Some people never really learned DND either, but kind of get carried along by the group. I feel like you could switch out systems on those people and they wouldn’t do any worse.
But I get it. Some people are more casual. Some people have executive dysfunction. My current strategy is to find people who want to play what I want to play, and it’s working okay. Still makes me a little sad that DND is so mega popular, but okay.
It’s one of the hardest to learn, imo. 5e is very inconsistent and has a lot of rules even if they suck. Heck, if i had more confidence in wotc I’d say they deliberately designed 5e to make people feel this way, Pathfinder is far more consistent and WoD takes all of five minutes to learn how to play!
On the other hand, DMing also involves a lot of homework, so it’s completely understandable that someone might want to switch to doing homework for a different subject on occasion.
I was once explaining a rules lite system I wanted to try to someone, and he kept complaining about how difficult it would be for him to learn a new system. I had to point out that I had already fully explained the rules while we were talking, and we weren’t even talking long.
I think some people just think every system is as complex as D&D.
This is very often a thing people believe! Especially if the other system they’re looking at is like Pathfinder (similarly complex) or some close D&D relatives that have a different set of arbitrary numbers. Like, in this game a 15 strength is +3! We have 50 feats with similar names but different behaviors! They might not even realize that not every game has six stats, or long lists of “feats”, or anything even like “feats”. And a lot of games (most of them?) don’t have weird tables and mappings.
Like if you’re playing Fate Core, and you want to burgle, you just your burgle score. One number.
But I think a lot of the time when people present that kind of resistance, it’s coming from an emotional place. Telling them facts isn’t going to do much. They might feel embarrassed about not being good at the new game. They might feel bad about spending $80 on the D&D books and unusual dice when the new game has a free book and just uses d6. That kind of stuff. Unfortunately, most people aren’t really introspective enough to surface those feelings quickly and accurately. (I include myself in “most people” there, sadly.)
I had a guy in an old group that once with full sincerity said “The best thing about D&D is we can just try out different house rules, and if we don’t like them we can change something out.” Like, my guy, that’s not a unique property of D&D. If anything, D&D is harder to homebrew because it has oddly specific rules and assumptions.
Pathfinder is close enough to D&D that I’ve had success converting people to it because fuck Wizards of the Coast and their recurring attempts to gouge everyone with mandatory subscriptions and predatory licensing rackets.
Also Pathfinder’s setting is downright more creative because they don’t keep digging deeper into that boring old “what if underdark and illithids… AGAIN?” well.
I haven’t played Pathfinder 2e but my understanding is it had a lot more choices at the turn level and character build level. that’s good if you want that, but I think for a lot of people the shallowness of 5e is a plus. There are other games that would also be a good fit if you’re not looking for deep tactics or builds, though.
It’s unfortunate, because I do find D&D creatively dry and stale especially now. WOTC focuses heavily on its “original monsters do not steal” and tends to rehash and rehash them for settings and stories a lot.
I run two groups right now - one for d&d and one for Blades in the Dark. Blades group are people with whom we tried D&D before but they found it too combat-focused and “like someone put his gross math fetish into a game”. First group I may one day run Pathfinder 2e for ew camapign. Second one I don’t even suggest this option.
People complain about it a lot, but I’ve never actually ran into a system that uses any maths beyond what a five-year-old should be capable of. Closest I think might be Mutants and Masterminds with stacking multipliers, but still just some extra steps. Nothing that knowing your times tables wouldn’t prepare you for.
D&D and Pathfinder are like Baseball and Softball, maybe. But going from D&D to Fate or PbtA is like changing to football or fencing. It’s very different. Trying to get someone who’s playing Baseball to take up soccer is tricky. D&D is baseball. Pathfinder is softball. Easier transition.
I think it’s an error to treat “I play DND” the same as “I play RPGs”. It’s like “I play baseball” vs “I play sports”.
There are too many reasons to succinctly list why people might be sticking to DND.
In my experience, you’ll have better luck finding players who want to play something else rather than trying to convert DND players.
People just don’t like homework. (Which is perfectly understandable) And for most people most of the time, learning a new system is homework.
Some people never really learned DND either, but kind of get carried along by the group. I feel like you could switch out systems on those people and they wouldn’t do any worse.
