnings to railroad the players.

Biggest tell is the way they approach combat. They expect combat to be steamrolled or they have a heavy advantage without effort. But are scared or disappointed when combat is a very risky thing or they have to spend effort to get advantages. Hell, they won't put some weakening drugs in a drink of some obviously evil enemy to weaken him because such things like poison and assassination is seen as 'evil'. like they expected some major alignment change from doing the deed.
The ideal player is one who didn't come up through D&D and hasn't learned a whole bunch of assumptions and conventions that don't apply outside it. Of course more intelligent players will adapt and understand that different games require different mindsets. But many players will not.
 
I would rather blow my head off than use GURPS.
GURPS is extremely simple, unfortunately it is also GURPS and thus must present itself in a way to make it more confusing and unfriendly. God I hate Steve Jackson, what a dick. Though I should still tweak LEURPS (my retarded GURPS version after Steve Jackson Games threw a hissy fit) to make it less dogshit, but that would mean making more things for it to expand it out.
Cest la vie.

The ideal player is one who didn't come up through D&D and hasn't learned a whole bunch of assumptions and conventions that don't apply outside it. Of course more intelligent players will adapt and understand that different games require different mindsets. But many players will not.
The issue nowadays is that D&D has assumed the role as [The TTRPG]. It's become so synonymous that onboarding people into any other game has you trying to beat D&Disms out of them at the start. On one hand it's good to have an easy frame of reference - "It's like D&D, but . . ." gets people in the mindset close enough, but the further you deviate from killing goblins in caves for pocket change the harder it gets to rope people in. God help you if they're already "TTRPG Veterans of 10 Years" who have played nothing but D&D 5e.
 
The issue nowadays is that D&D has assumed the role as [The TTRPG]. It's become so synonymous that onboarding people into any other game has you trying to beat D&Disms out of them at the start. On one hand it's good to have an easy frame of reference - "It's like D&D, but . . ." gets people in the mindset close enough, but the further you deviate from killing goblins in caves for pocket change the harder it gets to rope people in. God help you if they're already "TTRPG Veterans of 10 Years" who have played nothing but D&D 5e.

That's gotten worse with things like Critical Roll and the abysmal Hasbro leadership, but that's been the case as long as I've been playing, and from what I know from the old grognards always kind of been the case.
 
GURPS is extremely simple, unfortunately it is also GURPS and thus must present itself in a way to make it more confusing and unfriendly. God I hate Steve Jackson, what a dick. Though I should still tweak LEURPS (my retarded GURPS version after Steve Jackson Games threw a hissy fit) to make it less dogshit, but that would mean making more things for it to expand it out.
That is an issue, yeah, but my main problem with it is that it tries to do too many things at once. I dispute the concept of the generic system, where I think a system should be purpose-designed for a particular mood, genre, or setting (part of the reason modern WotC D&D is so crap is because it is spread too thin). Trying to be able to represent (with crunch) everything from the Stone Age to Space Opera with a single mechanic system prevents it from feeling super strongly one or the other. Traveller can do stone age stuff with its tech levels; it is clearly aimed at capturing Space Opera. Even story-focused systems are not made equal, with Burning Wheel, Genesys, and Storyteller all aiming at totally different tones and feelings despite not being crunch-centric. Point being that if I want a genre game, I would be better served by finding a system designed specifically for that genre, though I could see a situation where no such system exists and you don't want to have to make one from the ground up, so collating GURPS subsystems together and filling to fit would suit fine.
 
God help you if they're already "TTRPG Veterans of 10 Years" who have played nothing but D&D 5e.
It's terrifying that that's entirely possible. I saw a YT video earlier this week from someone espousing their expertise from running Delta Green for "three years" and scoffed.

I'm old enough to remember putting up a big stink about the "temporary" measures instituted after 9/11, because I was in high school and saw how enculturating children to a "temporary" measure creates a generation-long precedent. The same happened with COVID.

What I'm saying is that 5e is basically 9/11. We're going to lose/fundamentally change the culture of TTRPGs because of this faggot-slop business model. Wail and gnash your teeth, but it will happen/has happened. Maybe our grandchildren will rediscover it, but only after Hasbro has long abandoned the market. Mark my words.
 
That is an issue, yeah, but my main problem with it is that it tries to do too many things at once. I dispute the concept of the generic system, where I think a system should be purpose-designed for a particular mood, genre, or setting (part of the reason modern WotC D&D is so crap is because it is spread too thin). Trying to be able to represent (with crunch) everything from the Stone Age to Space Opera with a single mechanic system prevents it from feeling super strongly one or the other. Traveller can do stone age stuff with its tech levels; it is clearly aimed at capturing Space Opera. Even story-focused systems are not made equal, with Burning Wheel, Genesys, and Storyteller all aiming at totally different tones and feelings despite not being crunch-centric. Point being that if I want a genre game, I would be better served by finding a system designed specifically for that genre, though I could see a situation where no such system exists and you don't want to have to make one from the ground up, so collating GURPS subsystems together and filling to fit would suit fine.
I believe a good system can suit a lot of different flavours. I've used Hero 6e for both generic fantasy and a Sci-Fi game to great effect. But I do agree with you - systems should be designed with at the least a playstyle in mind. The Aliens RPG is good for a throwaway game and high turn over. For a campaign or more tactical game, it's pretty weak. CoC is reasonable for an investigative game (though actually I think it could be better), but would be middling for something action focused and downright poor for those seeking a more tactical experience.

