Last year, my group had two simultaneous D&D 4e games going, one set in the Forgotten Realms and one in Eberron. They both ended, and I don’t see myself ever playing a long-term 4e game again — and I just realized that this isn’t the first time this has happened.
A quick aside: I could care less what anyone else plays — as long as you’re having fun, you’re doing it right and more power to you. If you want to have D&D’s babies, rock on; my preferences don’t impact you, nor yours me. This article isn’t about that.
So what is it about? It’s about the realization that with every new edition of D&D, I dive eagerly back in only to find, usually months but sometimes years later, that it’s not really the ideal game for me. It’s like an on-again, off-again relationship with a crazy ex, where the sex is great at first and you forget why you broke up — until things implode and you’re both crying at three in the morning and throwing plates at each other.
And it’s almost never the actual campaign — I love the campaigns. Both of my group’s recent 4e campaigns were awesome, taught me many neat things about GMing, and created happy memories that will stick with me for years to come. (Hell, my single most triumphant gaming session ever grew out of one of them.)
Nor is it the players, who I love to death. These are my peeps, and gaming together rocks. So what the hell is it? Apparently, it’s D&D.
Fair warning: This piece is more personal and soul search-y than most of my articles here, and it runs over a thousand words. If you stick it out, I do eventually circle back around to GMing, but this was something I needed to write so I could see where it led me. I hope that ride is interesting to you, and if I didn’t think it would be I wouldn’t have posted it, but it may well not be. I don’t usually do this on the Stew, hence the warning!
In Which I Bore You With D&D Anecdotes
I started with red box D&D in 1987, cut my teeth GMing (and played a hell of a lot of) AD&D 2nd Edition starting in 1989, dove back in with gusto for 3rd Edition, switched to 3.5 when that rolled around, and had a big smile on my face when 4e dropped.
But each time except the first, when I switched to 2e because I couldn’t find the red box at my FLGS, I found myself growing more and more frustrated with D&D as a system. I burned out hard on AD&D 2e — so hard that I stopped gaming for a couple of years. I came back to it because everyone played it and I’d gotten it tweaked the way I liked it, but I was still champing at the bit for 3e’s streamlining and modern approach.
Then around level 10, 3e became painful and unwieldy. What used to be fun no longer was, and 3.5 didn’t fix that: level 10, fun turned into pain. Level 20, agony. Hours-long combats made me hate life, and 3e was clearly no longer for me.
When 4e came out, I was stoked. It was streamlined, powers looked exciting, and the early sessions delivered. 4e delivered the most exciting, nail-biting, brain-burning combat I’ve ever had in an RPG…and, mechanically, nothing else. I hate almost everything else about 4e, and over time I even started hating how goddamned long combat took — it was like 3e all over again.
In fact, 4e is the polar opposite of most of what I like in a game system — something which took me far too long to suss out, and which makes me wonder three things:
- For me, this only happens with D&D. Why? What is it about D&D that causes this? I’ve burned out on other games, but never as hard as D&D, and many other RPGs have multiple editions that flow happily across my table without ruffling my feathers (like Call of Cthulhu).
- How can I spot this apparently inevitable problem BEFORE it becomes a problem? Or, more broadly, how can any GM or player recognize when the game isn’t doing what they want it to — which I’ve always found can be difficult from the trenches.
- Why the fuck do I keep going back? I have a guess: nostalgia combined with a near-lifelong relationship with D&D, troubled though it’s often been. Many of my happiest gaming memories are tied up with a game that, mechanically, I’ve disliked more often than not over the course of 24 years.
What Is This, BitchAboutDnD.org?
Numbers 1 and 3 are, I think, potentially interesting questions, but it’s #2 that really has a place on Gnome Stew. Specifically, as a GM, how do you spot when the bloom is off the rose — and what do you do about it? And as a corollary, how do you spot when the system is driving your players up the wall, and what can you do about that?
In my experience, the answer to both of those questions is usually “End the game” or “The game just sort of peters out.” Which is a shame, because letting a game peter out is a terrible course and ending a game with a promising and enjoyable story is an unfortunate thing to have to do.