But I get it. Some people are more casual. Some people have executive dysfunction. My current strategy is to find people who want to play what I want to play, and it’s working okay. Still makes me a little sad that DND is so mega popular, but okay.
I’m imagining someone switching to Pathfinder 2e, not telling anyone, and whenever it comes up they say it’s house rules.
I also feel like D&D is kinda hard to learn and has decades of terminology and baggage that contribute to that. Ah well
It’s one of the hardest to learn, imo. 5e is very inconsistent and has a lot of rules even if they suck. Heck, if i had more confidence in wotc I’d say they deliberately designed 5e to make people feel this way, Pathfinder is far more consistent and WoD takes all of five minutes to learn how to play!
On the other hand, DMing also involves a lot of homework, so it’s completely understandable that someone might want to switch to doing homework for a different subject on occasion.
I was once explaining a rules lite system I wanted to try to someone, and he kept complaining about how difficult it would be for him to learn a new system. I had to point out that I had already fully explained the rules while we were talking, and we weren’t even talking long.
I think some people just think every system is as complex as D&D.
This is very often a thing people believe! Especially if the other system they’re looking at is like Pathfinder (similarly complex) or some close D&D relatives that have a different set of arbitrary numbers. Like, in this game a 15 strength is +3! We have 50 feats with similar names but different behaviors! They might not even realize that not every game has six stats, or long lists of “feats”, or anything even like “feats”. And a lot of games (most of them?) don’t have weird tables and mappings.
Like if you’re playing Fate Core, and you want to burgle, you just your burgle score. One number.
But I think a lot of the time when people present that kind of resistance, it’s coming from an emotional place. Telling them facts isn’t going to do much. They might feel embarrassed about not being good at the new game. They might feel bad about spending $80 on the D&D books and unusual dice when the new game has a free book and just uses d6. That kind of stuff. Unfortunately, most people aren’t really introspective enough to surface those feelings quickly and accurately. (I include myself in “most people” there, sadly.)
I had a guy in an old group that once with full sincerity said “The best thing about D&D is we can just try out different house rules, and if we don’t like them we can change something out.” Like, my guy, that’s not a unique property of D&D. If anything, D&D is harder to homebrew because it has oddly specific rules and assumptions.
Pathfinder is close enough to D&D that I’ve had success converting people to it because fuck Wizards of the Coast and their recurring attempts to gouge everyone with mandatory subscriptions and predatory licensing rackets.
Also Pathfinder’s setting is downright more creative because they don’t keep digging deeper into that boring old “what if underdark and illithids… AGAIN?” well.
I haven’t played Pathfinder 2e but my understanding is it had a lot more choices at the turn level and character build level. that’s good if you want that, but I think for a lot of people the shallowness of 5e is a plus. There are other games that would also be a good fit if you’re not looking for deep tactics or builds, though.
It’s unfortunate, because I do find D&D creatively dry and stale especially now. WOTC focuses heavily on its “original monsters do not steal” and tends to rehash and rehash them for settings and stories a lot.
I run two groups right now - one for d&d and one for Blades in the Dark. Blades group are people with whom we tried D&D before but they found it too combat-focused and “like someone put his gross math fetish into a game”. First group I may one day run Pathfinder 2e for ew camapign. Second one I don’t even suggest this option.
People complain about it a lot, but I’ve never actually ran into a system that uses any maths beyond what a five-year-old should be capable of. Closest I think might be Mutants and Masterminds with stacking multipliers, but still just some extra steps. Nothing that knowing your times tables wouldn’t prepare you for.
me slowly putting away my logarithmic power curve and orbital mechanics RPG that no one will ever play
I’ve come to fear most people are idiots, seems even addition can confuse the average person.
I think more like “I play baseball” Vs “I play softball/rounders/cricket”.
It’s not that difficult to convince people who enjoy little league to try standard baseball.
D&D and Pathfinder are like Baseball and Softball, maybe. But going from D&D to Fate or PbtA is like changing to football or fencing. It’s very different. Trying to get someone who’s playing Baseball to take up soccer is tricky. D&D is baseball. Pathfinder is softball. Easier transition.