Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Azar_of_Faerun 01-01-07, 10:07 AM	Howdy all :) Two days ago, I was at a Powells Bookstore, browsing around, and eventually reached the fantasy RPG books section when I heard something strange. "D&D is something you grow out of, when you become an adult I mean. The idea, the prospect of the game is fun, but it's too cluttered by the rules to go anywhere." The guy mentioned more things, but nothing else was relevant. What do you think of this statement?
HauptSin 01-01-07, 10:16 AM	He's right, a comprehensive system in which one can do basically anything with a little work and thinking can't go anywhere.
Sim_antix 01-01-07, 10:17 AM	Many things adults like are "cluttered with rules" so that statement has no relevance whatsoever.
Crystal Monk 01-01-07, 10:19 AM	the number of parents who play D&D with their kids nowadays pretty much proves both parts of that wrong - you don't grow out of it, and it can't be that cluttered if you can teach it to someone as young as six or seven. :D
Odimax 01-01-07, 10:23 AM	Strange. I feel like D&D is something you "grow into". At first, it seems cool, but you might not completely understand how the game is supposed to work. Then you begin to play, and slowly figure it out. The youngest person in my gaming group is my wife, who is 25. We are all having a good time, and I don't see myself "growing out of it" anytime soon.
green_yawgmoth 01-01-07, 10:27 AM	The people who think D&D is something you grow out of are the same people who think that anything animated is for kids, and magic is too complicated to learn in under an hour. In other words, I'm surprised they can dress themselves without assistance. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
Azar_of_Faerun 01-01-07, 10:31 AM	Poor Barinalo, we barely knew him
Board_Rider 01-01-07, 10:39 AM	I think that the statement holds water when it pretains to the casual gamer. The reasoning is flawed though. Most ex-gamers that I know quit playing D&D because hey found other hobbies, such as snowboarding and dating that they couldn't do as kids which now take the place of D&D. Additionally, there is the large task of working. Schedules and life simply move to the forefront of issues being addressed. D&D is simply left behind. Gamers who love the game, like myself, keep it as a hobby because we view the game differently than a casual gamer does. Simple as that.
Drucilla_Rocks_my_Socks 01-01-07, 10:46 AM	If they mean D&D specifically, I might see that...if they mean RPGs in general then they are completely wrong. I personally would like to play stuff other than D&D, but it's tough to get a group going for other stuff. People know what you mean when you say "Would you like to join my dungeons and dragons campiegn." My solution is to run it the way I like and not worry abou all he Official BS that is out there. It's a pretty good base to work off of if you have a brain and no how to pick and choose and make a decent campiegn setting.
MHolland 01-01-07, 11:32 AM	I discovered girls, sports, computer games and everything else life as an adult has to offer. However, I have never "grown out" of D&D at all and I don't think I ever will. I think a person may choose to get into new things and leave the old ones by the wayside but that doesn't mean they have grown out of anything, it just means they made a change.
UniversalSnip 01-01-07, 11:53 AM	Did you expect anyone who had grown out of D&D to be posting on these forums?
dayrat 01-01-07, 12:08 PM	Howdy all :) Two days ago, I was at a Powells Bookstore, browsing around, and eventually reached the fantasy RPG books section when I heard something strange. "D&D is something you grow out of, when you become an adult I mean. The idea, the prospect of the game is fun, but it's too cluttered by the rules to go anywhere." The guy mentioned more things, but nothing else was relevant. What do you think of this statement? It is really hard to know what the point was without more context. Was he advocating a different system with less rules? Was he talking about the concept of roleplaying in general? He is right about one thing, our tastes change over time and many people will stop playing D&D or switch to another game.
Quantumflux 01-01-07, 12:19 PM	Hello all I started playing at the age of 14 and am now 41, I believe that role playing games are definately not something you grow out of. My wife also plays and has done for over 10 years, she also was playing before I met her. Now we also play D&D with our nephew and his father, it is in the family so to speak. I think RPG's are a great method of breaking down the age barrier and a great tool for building friendships with people of all backgrounds. Regards QF
DIESCUMDIE 01-01-07, 12:30 PM	Most people are like this http://www.getoffourisland.com/index_files/DeeperOrigins.htm. These people aren't going to be into dnd. Growing up can mean becoming this.
Artector 01-01-07, 12:32 PM	I want to ask questions similar to dayrat's. Also I just wonder how thw topic came up. Were you in line? Just thumbing through? He start it? I know the statement can be very stand-alone, but I"m a curious person. For a fair number of people its potentially true, others its in no way true. I know a couple of people who I'm sure won't play once they are older, but that doesn't matter to me.
Cincinnati 01-01-07, 12:56 PM	I think the statement is completely imbecilic. What do the rules of the game have to do with growing up or becoming an adult? More rules = less adult? It's a non sequitur.
Always-Late 01-01-07, 02:35 PM	When you become an adult, NOTE: JUST A THEORY, as I'm obv. unqualified to make such a statement, having never been there you get hit by rules and regulations and numbers and things like that every day from your boss or your taxes or your bills or your forms and so you are less inclined to toy around with rules and regulations during your leisure time because you have to get it away from all that sometime
Stormbrand 01-01-07, 02:44 PM	Most people are like this http://www.getoffourisland.com/index_files/DeeperOrigins.htm. These people aren't going to be into dnd. Growing up can mean becoming this. Scary, because what was there were all good points. My guess, D&D is fairly expensive if you want to use many sourcebooks and such, but the biggest cost is time. A good D&D session takes several hours, most of your saturday afternoon, in addition to learning (new) rules, planning adventures, backstories, plotlines etc. D&D can be a fairly demanding hobby, and for something as "low-priority" as a hobby, it takes alot of time.
Aryxbez 01-01-07, 02:49 PM	Originally posted by Odimax Strange. I feel like D&D is something you "grow into". I totally agree with this Originally posted by UniversalSnip Did you expect anyone who had grown out of D&D to be posting on these forums? Well said When I started playing the game I barely knew any of the rules the only way I learned the rules was from reading the books myself which I had learned in under a month. Ever since I am usually the one who knows the rules better than anyone else. Which is good since I am my groups DM So I disagree that you grow out of it. You may quit for a while due to work and such. Doubtful that one would ever stop playing. Unless it was never one of your big hobbies to begin with
Drucilla_Rocks_my_Socks 01-01-07, 03:23 PM	When you become an adult, NOTE: JUST A THEORY, as I'm obv. unqualified to make such a statement, having never been there you get hit by rules and regulations and numbers and things like that every day from your boss or your taxes or your bills or your forms and so you are less inclined to toy around with rules and regulations during your leisure time because you have to get it away from all that sometime Eh? Kids get hit with too mcuh hit now'days, I can't see how it would help. I think it's more that kids are so indoctrinated with restrictions that it is part of thier nature. I'd hate to see what the children who are about 10 right now are like in 6 years.
Artector 01-01-07, 03:31 PM	Eh? Kids get hit with too mcuh hit now'days, I can't see how it would help. I think it's more that kids are so indoctrinated with restrictions that it is part of thier nature. I'd hate to see what the children who are about 10 right now are like in 6 years. Yeah. I'm in High School and last year's freshmen, and this year's are pretty horrible. In that they break rules, which may/may not be the result of too many rules...
Drucilla_Rocks_my_Socks 01-01-07, 04:00 PM	Yeah. I'm in High School and last year's freshmen, and this year's are pretty horrible. In that they break rules, which may/may not be the result of too many rules... I feel your pain. It's my senior year but I'm basically floating around doing carpentry and such. Still, much of what is considered "delinquincy" today is just silly. Kids aren't realy supposed to hang out anymore on the street corner (because they're obviousely smoking drugs!), a 13 year old boy can't give the girl he has a crush on flowers without being labled a stalker, and all the kids get driven everywhere. And honestly, if the rules are that bad, breaking them is the only sane thing to do. People shouldn't worry about it too much, but if they do, the thing is to make it thier problem, not yours.