One approach would be to switch systems, but would the soul of the campaign be the same? And if not, would that fact be outweighed by all of the other positives? My group is considering this with our Forgotten Realms campaign: switching to another system, recreating the characters, and diving back in; I don’t know if it will happen.
Another approach is to house rule the hell out of the game, which I’ve done in the past. This is a good middle ground between letting things fall apart and throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but it hinges on something I’m apparently not very good at: self-awareness about your gaming tastes.
Sure, as D&D campaigns have marched on I’ve begun to notice my dimishing enjoyment of the system, but what I really want is the ability to, with a measureable degree of accuracy, assess whether I’m going to enjoy a system BEFORE I spend weeks or months not enjoying the mechanics of it.
And, failing that, the ability to spot problems like this mid-stream and execute a perfect course correction that saves the game and lets us all sail on into happyfuntopia.
While I’m wishing, I’d also like a huge cock.
So how about it: Is everyone else good at this but me? Do you have this same problem, or have aspects of this problem cropped up throughout your gaming career?
And what are your best techniques for taking your own pulse when it comes to enjoying a game system, either in advance or during an ongoing game?
You might try Epic 6, a mod for 3e.
http://www.myth-weavers.com/wiki/index.php/Epic_6
I feel your pain. I’ve always had a love/hate relationship with D&D. And the Level 10 threshold sounds about right. As attached as I’ve got to some of my characters, I’ve never felt any desire to push too far through the double-digit barrier. And when I did I started to lose interest in the story; the challenges became too easy and too hard at the same time.
Maybe heroes just aren’t meant to live that long…
Same as you, I started in red box…I was mostly absent from the 2nd Ed scene, for which I am grateful in some ways.
I’ve had a lifelong relationship with D&D too; my mother plays it, my husband and I met because of it, and eventually I plan to teach my son to play.
Honestly, to answer the “how do you know you hate it” … look at yourself when you’re getting ready for the game. Do you approach prep with “Maybe THIS time it won’t suck?” You’re probably not really having fun. Are you entering your prep session with the same amount of joy you have when you walk into your office on Monday morning…or even less? You’re probably hating your game.
What do you do about it? Well, modding/house rules for the game is about it. You could try inventing your own game system, but I will give you all the benefit of the doubt and say you aren’t THAT insane. Game developers usually have some sort of nuerotic twitch, and need therapy, from what I hear. The one time I tried to make up a game system…well, like I said. Therapy.
Another possible solution, for slow combats anyway: a “speed game.” Basically craft a D&D session or campaign where there is no “let me look at my spell list,” there is no “should I take the five foot step, or shoot him from here?” Get one of those nifty timers like they use for chess. Buzzer goes off, player goes to a default action or skips that round, and his character stands there in confusion. Same for monsters. This obviously begins to not work for certain levels of characters (for me, that pain began around level 12); but as a one-session, “let’s see how insanely fast we can do this” gambit, it just might perk up your interest. And if nothing else it serves as a way to directly experiment and see how much time your players (and maybe you) are spending on combats that could be trimmed down.
All that aside, you keep coming back to the game. That says something else: that you love it for some reason. You hate it for many reasons, but whatever it is you love about D&D, that love is stronger than the hate of mechanics.
And that love is worth suffering for, a little bit, right?
I have played each version of D&D and each version, I echo your frustrations, as my own, but it never leaves me upset. I think that I have come to understand that D&D is an institution, but it is not my cornerstone game. I come to it, play it, and eventually leave it.
The game that most echo’s your feelings above, for me, is Shadowrun. I have every version of SR since I first saw the poster hanging in my game store, back in the late 80’s. For me, I hate the SR mechanics, and every version, there are promises that the mechanics are cleaned up, and every version, I have to import 10 lbs of d6’s.
In the 90’s I took the approach you are thinking of with Forgotten Realms, and took the entire SR universe and ported it to Palladium (withhold all jokes about mechanics). We played our SR Palladium game for some time, and loved it.
As I’ve walked through the valley of the shadow of… Each new edition (since 2nd), it has left me wanting more. I was late to the game in trying new things, and only right before 4th Ed shipped did I try new games… Since then, I have made a habit of getting new games, reading the rules, and figuring out what I like and don’t like about them.