Hero 6e for me is the apex of adaptability in that it handles both low level and high level settings pretty seamlessly and can scale smoothly between them, and is highly capable for creating a variety of experiences by a GM just limiting the sorts of powers that are available. Really it's more of a game design tool than a finished game. If you want to make a Martial Arts kung-fu game, if you want to do gritty Sci-Fi, if you want to do capes and tights, it can handle all of those things. But, it is never going to be a rapid-playing cinematic experience like the Alien RPG or a deeply investigative game like CoC.

I'll hold off commenting on D&D as my experience on it is pretty limited and back when it came out. But in the few brief sessions I played it felt... messy. It felt... confining.

What I'm saying is that 5e is basically 9/11. We're going to lose/fundamentally change the culture of TTRPGs because of this faggot-slop business model. Wail and gnash your teeth, but it will happen/has happened. Maybe our grandchildren will rediscover it, but only after Hasbro has long abandoned the market. Mark my words.
I fear you are correct. It's not simply an effect on rule systems - others still exist and appear to be doing alright. But the culture is getting very Reddit-y. If people recall my diatribe about Vaesen some pages back, there's this... coddled feel to everything coming out now. I don't think it's all down to D&D though. I think the wider Progressive / IdPol sort of culture is the shit that fertilises it.
 
I fear you are correct. It's not simply an effect on rule systems - others still exist and appear to be doing alright. But the culture is getting very Reddit-y. If people recall my diatribe about Vaesen some pages back, there's this... coddled feel to everything coming out now. I don't think it's all down to D&D though. I think the wider Progressive / IdPol sort of culture is the shit that fertilises it.
I agree, it's not "just" D&D or "only" D&D's fault, it's a broader cultural shift, and my point is that that cultural shift has gone on for so long that not only has it become dominant, but it's become essentially intrinsic. I'm not saying that nobody's doing OSR, or domain play, or high lethality games, or 3d6 straight down, or anything like that. I'm saying that the fundamental philosophy that led to that way of doing things is no longer part of the popular zeitgeist in the hobby. "Troonslayer: A PbtA Game" could get published tomorrow and sell enough copies for the author to be a medium muckamuck in the scene and it wouldn't mean anything different. From now until sometime "after," whatever the "World's Most Popular Roleplaying Game" is, whether it's Dungeons and/or Dragons, or some successor, will have a section or mention of "safety," something that would have been inconceivable to Gary and Dave and Dave and I think another Dave and etc in 1968.

RPGs as I and the generation before me knew them will have to die, and then be remembered, reinvented, resurrected, by a generation to come. The future for RPGs, if there is such a thing that isn't terminally pozzed, will be closer to what's happening with the Braunstein now. It'll need to skip a generation or two to free itself from the cultural baggage that comes with being conquered by invading communist homosexuals.
 
my point is that that cultural shift has gone on for so long that not only has it become dominant, but it's become essentially intrinsic.
Disagree. Though I do wonder what woke era nostalgia will look like when it hits 20 years from now. Will there be a OneDnD revival community like there is for 4e now?

The reason it's not intrinsic is that no one is buying this shit despite companies best efforts. Major "evergreen" franchises, companies, and even entire mediums are written off as "dead" despite nothing indicating they fell out of popularity.

This is where you have to be clear about DnD vs TTRPGs. TTRPGs fell out of favour when the tourists moved on to the next shiny thing. That's not going to happen again unless there's another perfect storm like how Stranger Things and Critical Role introduced DnD to normies. All DnD needs to recover is a decent edition.

The problem DnD has (beyond communism) is the fanbase is too fractionated. I won't do the rant again, but it'll suffice to say that grognards will never be happy because their demands are contradictory.
 
I dispute the concept of the generic system, where I think a system should be purpose-designed for a particular mood, genre, or setting
I don't hate generic systems. But they should be thought of as a launching point that is melded into an actual game people play. Case in point, Basic Roleplaying from chaosium is a generic system, which is a starting point for their other games. This game uses the ORC license which is more permissive than the old OGL. I take BRP and use it to make a game, then I can sell that game. With GURPs I use the generic system, put a bunch of time making a game, then I can play it with my friends but I can't sell it. I like my friends but I'd rather put my time into something I can sell.

the fanbase is too fractionated
This is a broader cultural issue beyond TTRPGs. The "mainstream" of every hobby is a battle ground between communists and fascists. I really like the David Lynch opinion. Don't write your politics/themes into your games, just write something true and good. If people stopped trying to tell us what to think with their stories. Just give something you think is real.