thecosmicgoose 01-01-07, 04:21 PM	I think that the statement holds water when it pretains to the casual gamer. The reasoning is flawed though. Most ex-gamers that I know quit playing D&D because hey found other hobbies, such as snowboarding and dating that they couldn't do as kids which now take the place of D&D. Additionally, there is the large task of working. Schedules and life simply move to the forefront of issues being addressed. D&D is simply left behind. Gamers who love the game, like myself, keep it as a hobby because we view the game differently than a casual gamer does. Simple as that. i can agree with this. being in college full time has put major constraints on my free time (not recently though, thank god for holiday break) and it can be difficult to get a game together. its understandable that under the pressures of work, family, bills and other obligations (which always have to come first to leasure activities) that the game can fall by the wayside. however, i think the OP's quote was more in the line of "DnD is just childish, and shouldnt be played by respectable adults." which is just foolishness. to quote one of my gammer buddies "Gaming is like *********ion, no one talks about it, but everyone does it"
Azar_of_Faerun 01-01-07, 04:49 PM	To the guys who asked: It was while I was browsing books and he was with his buddy, leaving the section and offhandedly made the remark in my direction. :confused:
Drucilla_Rocks_my_Socks 01-01-07, 05:48 PM	To the guys who asked: It was while I was browsing books and he was with his buddy, leaving the section and offhandedly made the remark in my direction. :confused: Well thats just rude. D&D is a fun game. It aint perfect, and there are some things about it that I downright hate, but all those things are changeble. It's a fun game and a good exuse to have a bunch of people over.
a_psh 01-01-07, 07:42 PM	"D&D is something you grow out of, when you become an adult I mean. The idea, the prospect of the game is fun, but it's too cluttered by the rules to go anywhere." ... What do you think of this statement?You clearly would like to hear someone talk about this point, and it's a point that I actually agree with, so, here goes... In many cases, I agree. People play RPGs for a variety of reasons. D&D is almost everybody's first RPG. Inevitably, most of the people playing D&D will or should grow out of it. Here's Part 1... Mechanically, D&D is terribly ill-suited for any kind of serious storytelling or character development. Unless you ignore most of the rules (why are they there, then?), it takes forever to make NPCs. You're stuck either handwaving a lot or doing it in prep. Doing everything in prep means you're straightjacketing what's going to happen during play. This isn't as simple as complex system vs. simple system. It's a matter of how much of the system has to live on the character sheet. In D&D, it's a crapton. The class and level system is horribly restrictive. Creating an effective character requires a lot of preplanning, a "build". By the time you hit level 4 or so, you're effectively locked into that build. For the most part, you can't really change tracks without just being worthless at everything. It's all very... inorganic. Moreover, neither the reward system, nor the character creation system, nor the basic task resolution system do anything to help a coherent story actually take shape. Nothing in your multi-page character sheet actually tells you what a character is about. The right solution to any challenge is always to play it safe -- if you try to create conflict or drama, the mechanics hose you. Look at it this way... D&D is an action-oriented game. Good action stories often involve improbably situations, luck, and overcoming the odds. Every time you put your character into one of those situations in D&D, you're more likely to die than to persevere. That means that, most of the time, you're not getting a good action story out of D&D. The game tries to fix this a little bit by making death irrelevant with resurrection spells. Wow, that just takes the drama out of the story by reseting the stakes to nothing. Great design there. :rolleyes: What about something other than an action story? Well, as far as the exploration of moral issues goes, any story you try to create with D&D is going to be on the torpid side, too, since you've got alignment pushing a predetermined conclusion down your throat every step of the way. Without it, you might as well be running a non-system because now the system has nothing to do with the story you're telling. How about a story that's mostly about people and relationships? Hmm, do you see any mechanics that involve that at all? Nope, I don't. Et cetera. No, doing something other than adventure fantasy with D&D definitely doesn't make the system work better. The above are just some random examples. Sure, D&D's got classes and spells and all that crap. Tons and tons of rules. But, whenever you look for anything that is actually relevant to putting together a story -- something with pacing, theme, whatever -- you either hit a big brick wall or draw a blank. Mechanically, D&D is complex but ridiculously unrealistic. I'm not going to give tons of examples of this, since they're pretty obvious and have been done to death. As a tactical game, D&D is weak. A lot of rules are imbalanced and arbitrary. Combat creeps by slowly. The closest thing you have to an opponent is the GM, who can do anything but is supposed to let you win. People who talk about tactical challenge as the main reason to play D&D are just plain deluding themselves. The only actual "challenge" in combat is really getting the GM to underestimate your abilities. I can say more about other facets of the game, but I'm tired for now, so, err, later.
Azar_of_Faerun 01-01-07, 07:44 PM	I think different levels of realism in a fantasy game is what makes players more or less interested in the mysticism and backstory put forth in campaign *shrugs* :weep:
Aryxbez 01-01-07, 09:23 PM	wow a_psh, sounds like you're thinking too hard If a DM wishes to make a story, Rules shouldn't really affect a story greatly why would any DM allow rules to destroy his story at all? That is the PC's job, to change and destroy the story as it goes along
Always-Late 01-01-07, 09:28 PM	I think, myself, that trying to run "alignment" (without the alignment system, just evil or good, Paladin/Blackguard, yes or no, would his diety agree) is impossible to do unless 1. Explicitly stated by the rules, or 2. Makes no game difference, period. Hooray Eberron. Because if the DM and the player disagree on a fundamental moral point (one baby, five hundred babies, do you kill the baby, Y/N, I'm sure we could make it much more realistic) having the DM do anything involving alignment, good/bad, will celestials heed his calls or demons embrace him into their ranks, etc, etc your game is headed off a cliff.
Artector 01-01-07, 09:35 PM	I think that this quote applies quite well to just about anything pertaining to alignment. Buy 5 lab rats. Drop some dice and the SRD into a cage. Leave them be. I guarantee the rats will either have eaten each other and the SRD will be open to the alignment section, or they will all be munching pellets in a circle quoting Monty Python in the language of rats. At this point, for entertainment, you can introduce a female rat. The other rats will inevitably panic at the very sight and run in fear.
aotrscommander 01-01-07, 09:45 PM	Mph. Either we lost some stuff when the boards went offline or I touched nerve somewhere. Just wish I'd have saved that post for posterity. That was quality invective, that was... Excuse me for virulently defending D&D and RPGs in general. (That statement is meant both literally and ironically, by the way.) (In case anyone late to the thread wonders what I'm on about, my rather exuberently evil-aligned point was that the individual mentioned by the OP sounded like he was being highly patronising and I find the attitude of people who judge other people's hobbies and interests in such a fashion to be deplorable; it's one of the very few things that gets me really riled. I don't like cricket or baseball, but I don't knock the people that do.) So, to clarify, no, I don't think you 'grow out of' as in 'become too old for' any kind of hobby that interests you, be it D&D, computer games, Pokemon, anime, cartoons, comics or sports.
AaronDireBear 01-01-07, 09:51 PM	I call BS. I know a guy whose been gaming as long as I've been alive (23 years). I also know a guy whose been gaming as long as the aforementioned gentleman has been alive (31 or 32 years, I cant recall at the moment), back when Dungeons and Dragons was just one pamphlet.
a_psh 01-01-07, 11:04 PM	wow a_psh, sounds like you're thinking too hard If a DM wishes to make a story, Rules shouldn't really affect a story greatly why would any DM allow rules to destroy his story at all? That is the PC's job, to change and destroy the story as it goes alongThinking too hard? I challenge you to stop and think, then. "Rules shouldn't affect a story greatly"? You say this because you've never touched a system that doesn't just leave a big gaping void where "story" is. Even then, though, just look at say, combat mechanics. Compare a duel in hit-point-based system, a system with verisimilar damage, and a stake-based system based on escalation of conflict. Hit points: the two characters keep swinging at each other until one drops below 0, injecting special abilities and modifiers into the mix as needed; the battle is a relentless flurry of blows, with one person probably dead at the end. Verisimilar damage: the first wound or two basically decide the fight, since weakened combatants are less effective in both offense and defense; a lot of defense, a lucky strike or two, and then it's really up to the loser to determine how much more beat up he wants to get before he surrenders, and up to the winner to determine whether his opponent deserves any mercy; maybe the duel isn't even the most dangerous part, as wounds can then become infected. Stake-setting &c.: the combat probably spends a lot more time in the non-physical realm before it gets to swords; when it does, there are a few descriptions back and forth, with each combatant doing an opposed roll and having to decide "Is this worth taking the fallout? Is this worth taking the fallout? Is this worth taking the fallout?"; the "damage" likely affects things like relationships and reputations as well as just each character's body; in the end, either somebody backs down or they both stake their very lives on something and then it's settled with a single final contest. That's just combat. But the scenes played out very differently, and they are, in fact, likely to end very differently, too (with the example HP-based system being more likely to result in a quick death, while the example stake-based system has now generated all kinds of little events related to the battle based on teh stakes that were set). Clearly, system matters. Your problem is that D&D, Rifts, Vampire, GURPS, &c. are all systems where "story" is crap that sometimes happens by accident rather than something that develops by design, and so you think system and story have nothing to do with each other. "His story"? You just killed shared storytelling right there. Basically, you're assuming that the GM is pre-writing 99% of the story and the PCs just exist to skew it a little and inject a detail here and there. Great. That's one person telling a story to a handful of others. And that's all that it is. Welcome to D&D, Rifts, Vampire, GURPS, &c... all systems with a over-strong central GM and little room for creative input from everyone else at the table.
