• The Infractions Forum is available for public view. Please note that if you have been suspended you will need to open a private/incognito browser window to view it.

At what point did you decide that you never want to play D&D ever again?

Pteryx

Simulator & Spellcaster
Validated User
The mention of Adventurer's League reminds me: in general, AL looks as though it encapsulates a large cluster of what I want to avoid in D&D. By necessity, who the characters are don't matter and the plot is rigid. You're basically narrated from combat encounter to combat encounter. You may not even get continuity other than character growth out of the endeavor. It's different enough in overall character that it would be hard to even judge player suitability for other things by gritting my teeth and going along with it.

And AL and PFS seem to be the main things in easy reach in my vicinity.

The rest of the D&D around here looks to be in pubs, which doesn't suggest the correct atmosphere for the kind of game I'd want to play either.
 

DocShoveller

Godwin's Lawman
Validated User
The mention of Adventurer's League reminds me: in general, AL looks as though it encapsulates a large cluster of what I want to avoid in D&D. By necessity, who the characters are don't matter and the plot is rigid. You're basically narrated from combat encounter to combat encounter. You may not even get continuity other than character growth out of the endeavor. It's different enough in overall character that it would be hard to even judge player suitability for other things by gritting my teeth and going along with it.

And AL and PFS seem to be the main things in easy reach in my vicinity.

The rest of the D&D around here looks to be in pubs, which doesn't suggest the correct atmosphere for the kind of game I'd want to play either.
FWIW, I've run both AL and PFS and find PFS scenarios vastly superior for roleplaying and narrative. I can recommend quite a few that are more than a string of combat encounters, if it helps. I much prefer 5e as a system, but Paizo's organised play is the best one I know.
 

Arevashti

Aspiring World-Builder
Validated User
I almost got soured on it before I even started. While I had a definite interest—especially in Planescape and Dark Sun—even as a little baby nerdlet, the first local game store I ever set foot in was a hostile environment.

But later, I got together a gaming group, which somewhat mitigated that. And later, I found other sources for my material, which obviated the need for the Hostile Local Gaming Store altogether. (Also: 5e and Pathfinder both beat AD&D hollow.)
 

DragonPgmmr

Displaced Midwesterner
Validated User
I haven't ever quit. Not in 38 years. I currently run 2 games, 3.5 and a Pathfinder. I haven't transitioned to 5e yet simply because my group(s) haven't had the need for rule changes. I will most likely make that transition soon; as, though the majority of my players I've gamed with for a range of 10 to 30 years, the newer, younger, members are now running their own games that are 5e.
 

Aleksandar Mari

Registered User
Validated User
I don't remember what was the 'straw that broke the camel's back', but I do recall that after experiencing the Baldur's Gate saga on the computer, reading the (at the time) newly published third edition and Forgotten Realms campaign setting - my interest started to wane. The first hit was the disappointment in the flexibility of the third edition rules. While they were certainly better, for me the game had lost some of its uniqueness. It appeared that the power level of the player characters had spiked, and that what was out of reach for second edition characters had become mundane in the new edition.

As years passed I became increasingly more critical of D&D, realizing just how much of the game was encompassed by the miniature wargaming combat and how little it stimulated role-play, or the adventures that I was actually interested in experiencing. While you could role-play just about anything within D&D, the systems itself incentivizes a style of play that is more reminiscent of a computer game, and heavily mechanical (optimize character, raid dungeon, kill dragon, take loot) in execution. Then fourth edition came along and gave a solid reason for a total break with its MMO, even more videogame-like rules. Pathfinder, despite the pretty design - failed to stimulate my interest, because it was just more of the same. I have recently skimmed over fifth edition, and while I am supportive of the changes I witnessed there - it all seems like a retread and the been-there done-that feel hangs so heavily over the books, I realize that whatever D&D does - I will likely never play it again.

Finally, Talislanta (4E), Fading Suns, Mouse Guard and others showed up (meaning, I learnt of their existence) - demonstrating to me the extent of what could be done with RPGs. Talislanta in particular wiped away the D&D system and its generic settings like a bad dream, making it seem hopelessly mired in unimportant mechanical issues and thoroughly mundane, as opposed to exotic. Mouse Guard showed that the 'epic' feel could be pared down to apparently banal real-world phenomena (weather, wild animals), while losing none of the gravitas of a good adventure. Fading Suns demonstrated a staggering scope of ideas and potential that no D&D setting could ever hope to match, even if it is buried in a badly designed system.

My one regret? That Planescape is not re-released for the new edition of D&D or other, simpler, systems. It is the sole setting that I would still gladly engage with.
 
Last edited:

Daz Florp Lebam

Registered User
Validated User
After playing 4th edition for roughly the first year of its release, so some time in 2009, I guess. I respect the game, its design, and the work put into it, but it just wasn't for me, or our group in general.

(Then I came back about a year and a half ago and have been running 5E pretty much weekly since. Not because it's necessarily "great", but because we find it more manageable and accessible.)
 
Last edited:

fearsomepirate

Registered User
Validated User
I include unabashed clones (e.g. all OSR games and Pathfinder) under the "D&D" heading. I haven't quit yet, but I'll quit when I get tired of hobgoblins, castles, and mace-wielding clerics. I may or may not stick with the official version until I do...ACKS and 13th Age both are intriguing, but they're both D&D variants as far as I'm concerned.