Over time, I have been able to piece together the pieces that are consistent, and this has helped me kearn why I care for DnD less than other games. Of course sometimes my interests change, but at a given point in time, I generally fall into the following.
I want a game that…
1. Is cinematic – I love high flying adventure.
2. Has medium to light mechanics – I am a story oriented GM. Don’t want mechanics to control things. I am no rules lawyer.
3. Offers a way for PCs to do rerolls or special cinematics – I like to give pcs extra storytelling power, and the ability to work past a bad night of rolls.
4. Strong mental and social conflict resolution – When trying to get my players thinking about alternatives to killing or knocking out the big bad, it helps if the mechanics put alternatives to battle on a strong or equal footing to combat.
Sorry forr the length.. The point is, that knowing those four things, I can determine what kind of game system will support my GMing best. To me, it is pretty obvious that there are better choices to DnD for the kind of game I want to run/play in.
As a side note, I womder how much the marketing budget of WoTC has to do with going back… They can market d
5. Degrees of success or failure.
It is amazing that lately I’ve seen many people, bloggers, friends, etc echoing your feelings. I was actually going to do a post awhile back on it, but that idea ended up on the back burner.
I agree with Matthew J. Neagley to try E6. That is what I am currently trying with my Pathfinder Pirate campaign that just started. I HATE anything beyond level 10.
To me everything just gets too crunchy and as jonboywalton put it, everything gets easy and hard and the same time. Not to mention a little too silly (in some of the enemy and plot devices of that level).
In the last few years I’ve also looked at other systems that, while have a slightly different feel, have awoken an excitement in me that I haven’t felt about gaming in a long while. For me Savage Worlds, Dragon Age, and FATE have all earned a special place in my heart.
Like you I get burned out on DnD/Pathfinder (now- no 4e for me) and end up coming back to it hoping that somehow it will be different this time.. That maybe.. just maybe she’ll treat me better.. her emotions easier to read.. but no. She’s a tempting but hard mistress.
Sorry tapped the wrong button.. (submit)..
Marketing… WoTC sure has more money to create hype.. Guess it depends on your social circle.
Item five wasn’t meant for the post as a requirement, but a handy mechanic element that I find is nice icing on the cake.
I do the same thing. I’m about to start up a mini series campaign in 4e soon. I haven’t really given 4e a good shakedown, but I know the fit isn’t right for my group’s go to game. Still, D&D is the glue of the RPG industry. While it isn’t the game everybody plays, it is the game that everybody knows about and likely cut their teeth on. Your ex analogy is spot on. You may realize it wasn’t meant to be the one, but you still want to know what it is doing and how it has changed.
I quit playing D&D long ago, for the same reasons. To answer your question about taking your own pulse on enjoying a game system, to me it comes down to one simple concept: Are exciting things exciting? When you start a combat encounter and everyone groans, it’s not a good sign. When the wizards duel that takes a few minutes of game world time takes 30 minutes or an hour at the table of consulting charts and rulebooks, it’s time to go to a lighter system.
I think D&D has sacrificed playability at the altar of accuracy and balance. With seasoned players, a rules-light game with reasonable rulings by a competent GM makes play fast, fun, and creative.
I think you missed something: the other players. Like you, I’ve burned out on D&D several times and what has brought me back almost every time is other players wanting to play D&D. Sometimes you just can’t change systems even if you want to unless you care enough to quit your group entirely.
.
While I’ve never been burned on the system itself – I love D&D, but that’s not the point I want to make here – I have experienced some of the same issues that you seem to have with the system: Namely, the hours-long combat scenarios that seem to drag on forever and ever.
Mostly, this occurs with online games only (because it is my primary method of gaming). Back when I was gaming with other people at comic shops, it seemed we could get three or four good encounters through in a night, depending on the size of the group (and usually, we had at least 10 people around a table!). Yet, when I game these days, it feels more like I’m lucky to get through five or six rounds of combat when I’m only dealing with three or four people!