ArchMage0271 01-01-07, 11:12 PM	Hello all I started playing at the age of 14 and am now 41, I believe that role playing games are definately not something you grow out of.QF I began playing at the age of 12 and turn 26 in february. I love the game, however, I have to say that a change to a 4th edition would put me out of D&D... The overall cost of books and learning new rules is to exhausting to try another edition.. However, I do have a large collection of 3.5 and enjoy the game.... But I have to live my life aswell.. I will not grow out of D&D just grow out of supporting the new products as I get older......
ArchMage0271 01-01-07, 11:14 PM	Sorry... I said I turn 26 in February... Actually I will be 36... Hit the wrong key.
Aryxbez 01-02-07, 12:32 AM	What gaping hole? I am not seeing this hole you speak of that D&D causes Also I find that D&D's system is fine for making stories, maybe not perfect, but good enough. Thus I have no problems So HP doesn't make a duel realistic, D&D isn't supposed to be 100% realistic it is a fantasy game for a reason. besides If a person had little health and no known advantage over the person he was dueling, why would he duel at all? Also I do believe that the DM creates the story. however the DM changes the story depending on what the PCs do. thus the DM changes the story as the changes go along. So how am I destroying story if it is changed because the heroes change what happens? Are you saying it should be forefully railroaded? sounds like it Otherwise the way I run my games My players have had no problem with. So just calm down, or I won't bother responding to what you say. And if I insulted you, I apologize.
The Hive Custodian 01-02-07, 12:38 AM	Welcome to D&D, Rifts, Vampire, GURPS, &c... all systems with a over-strong central GM and little room for creative input from everyone else at the table. That's an interesting perspective. Are there some systems that you could recommend that you believe do not fall into this trap?
a_psh 01-02-07, 01:45 AM	What gaping hole? I am not seeing this hole you speak of that D&D causesThink about your favorite novels or short stories. That kind of story. Not just a series of events. Something with pacing and theme. A story contains some kind of statement, explores some kind of issue. Actually developing that as a group and in play means that everyone has to be able to make important and meaningful contributions to pretty much every aspect of the shared imagined space. Just doing away with system doesn't deliver that, either -- freeform RP is absolutely terrible at generating this kind of thing. Also I find that D&D's system is fine for making stories, maybe not perfect, but good enough. Thus I have no problemsWell, "good enough" means it's something to "grow out of", doesn't it? I mean, you could say tricycles are good enough for getting around and ask why anybody bothers switching to bikes, right? Or, for a more accurate analogy, you could say that a generic cheeseburger is "good enough" and ask why anybody bothers switching to bacon cheeseburgers, buffalo burgers, burgers with lots of onions, &c. And the obvious answer is that the generic cheeseburger may be good enough, but you can do better. So HP doesn't make a duel realistic, D&D isn't supposed to be 100% realistic it is a fantasy game for a reason.But you do see how changing the underlying system completely changes how the scene is resolved and what the scene is about, right? besides If a person had little health and no known advantage over the person he was dueling, why would he duel at all?Maybe it's about love. Or family and honor. Or hatred and revenge. Depends on what the character is about and what the story is about, really. A cold calculation is pretty much the last reason in the world anybody risks his life for anything, isn't it? If you're interested in thematic storytelling, that's the most obvious thing lacking in D&D's mechanics, actually: how much your character cares about something is absolutely worthless. The game system flat-out tells you that his drives and passions don't amount to a hill of beans. That's really going against the grain of what many conventional fantasy stories are about, even. Also I do believe that the DM creates the story. however the DM changes the story depending on what the PCs do. thus the DM changes the story as the changes go along. So how am I destroying story if it is changed because the heroes change what happens? Are you saying it should be forefully railroaded? sounds like itNo, I'm saying the opposite: that you the GM have already destroyed the story by pre-writing large chunks of it. You're destroyed it just by thinking of it as "my story". The game is no longer about exploring theme together. Well, it's about exploring the GM's theme, but that's it. Otherwise the way I run my games My players have had no problem with.If you're not looking for thematic storytelling (whether it's because you've never seen it or it's just not your thing), you don't miss it when you pick up D&D. Now, if you play D&D looking for a while and slowly figure out that this is something you want, you've just "grown out of" D&D. There ya go.
a_psh 01-02-07, 02:20 AM	That's an interesting perspective. Are there some systems that you could recommend that you believe do not fall into this trap?Stop me if I sound like an advertisement. I really don't want to be. I'll preface this with a warning: most of these examples are recent and small-time. I think of all of these as fundamentally good games, but I'm more interested in big, groundbreaking ideas and systems I can pick up quickly than how good the rulebook looks or how good the secondary mechanics are. As far as the best examples of de-centralized or de-emphasized GMing, you've got Polaris: Chivalric Tragedy at the Utmost North (a fantasy game where GM duties are split and rotate with the "spotlight") and Universalis (a completely decentralized game, pretty much -- with a mechanic that encompasses shared setting creation as well, which makes it good for creating a setting cooperatively and then playing through that setting with a different system). Now, hardcore de-centralized GMing isn't that big of a priority for me, personally. As far as games that still have a specific GM that does all sorts of GM-y tasks but still put a lot of emphasis on wide player input, you've got, hmm, my short list would be Prime Time Adventures (based around emulating the kind of episodic stories you see in a TV show, with a GM but a lot of negotiation going on) and Dogs in the Vineyard (a game of moral exploration set in a Mormon version of the West, a pretty good example of how to do the traditional job of NPC-management without being the story-god at the same time).
RichardAwesome 01-02-07, 02:56 AM	I've found that it's not something that you grow out of, but you can grow apart from. To elaborate, when life takes command and it becomes harder and harder to make the time to get together and spend the better part of a day gaming. I know in my group, we've taken 2-3 month breaks because everyone's schedules just got too hectic.
Aryxbez 01-02-07, 04:40 AM	Well I now finally somewhat understand what you were saying Also I do see the system changes with the underlying and so forth, since combat is not as safe seeming. Also I don't see anything majorly stopping someone from fighting for love and all that. Although if a PC has no motivation to go on a quest or adventure and what not, then obviously they won't go on said quest or adventure. So I am to believe that if a PC has motivation then it would matter. Same for a group, if they don't want to slay that one dragon or stop a cult or something, they won't obviously. Otherwise I heavily doubt I will ever Grow out of this game, I find it too great of a game to ever quit playing. And Thats that
unundindur 01-02-07, 05:05 AM	From my experience it is a curve. Mind that I started when was about 10 years old. At first it is daunting (2 months), then it becomes the most fun and important thing in life (4 years or so), then it moves on into the famous "how can we make this the way it was before" state (3 years), and after that its on and off for some years before I realized the system was really not that brilliant (3), and started working on a more open-ended and simple system (still in the works). So, beeing 12 years old with no sense of time, endless imagination and likeminded friends is the new 30s. I think the key to continue liking DnD is twofold; Either don't care for roleplay or ditch half the systems. Thats at least how I have felt for a few years, and since roleplay is what i still like about DnD I more houserules and tweaks than my sisters budget :)
DrakoShade 01-02-07, 05:19 AM	I didn't really get into D&D until after I'd left school and gotten a real job, actually. It gives me something to work with in terms of keeping my mind busy, now that there isn't studying to be done. I enjoy working with the rules, even when (as it has been for the last year) I don't have a group to play with. It becomes a hobby of thought-experiments, allowing one to keep one's self sharp despite the doldrums of a boring job. I'd say that the need for escapism and (far more important) something to do with one's intellect is something one grows into, not out of. It's a good way to pass the time.