Once I'm done, I'll either find a new hobby or find a game that isn't about slaying dragons to gank their loot.
 

the cat

Drone
Validated User
I would still play 4e or BECMI if the opportunity for a good game came up and I had the time. But I dropped out of D&D in general during the playtesting phase of 5e. It became clear to me that they were trying desperately to throw away everything I loved about my favorite edition in order to appeal to people who hated that edition, and people whose main interest was nostalgia. ('Does this feel like the goblins you remember from the old days?') Things like the terrible push polls didn't help, either.

I haven't looked into 5e very much since then. By the popularity it's gotten, I admit that it's entirely possible they managed to make it into a good game regardless of the terrible first impression it made on me. But it's too late for me. The Wizards design team made it very clear that they didn't want me as a player of their game, and I'm fine with granting them their wish.
This is where I am at as well. I have played 5th and it wasnt quite what I was looking for so I walked.
 

Witness123

Registered User
Validated User
Which time?
I left 1e, because I came to dislike the patchwork nature of the rules, many of Gygax's additions from the original Greyhawk supplement, the cleric, and lack of customization. Furthermore, my introduction to both Hero System and Rolemaster also caught my attention and showed my alternatives that I had wanted

I came back with 2e due to Priests of Specific Mythoi/Specialty Priests, more customization for Thieves, Complete Fighter's Handbook, Compete Priest's Handbook, Complete Thief's Handbook, Dark Sun (original boxed set), Ravenloft: Realms of Terror. These factors made me willing to try AD&D again with friends whom felt Rolemaster and Hero System were too complex in character generation. However, into the Dark Sun release schedule followed by the Revised Darksun boxed set and Planescape, I disliked direction that 2e was taking and some of the D&D rules continued to bother me so I left again.

3.0 caught my attention with its unified system, ascending AC, skill point system, three saves, and addressing a few other issues that I had with D&D. I bought the core books, but did not run it as I had issues with some of the classes and disliked the WOTC supplements. However, products from Green Ronin and some other third party products kept me checking out D&D. Finally, I jumped in with the 3.5 Unearthed Arcana. It is a game that I enjoyed running up to levels 10-12 provided that I house ruled several things, banned both some WOTC core stuff and nearly every WOTC supplement.
I left 3e for a few reasons: a portion of the online community, WOTC's position switching mid 3.5 from D&D is a toolbox and the DM is in charge and should only allow things that fit the campaign to the DM should try to allow anything that a player wants to play from an official book

I skipped 4e. There were several things that I really liked about 4e. However I disliked
a) what I perceived as the focus on their default setting (e.g. several of the cleric feats were associated with specific deities and which did not fit my campaign's deities (or any deity I would create) and there was feel to the default setting based on much of the equipment (e.g. leaf armor) and several class powers (e.g. many barbarian powers having elemental keyword) that created a default feel that I did not like;
b) several of the classes (e.g. the barbarian, cleric (got somewhat better with later supplements), avenger, invoker (which sucked, because I like the idea of robed priests type);
c) paragon paths and epic destinies being assumed for mid to high level play which meant 4e would be another edition that I would not play past level 10 or so (I disliked 3e Prc's but they were at least optional);
d) splitting up demons into 3 Monster Manuals, the Demonomicon, and Planes Below, (edit: and Dragon Magazine) seemed like a money grab (as did moving some traditional monsters dating 1e from MM1 to later Monster Manuals);
e) the AC and saves seemed inflated to me- just because;
f) the keyword system and powers reminded me of Hero System/Champions, but the results of some the implementation not done as well.

5e: I like a lot of the base rules. However, once I past that, I have issues with the game. First, I dislike several of the phb classes (cleric, monk, sorcerer) and the majority of the PHB subclasses, I find myself severely disappointed with their design. Second, as with nearly every 3e WOTC supplement, I find the myself disliking the content of 5e official supplements (especially, the new subclasses). Mearl's twitch design episodes just further my dislike for the current designers of subclasses. Third, while, I have found some good third party material, but I think my house rules will be as large as AD&D 1e to 3e. I don't know that I want to go through that again (although, at times, I do attempt to work on a house rules document); and, finally, it is another edition that I would not want to run or play past level 10-12 (and only with the right group).
 
Last edited:

Evan Waters

Talented Amateur
Validated User
I am surprised. Given its location, I was expecting the a lot more variations on "I haven't" in this thread. Which is my answer FWIW.

Er, what? 4e massively reduced the power levels compared with 3.5, and 5e brought them back up. For example: Standard-action long-range point-to-point teleport is available to Wizards from level 9 in 3.5 and level 29 in 4e. The difference is not always that stark, but it is indicative of the general trend: Powerful and/or potentially disruptive effects come online at much higher levels (or not at all) in 4e than in 3e or 5e.

_
glass.
4th did make the early levels a bit more powerful- just by nature of everyone having more HP, and you can probably take at least two or three hits, so the 1st-level Wizard doesn't have to worry about being downed by a single hit from a kobold, etc. You're a little less cautious in terms of what fights to get into. But at the same time it flats out some of the high-level stuff (most notably spells.) It's more stretching the "sweet spot" that emerged in earlier editions.
 
Top Bottom