Part of it, unfortunately, boils down to the system. It is slow. It is clunky. It will ALWAYS be slow, and it will ALWAYS be clunky, because that is how the system operates. It has never deviated from the old formula: Everyone rolls to see whose turn goes first, then you go down the line one after another, and you are stuck there waiting for your turn to see what happens.
And honestly? It kind of sucks. I’ve done a lot of work in trying to find ways to streamline the combat process (my turns take, at most, maybe a minute or two, because I am prepared when the GM says its my turn, unless I have a question and it takes him a few minutes to reply). But the sad fact is, the system will always be slow and clunky because of how D&D works.
I love the d20 system to death. So much I recently tried to do a Pathfinder overhaul for the Modern and Future systems (which is working fairly well, overall). But I can still recognize when something is broken, and quite honestly, it’s the initiative thing that seems worst off. At one time, it made sense, but nowadays, it’s just one more thing that causes the game to slow down to a crawl. Throw in predictability and a lack of being able to think creatively 70% of the encounters, and you’re just asking for trouble.
D&D is one of those funny little games, even for those of us who’ve been gaming for less than ten years. We feel like it should be *the* game to play. It’s what made the hobby popular, after all. But I think we tend to get so wrapped up with all the bogged-down rules that we forget to have fun with the game sometimes.
I guess the real question I have for you after this long-winded rant, Martin, is can you peg down exactly what it is about the D&D games that seem to cause you so much frustration? Or for that matter, what is it exactly that attracts you to a tabletop RPG? There’s a ton of things to consider when running/playing an RPG, and one of the big ones has to do with how the GM expects the game to be run.
I find that, in using d20, the game can still be plenty exciting over level 10, but only if you’re doing it right for your group, and thinking outside of the box. Otherwise, it becomes that irritating grindfest that everyone seems to get so fed up with.
Martin, have you thought of doing mini-campaigns? Create one main arc that the players know about, and consider one that could emerge from within that to create a second lead-on arc. At the end of that, end it.
Ex: Arc 1 is “Kill the dragon laying waste to the countryside.” The players know this up front. The emergent arc could be that, in the course of progressing towards slaying the dragon (second or third session in), the players discover the dragon was lured there by the local lord so he could maintain power in the face of an imminent peasant uprising. With an immediate threat (the dragon), the uprising died before it began, giving the lord time to consolidate power or root out the main rabble-rousers. For the emergent arc, the players could either confront the lord head-on, or help support or lead the peasant uprising.
Game’s done in 3-5 sessions. It’s short but satisfying since it has a solid beginning with a clear premise (everyone knows what they’re making characters for), there’s a twist that draws them onward, and there is a definitive ending. It also gives people time to progress their characters but doesn’t become a grind. Most importantly, it doesn’t just peter out, trail off or end abruptly.
If folks are still in a D&D mood, start a new mini-campaign with a new DM so you get a chance to make heads roll as a player and recharge. Other players get to test out DM’ing without the worries of having to carry a game out over weeks and months.
Win-win all ’round.
The truth is, any game gets dull or frustrating after a while.
So I play a variety of games to keep things fresh. D&D, Shadowrun, and Savage Worlds give me plenty of variety. They all have weaknesses and strengths.
Hi all, completely understand your love and frustration of the D & D beast. I Started Red Box and loved Advanced D & D, then discovered Rolemaster and the novel concept Orcs could be dangerous.
I LOATHE D & D now, if you like video games or wargames with character sheets , its seems all good – but levels, hit point progression and clunky character gen makes me vomit.
I played HERO for a lot of years but it is horribly complex then discovered Runequest II – the figths still take a while but are so real world deadly, you don’t tend to have many…
You can create any sort of pc you can think of, no restrictions and 10 goblins and an Ogre are really dangerous no matter what your power level.
I think the thing that really turned me off D & D was my character getting shot by 3 long bow arrows, falling 100 feet and then rushing back into the fight…
…same scenario in Runequest and lets just say, you would not feel the fall…
D & D has discovered its niche, its WoW for table top games…
I have to echo some of the other sentiments here- it might not be an issue of something intrinsic to D&D per se- getting to 10th level and above usually takes a while, and maybe that’s the problem, too much time spent in the same game. Couple that with multiple editions (which, despite their differences, there are plenty of things that have always existed in D&D) and you might just have overall game fatigue. How often do you try to run other games for as long as you run D&D?