WolfHati 01-02-07, 05:22 AM	Well tweaking the rules and making stuff up is D&D and has been since as long as I've been playing it... this sticking to the rules as written crap musta been something they added in 3e.
unundindur 01-02-07, 05:27 AM	I didn't really get into D&D until after I'd left school and gotten a real job, actually. It gives me something to work with in terms of keeping my mind busy, now that there isn't studying to be done. I enjoy working with the rules, even when (as it has been for the last year) I don't have a group to play with. It becomes a hobby of thought-experiments, allowing one to keep one's self sharp despite the doldrums of a boring job. I'd say that the need for escapism and (far more important) something to do with one's intellect is something one grows into, not out of. It's a good way to pass the time. Now that is true :) At the same time it's somewhat strange to pay for it... Now that I know the rules my work is going in a direction making all the DnD rules void, but of course it took quite a few years to get there, and the fluff is still nice :)
DIESCUMDIE 01-02-07, 07:42 AM	Stop me if I sound like an advertisement. I really don't want to be. I'll preface this with a warning: most of these examples are recent and small-time. I think of all of these as fundamentally good games, but I'm more interested in big, groundbreaking ideas and systems I can pick up quickly than how good the rulebook looks or how good the secondary mechanics are. As far as the best examples of de-centralized or de-emphasized GMing, you've got Polaris: Chivalric Tragedy at the Utmost North (a fantasy game where GM duties are split and rotate with the "spotlight") and Universalis (a completely decentralized game, pretty much -- with a mechanic that encompasses shared setting creation as well, which makes it good for creating a setting cooperatively and then playing through that setting with a different system). Now, hardcore de-centralized GMing isn't that big of a priority for me, personally. As far as games that still have a specific GM that does all sorts of GM-y tasks but still put a lot of emphasis on wide player input, you've got, hmm, my short list would be Prime Time Adventures (based around emulating the kind of episodic stories you see in a TV show, with a GM but a lot of negotiation going on) and Dogs in the Vineyard (a game of moral exploration set in a Mormon version of the West, a pretty good example of how to do the traditional job of NPC-management without being the story-god at the same time). I agree with your other posts where you outline some of the problems of stories in dnd. Unfortunately the games you reccomend sound impossible for me to pursuade another to play, and they sound sort of amatuer .
High Octane 01-02-07, 08:49 AM	I think that this quote applies quite well to just about anything pertaining to alignment. What an ego boost. Being quoted outside of a sig.
Rhymenocerous 01-02-07, 09:50 AM	Howdy all :) Two days ago, I was at a Powells Bookstore, browsing around, and eventually reached the fantasy RPG books section when I heard something strange. "D&D is something you grow out of, when you become an adult I mean. The idea, the prospect of the game is fun, but it's too cluttered by the rules to go anywhere." The guy mentioned more things, but nothing else was relevant. What do you think of this statement? I'm 37, I'll be getting all of the other geriatrics to play when my kids put me in the assisted living center if I live that long.
Anaxander 01-02-07, 02:30 PM	If one equals maturity to a total lack of creativity, fantasy and humour, than I rather would be immature. As a young adult, I can only pity people who think of D&D and RPG in general as a 'fase', which ends when you are grown up and start doing Serious Stuff (tm).
High Octane 01-02-07, 03:06 PM	I think he might have meant that not as an age or a maturity thing, but as a condescending "D&D is for RPG noobs" sort of deal. Anyway, as for the age thing, i have a 37 year old in my group.
AaronDireBear 01-02-07, 03:49 PM	I began playing at the age of 12 and turn 26 in february. I love the game, however, I have to say that a change to a 4th edition would put me out of D&D... The overall cost of books and learning new rules is to exhausting to try another edition.. However, I do have a large collection of 3.5 and enjoy the game.... But I have to live my life aswell.. I will not grow out of D&D just grow out of supporting the new products as I get older...... Nothing is forcing you to switch, it isnt World of Warcraft where everyone must abide by the nerfs and desecrations.
Bruunwald 01-02-07, 03:51 PM	Some people have very definite rules as to what constitutes as "adult" behavior. I have had friends who decided not to play anymore not because they no longer had interest in the game, but because they had been persuaded that adults should not have fun and should work, hard and miserably, until they drop down dead from exhaustion. Probably not coincidentally, those same friends tend to find misery in nearly every aspect of life, and inconvenience in any small perceived disruption of the status quo (such as say, when lunch is ten minutes earlier today than it was yesterday). They tend to look snobbishly on the major purchases (cars, homes, etc.) of our other friends, and to criticize all the life decisions of their own relatives. They often tend to speak of their spouses and children as if they were inconveniences. They keep having to visit their doctors for various reasons. They like to blame others. To me, none of this seems very mature. It's definitely not wise. Wisdom and maturity have everything to do with happiness and balance. You only "grow out" of something that makes you happy at great peril to your health. If you have some healthy outlet like gaming, or painting, or playing guitar in a rock band, and it makes you happy, you ought to keep doing it, even if other people look down their noses at you. Especially if other people look down at you. Maybe your example will clue them in to the possibilities for their own happiness. One day, I will be dead. And long after that, our sun will wink out and this solar system will be dark. And then, quite possibly, the Universe will go cold, or collapse, or maybe start over again in a Big Bang blast that will wipe all record of our tiny, insignificant existence out of all Reality. I hope to God to have a little fun before all of that happens.
mathogre 01-02-07, 04:18 PM	Howdy all :) Two days ago, I was at a Powells Bookstore, browsing around, and eventually reached the fantasy RPG books section when I heard something strange. "D&D is something you grow out of, when you become an adult I mean. The idea, the prospect of the game is fun, but it's too cluttered by the rules to go anywhere." The guy mentioned more things, but nothing else was relevant. What do you think of this statement? I started playing D&D in spring 2005. I'd never played an RPG previously, though I'd been on MUDs/MUSHes a little bit. When I started I was 47, married with kid (she's now an 8 y.o. (unknown if she'll be a gamer)), fully employed, 2 cars, mortgage, retirement accounts et al, a Responsible Adult. I've already made reservations to attend the D&DXP, and am excited at the prospect of playing my first RPGA game in a Living Greyhawk setting. I'm not growing out of it.
a_psh 01-02-07, 05:02 PM	Also I don't see anything majorly stopping someone from fighting for love and all that.Well, the point is that it's irrelevant as far as actually completing your task is concerned. In D&D, your reasons for doing anything are just gravy. This is something that works well for rather controled, scripted play, since it would be absolutely stupid to penalize the players for following a crappy hook by also making their characters mechanically weaker during the adventure. For heavily open-ended play, you want to make the characters' drives and relationships meaningful, because that keeps the game going somewhere. Otherwise you'll tend to end up wandering aimlessly. "Why?" becomes not just a bit of flavor but the primary concern during play, and you want mechanics to reflect that and focus your attention on it. Hero Wars / HeroQuest is a pretty good example of these kinds of mechanics in action in a mainstream system. And Vampire: the Masquerade is a great example of a mainstream system that really should have this kind of thing in it but doesn't (just one of the many reasons VtM is a ridiculous failure).
a_psh 01-02-07, 06:20 PM	I agree with your other posts where you outline some of the problems of stories in dnd. Unfortunately the games you reccomend sound impossible for me to pursuade another to play, and they sound sort of amatuer .Honestly, this is where you see good, innovative design: independent productions. Big-budget publishing houses publish what people expect and don't take risks. Most of their designers sit around generating content for games rather than games themselves. As an example, do you know what WotC published in 1995? Everway, by Jonathan Tweet (yes, 3e designer Jonathan Tweet), a diceless game with what was basically a Tarot deck for randomization and inspiration. Wierd and innovative and different, though not very commerically successful. What do they publish now that they're the primary pen-and-paper RPG publisher in the world? A very polished and well-developed version of what's still basically 1980s design. Full-on getting rid of the GM isn't something that's been done well before. Yeah, duh, my examples are semi-experimental indie projects. Don't confuse independent with amateur. As for persuading other people to play it, here's an example that kinda helps... The early 90s saw Vampire: the Masquerade and Over the Edge coming out, both based on some very similar earlier design work with dice pools. Most folks haven't even heard of Over the Edge. Yet it's a hands-down better system in every way, and one that seriously broke ground for lots of other great games that followed. Hell, run a game in the Vampire setting with the OtE engine and it'll be a much better game, something that lives up to all the unfulfilled hype about storytelling that inundates the Vampire rulebooks. Yet Vampire sold vastly better than OtE. Why? Because the average RPG player doesn't really get what mechanics are doing for him when he plays the game. Pretty much the only thing he can really look at and scrutinize carefully is the setting. Or he can talk about class balance and feats and all sorts of minutiae, but doesn't look at the big picture, the core of the game. Getting better at seeing that big picture is a big part of "growing up" as a gamer. Of course, if I was advertising in gamer classifieds or whatever, I could have a much easier time finding a Vampire group than an OtE group. But, if you forced me to choose between the two of those, I'd pick OtE every time. Now, "persuading" strangers to try something outside their comfort zone may be hard, but I really don't have much trouble convincing my RPG-playing friends to try something for a few hours. So, as far as getting your friends to try new things for a little while, I really don't see the problem here.