 
Disagree. Though I do wonder what woke era nostalgia will look like when it hits 20 years from now. Will there be a OneDnD revival community like there is for 4e now?
I actually forgot onednd existed and I literally dont know anyone who plays it. 5e is just to popular, my store (one of the biggest in my city) literally only stocks like 2 copies of it at the back. Depending on how far WoTC falls in the next few years, I guess people may look back at onednd with rose tinted glasses?
 
I don't hate generic systems. But they should be thought of as a launching point that is melded into an actual game people play. Case in point, Basic Roleplaying from chaosium is a generic system, which is a starting point for their other games. This game uses the ORC license which is more permissive than the old OGL. I take BRP and use it to make a game, then I can sell that game. With GURPs I use the generic system, put a bunch of time making a game, then I can play it with my friends but I can't sell it. I like my friends but I'd rather put my time into something I can sell.
That's the thing with generic systems: they give you a toolbox you can do pretty much anything with. But like any large, comprehensive toolbox, it's a chore to lift that thing and carry it to your truck whenever you actually want to use it anywhere. So, you have to pick and choose which tools you're going to be using, and supplement it with additional tools the box doesn't come with, but that would be useful for what you're trying to do. Just like you're not going to need your sledgehammer when you're rewiring outlets and replacing light fixtures, but you really should bring that bag of wagos with you.

It's the same with RPG systems: a generic system always works better when you remove the bits that aren't relevant for the kind of game you want to run and bolt on additional systems that are. It's why GURPS has so many fucking splats for everything under the sun: sure, they all use the skill system and the 3d6-roll-under task resolution, but most of those also come with setting-relevant rules and advantages/disadvantages that give the setting its flavor and relevant mechanics. You're not going to be using the magic rules for a Pablabor game, but you definitely need to throw in the giant scale and robotics rules (or just play GURPS Mecha, because of course that's a splat).
 
I had a pretty solid 4 hour session of Dragonquest 3e yesterday. It all ran pretty streamline aside from one of the players who absolutely refuses to read a damn rulebook. Guy's been at the table for over a decade and just plays 100% Grug smash barbarians so there's always room for a dude with a big axe and not much else.
It's finally clicked with the table though and they've really warmed up to the idea of how the character progression is extremely freeform after actually sitting down and leveling up. Got one player investing into assassin skills + thief. Another is basically going to go a Dark Souls pyromancer type rout with the fire magics. He's already stated one spell 'is That's going to be my Forbidden Sun. Player 4 is going archer/scout with healing and herbalism and I'm thinking the 5th is going to settle on some sort of caster after he really reads everything over and explores all options. His character died 3 hours in but he had a backup and is ready to roll with it.
The problem with the rulesets in the books is that it seems bloated as hell due to how they laid everything out in the final editing process. Way too much repeated information on the same subject in little separate text boxes that have the exact same formula written out over again because there's one little added detail to it. I mean I get it they were trying to idiot proof it but it makes it an absolute mess to actually reference anything in a timely manner.
I actually took the time to condense the entire combat and melee section of the rules into the front and back side of a single piece of college ruled paper in an easy to read format.
One of the upsides is the way that XP is allocated. Not a lot of math there and the main source of XP is time in game at the table.
 
Had a good Rifts game. Got a new player, but they're catching on real quick.

Have to really push that the rules are WAAAAY different than anything they've ever experienced with Rifts.

H2H combat. Rolled a 5? Then it's a hit. Armor Class? Are you stupid? There's AR, but that's just the Armor Rating, if I roll a 5 I've at least hit your armor.

Close range guns? Well, that's a different matter. Depends on how close you are.

Not getting hit? Well, if you have enhanced reflexes or over 20, you can try to parry the laser bolt or rail gun round. Hope whatever you have can take it.

Dodge? Well, that takes up your next attack unless you have autododge, but I don't see "Juicer" on your sheet.

Then the idea that you can get FUCKED UP in like 30 seconds.

And no, not everyone has the same amount of attacks. I told you to take boxing, you didn't, so now other players have more attacks.

8 or better for point blank to short. Extreme range is like a 15 or better.

What's the ranges?

What I fucking say they are.

No, the range on your weapon isn't range increment, it's maximum effective range.

Fuck, I love Rifts.
 
I really need to take the kiddie gloves off.
my players thought they could talk the monster down on the recent session. I didn't feel like having the very obviously evil monster attack them when they were so adamant on talking it down for some reason. So I had it joining them to watch the party closer behind the scenes waiting for the perfect time to deliver a killing blow later.
Thinking of it now, that is way more manipulative than simply attacking them on the spot.
 
I really need to take the kiddie gloves off.
my players thought they could talk the monster down on the recent session. I didn't feel like having the very obviously evil monster attack them when they were so adamant on talking it down for some reason. So I had it joining them to watch the party closer behind the scenes waiting for the perfect time to deliver a killing blow later.
Thinking of it now, that is way more manipulative than simply attacking them on the spot.
That's such a good solution. I can already imagine your players saying "but you promised! We trusted you!" and your monster going "what, you believed me? Lol."
 
Atrás
Top Abajo