Actually, levels 10-12 in 3rd and 4th edition D&D are among my favorite. I’ve never had players groan when a fight start. They expect 2-3 battles per run, and we have fun with them.
I’m an old wargamer, you see, battle is part of what makes it fun for me. I like a strong story half, too, and interesting characters and interesting themes.
Combats don’t need to bog down, especially in 4e. I have homebrew power cards for all my players. They have the die roll modifier that they normally get written on the card, along with the damage. There’s no need to dig through the character sheet or books during a fight. In fact, I discourage it. I’ll just make a ruling and we’ll move on. And we don’t go back.
One of my favorite 3.5 characters as a player was a Wizard, level 10-12. I went to serious lengths to avoid the “stop the game while I look up that spell, could you pass me the book?” kind of thing. I had a binder with descriptions of each spell (typed into Word), and a printed spreadsheet/table that I used to prepare my spells and track them.
But maybe, as Jeff Carlsen said, any game gets dull after a while. What if you started characters at level 10 or so? Would the frustrations still be there?
I haven’t the foggiest idea about what you are talking about. 🙂
Burn out on D&D …. it’s Inconceivable!
Variety is the spice of (gaming) life.
I have played D&D since 1980 when my older brother got the 1977 “blue book” for his birthday. The whole family played, mom, dad, brother, and sister. It was good times.
I played 1st Edition with my brother and his friends off and on. Mostly when they weren’t sick of me ruining their best laid plans with my Ranger who had a talent for pointing out the obvious and then doing that. Heh. I also played “basic D&D” red box with my own friends.
Then I played 2nd edition D&D with my friends in high school and all the way through college. We rarely went past 10th level during a school year, so maybe the pain we had then wasn’t the same as many note above. I played a little Gamma World, enough to know that I didn’t really like it. And I played some old school Star Trek rpg briefly and had a good time with it.
It was also in college where I experienced a lot of new gaming systems, and I found my favorite D&D world setting – Dark Sun. I played White Wolf’s Vampire game, 2nd edition – I like the mechanics of this system best, even to this very day. Shadowrun 1st and 2nd editions were awesome revelations, even though the problems of those systems are easy to see. I played Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay as well – very odd and interesting system, like ‘Tomb Of Horrors’ on crack. And a superhero game called Aberrant.
I played 3rd edition, and 3.5, only briefly. Briefly because I HATE this edition of D&D. Why? It provoked more arguments at the table than any version of D&D before or since. Hate.It. Moving on….
I like Shadowrun 4th edition, it’s fun, even with its obvious flaws. I like 4th edition D&D quite a bit, and its my favorite D&D edition ever. Recently I have also branched out to try Dread rpg and Apocalypse World rpg, both have their flaws and their good selling points. I also play a TON of different board games. I guess I find it hard to burn out on one system as long as I keep rotating the games I am playing. Play one thing and only one thing? That is just begging for burn out. D&D is what it is, and if you are experiencing burn out, play something else for a while, come back to it when you feel like it. Nothing requires you to be loyal to only one game or system. Try new things or do other games you enjoy. Enjoy the wonderous and infinite variety that is rpg gaming.
By coincidence I came across a binder containing notes from a White Box D&D campaign older than everyone here, probably.
Did you know that it took a million XP to get to 20th level in them days? No hyperbole there, level 20 was 1×10 to the 6th XPs worth of effort.
And hit dice stopped being rolled at 10th level, with single points being allocated from then on. 20th level granted 10 Dn +9 hit points.
I’ve only ever played one 3.5 game where everyone became epic (except me, on account of an epic sorcerer was an epic waste of time under 3.5) and the GM stopped running it because he was having difficulty coming up with challenges.
And the combat took forever and it was always because some magic spell needed to be researched for ten minutes before it could be used. I took the step of rewriting all my spells as notes and attaching hem to my character sheet but I couldn’t interest the others in doing so, and besides, some of those spells were very involved in what they did under various circumstances.
I thoroughly enjoyed the game, though, and wish we could have continued with it.