Always-Late 01-02-07, 07:01 PM	Um. Why have rules that involve the story? I mean, what kind of rules are they supposed to be? Yeah, D&D has zero story rules (besides possible plot hooks, organiations, whatever) but I was under the impression that D&D supplies the rules and the players supply all the story. Um, what does OtE involve? Just the basics (wondering what it looks like, that's all.)
a_psh 01-02-07, 07:34 PM	Um, what does OtE involve? Just the basics (wondering what it looks like, that's all.)OtE uses dice pools but has no attributes or skills. Instead, player-defined traits make up the core of your character. You pick out a few of the most thematically-important things about your character and those give you bonus dice to your rolls. Meaning that, right there, during character creation, you're making a statement about what kind of a story you want to explore. To use a generic trait example (I don't know OtE's specific guidelines for traits, so this is the general example of how a trait-based system works)... You might write something like "I'm a master thief," "I make heads turn when I walk down the street," "My greed sometimes gets the best of me," "I hate my father," and "I'm still looking for God" on your character sheet. Now, that's not the sum total of your character, but those are the parts that are most narratively significant. The parts that you want to really emphasize as you go from scene to scene to scene, and that the other players and the system go out of their way to interact with. These kind of traits tell you what your character's about, basically. They give you mechanical modifiers when you do stuff related to them (maybe "My greed sometimes gets the best of me" is giving you a penalty rather than a bonus, for example). I'm using sentences in the example because, well, I like them better. Many systems assume that traits are words or phrases rather than sentences. It doesn't really matter that much. Sometimes you see these coexisting with more conventional stats and attributes, sometimes traits are all you have. Modern games that use these sorts of mechanics let you change them over time, of course. So maybe "I'm still looking for God" becomes "I've given up on religion" or "My hard life strenghtens my faith". Or maybe you drop "I hate my father" because it's just not relevant anymore and replace it with something completely different. That's the basic idea.
The Hive Custodian 01-02-07, 09:29 PM	Stop me if I sound like an advertisement. I really don't want to be. On the contrary; many thanks. I've been dissatisfied with many aspects of D&D for some time now (but I still lurk these boards, go figure), and I've been trying to develop a system of my own, as well as look to other systems that people have developed. Of the systems you mentioned, Universalis looks brilliant. I don't know if I'll end up playing it, but just reading the descriptions has forced me to rethink my past conceptions about what an RPG is.
a_psh 01-02-07, 10:57 PM	I've been trying to develop a system of my own, as well as look to other systems that people have developed.Personally, I rather like both the theory stuff on The Forge (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/about/) and some of the indie games that it's produced over the years. Specifically, if you're trying to "find yourself" as far as RPGs go, read a little bit about "GNS Theory" (http://www.timewastersguide.com/view.php?id=284) (it's considered a slightly dated concept now, but I found it helped expand my mind a bit anyway; the article I linked is a fairly nice synopsis with some criticism thrown in). If you want to just plain be exposed to games, Wikipedia and RPGNet are both decent sources. There's also this giant list (http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/encyclopedia/), which is cool because it has little synopses of some games' mechanics. That same website has some good links about theory (http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/theory/) and system design (http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/systemdesign/), and a list of free RPGs (great way to look at other people's ideas without burning a giant hole in your pocket!) as well.
Tillie_the_Pirate 01-02-07, 11:02 PM	No, you don't grow out of D&D. You give up on fantasy as a means of expression, and as a means of dreaming. I think a great part of what makes us human is out ability to have dreams and aspirations, and with D&D you can develop those sort of ideas fantastically and hypothetically with the ingenuity of complex human decisiveness. Hmm, maybe I'm other-thinking this. ;)
shotgunmusashi 01-03-07, 03:10 AM	Yeah, don't sweat it. It's an old bit of nonsense, that whole thing about "growing out of" fantasy. I like C.S. Lewis's (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/C.S._Lewis) response: Critics who treat adult as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.
Ebrion 01-03-07, 04:01 AM	I like the quote shotgunmusashi put up. I am 22, most of the people I play with are in thier mid to late 30's. I am a husband, and a father and I don't want to grow out of D&D. It is a wonderful way to spend every other Thursday. I will not let other peoples opinions about how I like to spend 6-8 hours of my month doing. Be they my parents (who still think the game is about the devil), Dr. Laura ( who says that D&D, Magic, ect. are children's games, and should not be played by respectable Family loving "adults"), or any other of the ignorant, unwashed masses that want to kill my buzz on life, because they can't get off their butts to try to make their lifes better. My life is better for having a few hours of creative thought injected every so often. Besides if I grow out of that, then I might as well wheel myself into the grave now.:rant:
johnkretzer 01-03-07, 04:34 AM	It is funny. I have been playing D&D for over 20 years. The game has grown with me. D&D has always been what you make out of it. My parents think it is a waste of time and money because I spend my nights(don't have a family of my own yet) playing D&D. Yet what do they do at night? Just sit back and watch TV. Sorry that isn't what I call very entertaining.
johnkretzer 01-03-07, 05:01 AM	You clearly would like to hear someone talk about this point, and it's a point that I actually agree with, so, here goes... In many cases, I agree. People play RPGs for a variety of reasons. D&D is almost everybody's first RPG. Inevitably, most of the people playing D&D will or should grow out of it. Here's Part 1... Mechanically, D&D is terribly ill-suited for any kind of serious storytelling or character development. Unless you ignore most of the rules (why are they there, then?), it takes forever to make NPCs. You're stuck either handwaving a lot or doing it in prep. Doing everything in prep means you're straightjacketing what's going to happen during play. This isn't as simple as complex system vs. simple system. It's a matter of how much of the system has to live on the character sheet. In D&D, it's a crapton. The class and level system is horribly restrictive. Creating an effective character requires a lot of preplanning, a "build". By the time you hit level 4 or so, you're effectively locked into that build. For the most part, you can't really change tracks without just being worthless at everything. It's all very... inorganic. Moreover, neither the reward system, nor the character creation system, nor the basic task resolution system do anything to help a coherent story actually take shape. Nothing in your multi-page character sheet actually tells you what a character is about. The right solution to any challenge is always to play it safe -- if you try to create conflict or drama, the mechanics hose you. Look at it this way... D&D is an action-oriented game. Good action stories often involve improbably situations, luck, and overcoming the odds. Every time you put your character into one of those situations in D&D, you're more likely to die than to persevere. That means that, most of the time, you're not getting a good action story out of D&D. The game tries to fix this a little bit by making death irrelevant with resurrection spells. Wow, that just takes the drama out of the story by reseting the stakes to nothing. Great design there. :rolleyes: What about something other than an action story? Well, as far as the exploration of moral issues goes, any story you try to create with D&D is going to be on the torpid side, too, since you've got alignment pushing a predetermined conclusion down your throat every step of the way. Without it, you might as well be running a non-system because now the system has nothing to do with the story you're telling. How about a story that's mostly about people and relationships? Hmm, do you see any mechanics that involve that at all? Nope, I don't. Et cetera. No, doing something other than adventure fantasy with D&D definitely doesn't make the system work better. The above are just some random examples. Sure, D&D's got classes and spells and all that crap. Tons and tons of rules. But, whenever you look for anything that is actually relevant to putting together a story -- something with pacing, theme, whatever -- you either hit a big brick wall or draw a blank. Mechanically, D&D is complex but ridiculously unrealistic. I'm not going to give tons of examples of this, since they're pretty obvious and have been done to death. As a tactical game, D&D is weak. A lot of rules are imbalanced and arbitrary. Combat creeps by slowly. The closest thing you have to an opponent is the GM, who can do anything but is supposed to let you win. People who talk about tactical challenge as the main reason to play D&D are just plain deluding themselves. The only actual "challenge" in combat is really getting the GM to underestimate your abilities. I can say more about other facets of the game, but I'm tired for now, so, err, later. I do feal I have to respond to this. I have read your other post so I am sorry if I am missing anything. And also D&D isn't for everyone so I do respect your opinion, I also to like trying other RPGs but always come back to D&D. It takes me about 10 min to 20 min to creat a 25th level NPC. Hardly forever. Now I am very good at this. But any RP requires alot of adlibbing by the GM. Letting prep be a strait jacket can be a problem with any RP system out there. Also as a player I never plan on a build that isn't out of concept for my goals of my character. For instance I might want a character to be a duelist I plan the minimal I need and everything else just goes to build the concept. Also have jumped concepts and you know what it never resulted in a character being useless. Personaly I think a mechanics that involve relationship and people are the most absurd thing. Why do you need to roll dice to role-play? Also alignment isn't suppose to be a mechanic. There are a 100 different ways to play a alignment with none of them being wrong. Also one last note on how to be a good DM. You limit your powers to be fair to the players then you try your hardest to kill them. I have never let my players win. The win because the out smart me, get lucky, or role-play really well. It sounds to me you have had very poor experience with DMs and/or players. If you ever played in a D&D game run by me you'll understand. A bad DM and or players can make any system bad.
High Octane 01-03-07, 11:10 AM	Yeah, don't sweat it. It's an old bit of nonsense, that whole thing about "growing out of" fantasy. I like C.S. Lewis's (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/C.S._Lewis) response: Critics who treat adult as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. ..........I might have to clear out my entire sig for that but damn it I AM SIGGING THAT!
herb4 01-03-07, 12:15 PM	I agree, to some extent, about the rules being overly complex. Too often since I've begun playing again, the campaign/battles are ground to a screaching halt while everyone pauses to flip through rulebooks. There's no real 'flow" to this game in many cases - everything seems to have been boiled down to number-crunching. As for "growing out of it"....yes and no. I left the game for a long time, mainly because life's demands grew more and more as i got older, not because i didn't like the game or was tired of it. I picked it up again recently, learned the new rules and remain amazed at how much D&D has degenerated into mere math, rules interpretation "game breaking" Maybe i'm just old, but what i really miss about the game is the storytelling aspect. Seems that everyone wants to play a block of stats as opposed to a CHARACTER. it remains fun, but i'm still waiting for that old magic to come back.
a_psh 01-03-07, 03:59 PM	It takes me about 10 min to 20 min to creat a 25th level NPC. Hardly forever. Now I am very good at this. But any RP requires alot of adlibbing by the GM. Letting prep be a strait jacket can be a problem with any RP system out there.Is that 10-20 minutes spent purely on stats? Let's compare... Even Riddle of Steel, which is fairly complex and is also obscenely clunky in a lot of places, has characters coming together faster than that. And when you're done statting up that Riddle character, you know about his desires and motivations as well as his fighting style. Writing down everything you need to know for a character playing a bit part -- someone only there for a scene or two in a specific context -- takes less than a minute. Making a player character for DitV takes about 20 minutes, and that includes playing out an entire scene as part of character generation; all of the mechanical GM prep work for a DitV session -- generating a town -- takes no more than five. So, in my experience (which is that it takes a few minutes to make a mook and around 10-20 to make a major character), D&D is asking for a lot as far as prep is concerned. Especially since neither of my examples have me needing to also do terrain layout or compare wealth values to a chart that tells me about how much money the PCs should have at this level or roll/choose treasure. D&D is most certainly a prep-heavy game. And the GM guide and community definitely focus on playing it in a very prep-heavy way. The problem is all the games that just copied D&D's structure a lot and threw in a wonky mechanic here or some half-assed appeal to "realism" there are prep-heavy, too, so you don't necessarily notice it until you look further afield. Also as a player I never plan on a build that isn't out of concept for my goals of my character. For instance I might want a character to be a duelist I plan the minimal I need and everything else just goes to build the concept. Also have jumped concepts and you know what it never resulted in a character being useless.Some things are supported by the systems and happen naturally. Other stuff, like qualifying for a particular prestige class or making that sneaky thief who fights with a pair of dirks or building a successful illusionist sorceror, takes a lot of pre-planning to avoid mechanical suckitude. Actually, this is all over the system: doing something that isn't already built into its own class requires lots of paging through rules and optimization. Let's put it this way: there's a reason they shoved all that stuff about rebuilding and retraining in the PHB2. Personaly I think a mechanics that involve relationship and people are the most absurd thing. Why do you need to roll dice to role-play?If you don't need rules to roleplay, explain why you bought hundreds of dollars worth of books and accessories and have a multi-page character sheet covered in numbers in your hand whenever you play. Do you mean "roleplay" as in "not fight," specifically? Well, why the hell do you need dice to fight? Same reasons apply... The fact is, mechanics focus the game. If a game is about something, then it should have some rules and guidelines for that something. Otherwise, if it doesn't actually give you any tools to deal with whatever matters most to you, why bother using the game at all? If you want to play a game that's all about cool action-packed combat, would you rather have rules for ripostes and counters or rules for crafting items? If you wanted to play a game about mysteries, is it more important for the book to contain rules that help set up and pace the mystery or a big chart to determine how much weight your character can carry? Compare RuneQuest and HeroQuest. Here are two games set in the same setting, specifically Glorantha, Greg Stafford's mythic and detailed world. But they're about completely different things. In the spirit of most "traditional" RPGs (of which it was one of the first), RuneQuest gives you a bunch of physical stats and makes you count "strikes" and movement squares and, as a result, sends your character out killing chaos monsters in the boonies. HeroQuest takes a complete 180 and asks you to define how your culture and religion affect what your character does and, as a result, makes the game all about problems of mystical and political importance. Now, which of these does a better job of actually exploring the world and what it's like to be a character facing constant turmoil and upheaval? Certainly not the one that's all about spelunking in dungeons and how much food fits in your pack. Also alignment isn't suppose to be a mechanic. There are a 100 different ways to play a alignment with none of them being wrong.Umm, alignment has most certainly been a mechanic for at least 15 years now. It's part of the rules, it interacts with other "crunchy" rules like what class you can be or whether your sword can kill a demon or whether holy word liquifies your brain. What makes it not a mechanic? If you're looking to actually examine the nature of moral decisions in play, I don't care how many ways to play alignment there are, because every single one of them is wrong. If you have a predefined answer to a question, it's not actually a question you can interestingly debate anymore, is it? At best, you're using alignment as some weird "cosmic scale" and criticizing its faults by saying that the "cosmic scale" is broken (which seems to be how a number of Planescape campaigns have done it). Also one last note on how to be a good DM. You limit your powers to be fair to the players then you try your hardest to kill them. I have never let my players win. The win because the out smart me, get lucky, or role-play really well.And this does nothing to resolve the overall issue that, instead of giving you a clear way for everyone to contribute to the shared imagined space, the standard M.O. for a "traditional" RPG is to just say "Here, Mr. GM! You're the guy with the keys! You have to relentlessly vet and limit everything anybody else contributes to the collective fantasy. Just do whatever feels right. Good luck!" Did I really need a book to tell me "Oh, just appoint one guy to sort out the big mess of ideas"? That's like only one step up from playing "Let's Pretend". Thefore, particularly as far as the point of authority and creative communication goes, you can definitely "grow out of" D&D. This is actually one of the places D&D could stand to most improve. It sounds to me you have had very poor experience with DMs and/or players.No, I've had lots of good experiences with D&D, and I've played with a lot of great players. If anything, having a good game actually makes a system's faults much more obvious (since you're not always distracted by Steve at the other end of the table forgeting what was in his spellbook or building dice pyramids or trying to rape your character). If you ever played in a D&D game run by me you'll understand.No offense, but that came off as rather patronizing when I first read it. I'm sure you didn't mean to be, though. Some things kind of just always sound patronizing. So, with that in mind, don't think of the following as overly patronizing, either: It's clear from the way you talk about GMing, roleplaying, &c. that you don't actually run a D&D game I would much enjoy.