And although I don’t have the years of experience with D&D to comment on the “broken-ness” of the various incarnations, many people have echoed your thoughts almost to the word on 3.5 and 4e, Martin.
Which makes me wonder something else: These things are playtested until the handles come off. Why then do these issues arise at all? Is it the old software development paradigm at work? A massively parallel attack that comes at the product in so many ways it uncovers problems months of linear tests don’t see?
Oh Well. A very thought-provoking article. Thanks for sharing.
D&D … blech.
A very thought provoking article, to be sure, although I really do wonder why you keep going back at all. I played AD&D a lot at Uni – so probably about two years of serious dungeoneering – and fun as it was at the time there were so many problems with it that I don’t see in other game systems. The whole level business seems so clunky, and classes, and all the table lookup that was required for any combat action, and so on and so on.
The only game I’ve played more table-intensive was MERP. Only played that a couple of times before steam was lost.
Anyway. My current roleplaying career started with a D20 Modern campaign. I had my doubts, frankly: even though it was based on 3rd ed rules I was still very dubious. And it was a lot smoother that AD&D so some of the horrors were mitigated but there were still levels and insane munchkinning opportunities in the spell rules, and all of that.
So I went back to CoC with my group, and then we migrated to Savage Worlds – which has levels, and XP, but they seem a lot less bizarre. I think it was the class system that was really winding me up, in the end.
No more D&D for me, I suspect. That crazy bitch can keep the records.
I started in 1977, as a player to somebody else’s box. I played all through 1e AD&D and probably spent the bulk of my gaming life in 2e AD&D, until our DM was killed in an accident, and we had an almost 8 year hiatus on RPGing altogether, though we still played games.
I missed 3.0, but joined back in well into 3.5 so I never got the huge load of books that most 3.5-ers do.
When 4.0 came about, I had no interest in moving to that, since I hadn’t yet been burned out on 3.5, however Pathfinder being more like 3.5 has attracted me, and now I’m a solid fan.
I’ve played many games other than D&D, but never lost my love for it. I don’t have this love/hate relationship with it at all. I never have.
GP
Holy Coincidence! A few days ago, my reply to a friend’s comment that he still misses D&D 3.5: “I miss it, then I play it again, and I don’t miss it anymore. Kind of like an unhealthy relationship with a hot ex.”
While D&D 3.5 got me back into the gamer fold, I like to think I’ve outgrown it. Having played other games, I find it too restrictive. Don’t get me started on D&D 4E; it’s a good small tactics wargame, but not the RPG I’d want to play.
@Kurt “Telas” Schneider – In thinking about this, I believe D&D is the way it is because of the ‘level up’ aspect. Other games have it, too, but not to the same magnitude. Basically, characters get more complex and powerful on a number of different aspects at each level (hit points, attack bonus, feats, spells, abilities, etc). Add enough of these levels up, and it’s about as fun as double-clutching on an icy road while turning left against traffic, with your wife on the phone and and a hot coffee in your hand.
Simply put, characters not only go too quickly from zero to hero, but they keep on going… and going… and going…
How do you avoid this? Play a game with a slower advancement schedule. Use E6. Agree that you’ll ‘advance more slowly’ while in the sweet spot for D&D.
I’m with you on this, Telas. The D&D games I’ve enjoyed least are the ones where there’s been one or two players for whom the object has been to level-up rather than enjoying the journey. A friend maintains he doesn’t like most fantasy games because the leveling aspect feels too much like a videogame (so muchj so that he rarely ventures outside of the Third Imperium).
I also have to agree with your evaluation of 4E as being a tactical wargame. I think there a lot of big hints at the DM providing the roleplaying opportunities in 4E, but there’s not much advice on how to work this in to the game. Reading though the Essentials adventures, “adventures” have been stripped of any pretense of roleplaying, and reduced to a string of potential combat situations. A good DM can make hay out of the in-between spaces, but there’s not a lot of guidence for the newbies (for whom the Essentials sets are presumably intended).