The Hive Custodian 01-03-07, 05:05 PM	A wise guy once said that there are two kinds of people involved in roleplaying games: the Computer Science and Engineering students who play them, and the Philosophy and English students who write them. Guess I must be the exception, then. In any case, thanks again, a_psh. You have helped me greatly. Hmm. I really should be contributing to the topic at hand, though, so here's my two cents: Regarding the original question, I would say that one does not grow out of RPGs. I see roleplaying as a combination of telling a story and listening to a story, two activities I hope I never grow out of. D&D specifically, though, is a different matter. I have to say I've personally grown out of D&D. I'll just mention one reason here: It takes me about 10 min to 20 min to creat a 25th level NPC. Hardly forever. Now I am very good at this. But any RP requires alot of adlibbing by the GM. Letting prep be a strait jacket can be a problem with any RP system out there. Also as a player I never plan on a build that isn't out of concept for my goals of my character. For instance I might want a character to be a duelist I plan the minimal I need and everything else just goes to build the concept. Also have jumped concepts and you know what it never resulted in a character being useless. First of all, is that 10-20 minutes including the time taken to familiarize yourself with all the components used to build that character? Especially at the current rate of splatbook proliferation, I would wager that this takes a long time, which not all of us have. But that's not my main point. My main point is this: I find much of the work put into D&D's so-called "character creation" rather pointless. The purpose of most of this work seems to be to feed D&D's rule system rather than actually represent a character. The pressure of optimization only makes this worse. If you focus on the background behind classes, feats, and other character options, and create a character based on those, you often get hosed. So you start ignoring those things. You reinterpret the character options away from their given backgrounds to better suit your characters while retaining power. But that means that the rule system has won. You pick those character options based on the rule system, not your character, and that means that the character options are no longer supporting character. And I think that's a shame. Especially because D&D isn't a very good tactical game, as a_psh said earlier, so it's hard to justify spending so much effort on the rules system. I don't mind a lot of prep time. However, I want to see some results for the prep time I put in, and D&D isn't giving me enough of that.
unundindur 01-03-07, 07:42 PM	Guess I must be the exception, then. In any case, thanks again, a_psh. You have helped me greatly. Hmm. I really should be contributing to the topic at hand, though, so here's my two cents: Regarding the original question, I would say that one does not grow out of RPGs. I see roleplaying as a combination of telling a story and listening to a story, two activities I hope I never grow out of. D&D specifically, though, is a different matter. I have to say I've personally grown out of D&D. I'll just mention one reason here: First of all, is that 10-20 minutes including the time taken to familiarize yourself with all the components used to build that character? Especially at the current rate of splatbook proliferation, I would wager that this takes a long time, which not all of us have. But that's not my main point. My main point is this: I find much of the work put into D&D's so-called "character creation" rather pointless. The purpose of most of this work seems to be to feed D&D's rule system rather than actually represent a character. The pressure of optimization only makes this worse. If you focus on the background behind classes, feats, and other character options, and create a character based on those, you often get hosed. So you start ignoring those things. You reinterpret the character options away from their given backgrounds to better suit your characters while retaining power. But that means that the rule system has won. You pick those character options based on the rule system, not your character, and that means that the character options are no longer supporting character. And I think that's a shame. Especially because D&D isn't a very good tactical game, as a_psh said earlier, so it's hard to justify spending so much effort on the rules system. I don't mind a lot of prep time. However, I want to see some results for the prep time I put in, and D&D isn't giving me enough of that. Good post! In my opinion it's not DnD as such that can be a problem, its the mechanics that are now so extensive and with so many loopholes and twists that it gets complicated without any real benefit. Why no benefit? Instead of expanding options, new content makes older content void. People build more powerful characters, and thus new monsters get more powerful compared to their CR, and all of a sudden the old character-build cannot compete. Its an evil circle. To me this all boils down to the use of so many systems. Classes, Prestige classes, feats, skills and they all have requirements. These requirements mean people who read the rules carefully, and don't care about concept will likely gain an advantage over the player who in the spirit of roleplay chose his progression after how game plays out. The game have become more of a roll-playing game in my experience, with a few exceptions where both GM have been very talented and rules have been tweaked and changed.
elondir 01-04-07, 04:49 PM	I'm almost 30 and still love D&D. However I don't really like the company's marketing approach of pokemon -> yu-gi-oh -> M:TG and D&D (you know, randomized mini packs, splatbooks every month, and so on). I prefer old-school dungeons and long overland journeys over detailed roleplaying. I guess that just shows my age.
a_psh 01-04-07, 05:11 PM	I don't know where this quote originally came from (The Hive Custodian quoted it above), but I'd like to use it for a bitter yet humorous aside: A wise guy once said that there are two kinds of people involved in roleplaying games: the Computer Science and Engineering students who play them, and the Philosophy and English students who write them. I suppose this (http://www.dreamborn.com/ors_p.html) is an example of what happens when engineers try to write (or, really, engineer) a system: * An obsession with "realism" without a good definition for what that means. * Game mechanics that are really just (one would presume, since you can't actually look at the system at all without shelling out $50 and sending them a resume) Newton's equations. * No sense of purpose or creative agenda, just an attitude that is very much "the game that I like is the game everyone will want to play." * Ideas that are as old as gaming itself (classless? RuneQuest, 1978) presented as if they were somehow innovative.
DaidojiTaidoru 01-04-07, 06:02 PM	Growing out of D&D? Perhaps grow into other systems, but never out of D&D. Why? Because D&D, especially 3.5 strangly enough, is one of the few systems that nicely works out high fantasy. The only other high fantasy gaming system that isn't more annoyingly detailed, or lacks any sort of structure is Exaulted. And most times I want to run a mid level game. Now of course I have very specific desires for my games however that others do not. 1 - I want structured combat rules. When people enter into conflict (and they will eventually) I want simple, but reasonable rules to handle who lives and who dies. This may be quick and lethal (why I like Legend of the Five Rings) or longer and cinimatic (why I like D&D) depending on the genre. However conflicts must be easy to handle otherwise the game will inevitably frustrate me to the point I'll hate the system. I'm looking at you White Wolf. Your Larp combat rules are atrocious. 2 - I want to be able to customise my character without making him unplayable. I don't play GURPS because every point spent becoming skilled at Video Games for my character is one being taken away from combat/social effectiveness. Any system where the rules force so called "roleplaying" considerations onto my chracter get a quick house rule or an outright cut. I don't care how some guy in his house thinks certain groups should act, I want to play my character. 3 - I prefer if my characters had a depth of physical abilities. I like knowing that my character has stats. I like it that my character has a number of stats. Usually between 6 and 10 stats. Why? Because it gives me a simple checklist for what my character should be able to do physically and mentally, allowing me to go off and enjoy creating the character socially. Other people enjoy more free and open games, and I can respect that. However I don't enjoy them. And I will state that neither style is more 'mature' then the other.
SilverFoxKnows 01-04-07, 06:47 PM	I started playing when I was 10. I'm now 35. The youngest person in our group is my wife, at 30. I guess I'll outgrow it when I'm too old to read a d20.
devinmdp 01-04-07, 06:56 PM	I am not quite sure what response the OP expected. By definition, anyone on these boards are still involved in D&D, and therefore one would expect a stream of "I never grew out of D&D" posts....which accomplishes what exactly? The fact is that a great many more people played D&D in the 1980's than play it now. Many of them played it in Jr. High and High School or even College but then dropped out of it as the "fad" ended. I happen to know a great many people who tell me yeah they used to play D&D but haven't for years and years. I tend to get this because my license plate on my car reads "IDO DND", so I get a lot of people commenting about it. Most people do grow out of hobbies and games they enjoyed playing in their youth. Especially those that require a lot of time and committment. This is not surprising, given adult's tendency to concern themselves with finding a mate, working, paying for a house and car, raising children, and a host of other activities that young people don't pursue. Devin
SneakyPetey 01-04-07, 07:17 PM	Howdy all :) "D&D is something you grow out of, when you become an adult I mean. The idea, the prospect of the game is fun, but it's too cluttered by the rules to go anywhere." I apologize if any of this has already been said, I did not have time to read every post. I started playing D&D when I was 10 and quit by the time I was 15. I found sports in high school and girls and booze when I was in college. After college I got back into it, and have been playing ever since (I'm 37 now). When I thought about whether or not you grow out of D&D, my first thought was "Geez, I hope not!" But then I thought of The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe: I read that when C.S. Lewis was asked by his grown up niece--Lucy--why he dedicated a children's book to her, he replied, "some day you will be old enough to start reading fairy tales again." That quote always makes me smile, because of the way I "found" D&D again... I think some people do "grow" out of D&D, but not because it's a children's game, but because other things come into their lives and squeeze it out. I agree with those who say "casual" gamers may grow out of it, but "true gamers" will stick with it. If something truly becomes a passion, you will stick with it as long as you are able.
Always-Late 01-04-07, 08:44 PM	Even Riddle of Steel, which is fairly complex and is also obscenely clunky in a lot of places, has characters coming together faster than that. And when you're done statting up that Riddle character, you know about his desires and motivations as well as his fighting style. Writing down everything you need to know for a character playing a bit part -- someone only there for a scene or two in a specific context -- takes less than a minute.... So the game system assigns him desires or motivation? Do you roll them off a table? Is there some sort of questionnaire thing, or do you just decide them for yourself? And what stops you from declaring some traits and motivations for him in D&D? The fact that there aren't rules for it?
a_psh 01-04-07, 09:33 PM	So the game system assigns him desires or motivation? Do you roll them off a table? Is there some sort of questionnaire thing, or do you just decide them for yourself? And what stops you from declaring some traits and motivations for him in D&D? The fact that there aren't rules for it?You assign them, of course. Nothing stops you from declaring desires and motivations in D&D. They're just mechanically irrelevant. The point is that building the stats of a D&D character is not even doing half the job, since it's all still a giant blank as far as a real character goes. Thus, I have more of a finished character after I'm done with the Riddle PC/NPC than I do when I'm done with the D&D PC/NPC, even if it takes about as long to make each character (in reality, if you write down how many combat dice each PC rolls in your notebook or on an index card so you don't forget it, it takes more like 15-30 seconds to figure out everything you'll need for an NPC they'll be facing in Riddle of Steel combat). As far as game design goes, 10-20 minutes on just character stats is, frankly, obscene.