Having said that, one of my most memorable gaming sessions was a 4E game set in the Birthright setting (if anyone from WotC is reading, please put Birthright on the list of 4E reworkings). Most of the group was away that week, so the session involved just my filthy elf and Thomas’s righteous paladin breaking into a fortified stead and trying not to get into a fight we had no hope of coming out of intact. No combat but high tension (with an exceptional DM at the helm).
Sorry I got off track a little. To bring it back, you can make a silk purse from a 4E’er, but I wouldn’t expect to be enjoying the game into 9th/10th/11th levels as much as I did at 2nd/3rd/4th.
@Kurt “Telas” Schneider – Quick Question (TM): Do you leave the Massive Damage rules turned *on* in your D&D 3.5 games?
I run a couple of D20-based games, and I make it clear that the players are playing with the Massive Damage rules turned on as per the rulebook (the actual threshold values vary by game – Conan 2nd ed has a MD threshold at 35 – I think – while Call of Cthulhu sets it at 10 for humans).
I find it reduces the headlong rush into Godhood and makes players a bit more wary about how quickly they unsheathe their swords. Of course, the bad guys get iced occasionally too. That’s life.
Thank you to everyone who commented! This was cathartic to write, and it was even more catahartic — and fun — to read your thoughts on this topic.
@jonboywalton – It’s funny, but a couple of campaigns ago we went 1-21, and it was the story and seeing the characters grow and change that kept me engaged long after the mechanics made me want to die. In 3.5, there’s some really compelling story to be had as you climb through levels 11+ — your characters, particularly spellcasters, can really reshape the world.
@Hawkesong – “All that aside, you keep coming back to the game. That says something else: that you love it for some reason. You hate it for many reasons, but whatever it is you love about D&D, that love is stronger than the hate of mechanics.”
That right there is why I think the fucked-up-relationship analogy works for me: You could be talking about a fucked up relationship! And you’re right. Your comment really resonated with me.
@lomythica – Having a list like that makes a lot of sense, as long as it doesn’t keep you from trying new games that don’t hit everything on it. (I’m not saying it does, just saying.) Definitely a good idea for taking the pulse of a system during a game, though: “I like 1-4, this game only has #3. That’s a problm.” Good advice!
@John Arcadian – “Still, D&D is the glue of the RPG industry.” Well said.
@MonsterMike – Re: starting combat with a groan, amen. D&D 4e has that for me in spades, and recognizing that in hindsight was a useful lesson.
@maxkaladin – Yep, I did miss that. Sometimes all it takes is one other person in the group who gets the itch and they pull everyone else along with them.
@E-l337 – Sure, I can peg what pisses me off mechanically about 4e: 1) combat, while fantastically exciting, takes way too fucking long, and 2) there’s almost nothing to the system except combat, leaving you playing against the system if you like other stuff. My problem is that I can see that now, after the fact, but not so clearly during the fact.
@Rafe – We tend to do arcs like that, but longer; making them shorter would help, but it wouldn’t change what I dislike about a system, just whether or not I blow a gasket before the game ends. Still, sound advice!
@davethegame – I actually haven’t run D&D since 2005; I’ve been a player. It’s not general burnout for me, though I’ve been there over the years.
@Toldain – Yes, for me I think the same frustration would be there starting at level 10 as working my way up to it.
@Troy E. Taylor – If you ever burn out on D&Dk, Troy, I’ll know we’re all in trouble!
@crowofpyke – Agreed! I’m a lifelong D&D player but also a lifelong RPG experimenter; I play and run all sorts of things.
@Dunx – “That crazy bitch can keep the records.” Jesus, but this thread is packed with great one-liners!
@Kurt “Telas” Schneider – Slower advancement can be a fine thing. I remember lingering over levels for months with 2e, which helped make the game more about the roleplaying and the characters and less about the mechanics; it was a fun time.
@Martin Ralya – Okay, maybe someone’s already said this, but if shorter campaign arcs “wouldn’t change what I dislike about a system,” why not go with a system that allows you to replicate the around-the-table elements (or whatever elements) of D&D you enjoy but with a game system that you actually want to pair with said enjoyment? You are not lacking in options, I’d say.
To put it coarsely, if you’re going back to your ex because she has a great rack… but you want to blow your brains out whenever she opens her mouth, find a woman with a great rack who can hold a conversation. 🙂
(That analogy works from the straight female perspective, too, obviously. However, since we’re talking within the structure of female ex’s and I’m a straight guy anyway… well, there you have it.)
Beyond the mechanical breakdowns, I find generic systems like D&D (or GURPS) eventually include *every* little idea that ever crossed anyone’s mind until they become bland grey mush. There is no focus. Every campaign setting become Greyhawk with new names.
I was very excited by the Eberron setting. Swashbuckling duels on Lightning Trains! Warforged! Wild adventures on airships! Indiana Jones meets High Fantasy!
But, the fact that WotC added ALL races/classes/magic systems/blah blah killed the focus and strangled the fun for me. Every WotC book, PHB 1,000,001, and so on, got integrated. All the generic races that had no connection to the setting were included.
Yes, you could house-rule it down to size, but if you are saving time by using WotC material, you have to reinvent bits and pieces with every new purchase. So if you have a problem with the mechanics anyway, why not use another system?
It’s probably no accident that the two games I’m playing now are based on already existing worlds. The games designers had to limit their choices to create a “feel” that the fans of the worlds would demand.
I GM Rogue Trader, set in Games Workshop’s 40k world. Designers can’t add just anything that comes to mind, they need to keep it dark, grim, and gritty. The only humor allowed is black humor. Technology and psychic powers come with a heavy price. The mechanics include critical hit tables to die for 😉 with severed limbs, exploding heads, and blood spurts that slick up the floor so much characters may slip in it.
I’m a player in aSong of Ice and Fire roleplaying campaign, based on the George RR Martin novels. Everything is political, the feudal system is heavy handed, and power corrupts. Treachery, shit, piss, and blood are the order of the day. Trying to be a hero in this world is a constant struggle.
I’m not saying you couldn’t make a focused game without an external IP to tie it to, but you would need to create a bible for your world to take the place of the IP. If anyone’s played well focused games not based on existing IP, I’d love to learn about them.
@Nojo – Well said, Nojo. My biggest gripe with WotC has always been that whenever they create a new world, they fill it up with “all of your old favourites”, i.e. everything they’ve ever published in every setting that’s gone before. I liked the tweaks and new stuff in Eberron (my favourite of the “official” settings), like the dinosaur-riding halflings and, of course, the warforged, but with more and more ingredients it started to lose it’s unique flavour, just what lured us in in the first place.
I know a good GM can cherrypick the bits he or she wants in the mix and ditch the rest, but I don’t think they should have to do that in the first place. Sometimes less really is more.
@Rafe – We’re speaking the same language — I don’t have a problem playing or running other stuff. Lifetime stats-wise I’ve played as much other stuff as I’ve played D&D, and run more other stuff than D&D. What I’m interested in is why D&D works this way (for me), and how to spot problems like the ones I have with D&D earlier (for anyone).
Oh, I’m sorry — I mistook the anecdote for being the issue as opposed to highlighting what is a common issue for many! (And well said, by the way.)
man I’m glad that I’m not the only one who feels like this. I loved the older editions of D&D but have been away from gaming for a bit. I played 3rd, it was ok, but the game did seem to take a lot longer than it used to when we got involved in combat. Fast forward to 4E, I joined a new gaming group (Finding a new group is always painful) and we tried 4E. The story was great, the people I played with were great, the game itself…..not so great. It seemed very video gamish to me with all the powers, but it did sound cool at first.The game was going great until we hit the combat, man did it take FOREVER!! I felt like I wanted to scream a Monty Python quote “Get on with it”. We played two more times but decided to drop 4E, the game just came to a screeching halt during combat. I recently tried other games like All Flesh must be eaten (very cool game) but I know I’ll eventually go back to D&D and will probably try 5E when it comes out.
I feel the same way. I personally cannot bring myself to play DnD. I play other games but given the choice I do not play DnD. I played 2E, 3E, and 3.5 but at some point I just found myself not having fun with the game anymore. I bought the core books for 4E when they dropped, read them, and then sat down to create a campaign. I like the game, setting, and ideas, but for some reason I could not and still cannot muster any enthusiasm to actually play the game.