Azar_of_Faerun 01-04-07, 09:52 PM	I am not quite sure what response the OP expected. By definition, anyone on these boards are still involved in D&D, and therefore one would expect a stream of "I never grew out of D&D" posts....which accomplishes what exactly? Do I detect a hint of criticism, or perhaps confusion? :confused:
CrabHeart 01-04-07, 09:55 PM	just got to the nintendo nsider forums lol... its full of 30 year old guys that play pokemon :rolleyes: it was cool when i was little but i quit after the first 150
unundindur 01-05-07, 05:50 AM	I apologize if any of this has already been said, I did not have time to read every post. I think some people do "grow" out of D&D, but not because it's a children's game, but because other things come into their lives and squeeze it out. I agree with those who say "casual" gamers may grow out of it, but "true gamers" will stick with it. If something truly becomes a passion, you will stick with it as long as you are able. I still think many of the "true gamers" as you call them also leave in favour of other gaming systems. This would not be because DnD isn't nice as such, its just that once you start getting many books and really utilize the francise it simultaneously grow in complexity (without really getting much better imo) and my games tend to end with a crawl. And then you also have the evil ciricle I described earlier. As you see, I am still here though, part having fun with DnD and part trying to find good solutions to my own fantasy-system to come ;)
a_psh 01-05-07, 08:03 AM	As you see, I am still here though, part having fun with DnD and part trying to find good solutions to my own fantasy-system to come ;)Several people on this thread have said they want to write their own RPG, so I feel the following advice is pretty appropriate: Read this (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/1/) until you understand both the thesis and the details, look at a lot of different games from different eras, and please, please, please don't make one of these (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/9/). Edit: Also, try to answer these (http://socratesrpg.blogspot.com/2006/01/what-are-power-19-pt-1.html) and, for God's sake, find an artist who can actually draw.
Anaxander 01-05-07, 08:14 AM	I think there are a lot of DMs or players who want to make their own perfect roleplaying system. I have tried to make several, but there was always something wrong: sometimes it was too simple, sometimes too cumbersome. The reason is of course that the perfect game does not exist, though perhaps you can make one or find an already existing one that suits your needs at the moment.
unundindur 01-05-07, 08:47 AM	Several people on this thread have said they want to write their own RPG, so I feel the following advice is pretty appropriate: Read this (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/1/) until you understand both the thesis and the details, look at a lot of different games from different eras, and please, please, please don't make one of these (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/9/). Edit: Also, try to answer these (http://socratesrpg.blogspot.com/2006/01/what-are-power-19-pt-1.html) and, for God's sake, find an artist who can actually draw. Thank you very much. I will be sure to read it all. And regarding art, I am a slight artoholic so if I ever get to the point of publishing I will strive my utmost to have good and persistant art-quality. Nothing disturbs me as seeing a book with 10 different art styles, rageing from western cartoon to anime to drawn scetches and ending in painted art. While all might be good the mix just proves inconsistency. But again, thanks for the links :)
SneakyPetey 01-05-07, 12:09 PM	I still think many of the "true gamers" as you call them also leave in favour of other gaming systems. This is certainly true at times. I also play Rifts with my D&D group and there has *never* been a discussion about abandoning D&D for the sake of Rifts (or any other game for that matter). My personal opinion is that no fantasy role-playing system will make *every* gamer happy. Since everyone in this world is different, we are all going to have our personal preferences. However, D&D in it's original (and subequent) form(s) has attracted an inordinately large percentage of the gaming market. This certainly makes a compelling argument for the solid foundation of the game and the combat system, as well as the overall quality of the game-related products.
Azar_of_Faerun 01-05-07, 04:09 PM	Y'know, I thought of something incredibly obvious. If D&D, or fantasy for that matter, is something you grow out of, then how do they explain the game designers, or authors of these novels? :)
Faraer 01-05-07, 04:13 PM	In reference to the Lewis quote, let's remember that the association of fairy tales with children is a 19th-century invention.Hmm, maybe I'm other-thinking this. ;)Not at all.
a_psh 01-06-07, 12:04 AM	If D&D, or fantasy for that matter, is something you grow out of, then how do they explain the game designers, or authors of these novels? :)I wouldn't go for this line of argument, as some fantasy authors are kinda notorious for being behaving like self-centered nerdy adolescents rather than responsible adults. ;)
Azar_of_Faerun 01-06-07, 12:17 AM	Or perhaps you don't recognize their genius?
Always-Late 01-06-07, 12:31 AM	I wouldn't go for this line of argument, as some fantasy authors are kinda notorious for being behaving like self-centered nerdy adolescents rather than responsible adults. ;)But they get paid for it.
jeffepp 01-06-07, 05:36 AM	I see one cause of the perception in the OP that should be pointed out, a lack of imagination. For many people, having "too much" of an imagination is almost a crime in an "adult", and is something that should be only for very young children. This goes along the lines of the ideas that "you can't make a living doing art", and "someone from your background can never make it (out of what/wherever the background is)". Often, people without hopes, dreams, and personal fantasies cannot accept that someone else does, and attempts to remove/destroy them (the dreams/hopes) "for there own good". There was little that got me more bothered in school than a teacher telling me that I was incapable of doing something, simply because THEY could not. Thankfully, this idea of killing imagination in adults is waining. The fact that the RPG industry is growing, whether it is PnP or computer game based, shows that society is learning that imagination is an important thing for a functioning adult.
Mirtek 01-06-07, 09:27 AM	I guess a lot of people grow out of D&D. Not because it's immature but because all those people have no more time for D&D. Especially college students, who often play much during their years of study, usually graduate into jobs which don't leave them much time to continue D&D.
R99 01-06-07, 01:22 PM	I think the main reason people who have never actually played the game say you grow out of it is because that's all they see it as: a game. but they also fail to see the purpose of a game: socialism. I may only be 14 but I would rather spend my spare at home where it's comfortable, playing DnD, having fun and being with people you can enjoy the company of, not go to some pub/nightclub to be surrounded by strangers talking about generic sport and not performing anything enjoyable except for drinking myself silly and throwing away money. The llast part was probably unnecersary but hey.
MoogleEmpMog 01-06-07, 03:34 PM	A fair number of people do seem to "grow out of" D&D when it comes to their RPG preference, although I think it's more a matter of: a) not really liking core aspects of the D&D experience in the first place or b) not having enough TIME for D&D. The former group could end up literally anywhere, from crunchier (HERO) to ultra-lite (Wushu), whereas the latter almost invariably gravitate toward lighter, faster games, especially those that are explicitly designed for one-shots and pickup games, such as FATE.
a_psh 01-06-07, 06:37 PM	socialismSocialization. not go to some pub/nightclub to be surrounded by strangers talking about generic sport and not performing anything enjoyable except for drinking myself silly and throwing away moneyThat's about as accurate a picture of clubbing and social drinking as "A bunch of nerds doomed to a life of eternal loneliness sit around mentally wanking about what it's like to be Gandalf or an elf lesbian with giant breasts" is an accurate picture of the pen-and-paper RPG hobby. And about as mean.
CharlieBrown 01-06-07, 09:38 PM	Howdy all :) Two days ago, I was at a Powells Bookstore, browsing around, and eventually reached the fantasy RPG books section when I heard something strange. "D&D is something you grow out of, when you become an adult I mean. The idea, the prospect of the game is fun, but it's too cluttered by the rules to go anywhere." The guy mentioned more things, but nothing else was relevant. What do you think of this statement? Some do grow out of it. Some also grow out of imagination alltogether. And some believe they grow out of it, to more "sophisticated" systems. Others still play the ORIGINAL Dungeons and Dragons, little half-sized books that came in a small cardboard box, 23 years later. It's a matter of perception - how you percieve "adult." It might be more accurate to say "Some grow APART from D&D" (or RPGs in general)... And the comments above about storytelling? Irrelevant, IMO - the ability to tell a story has more to do with the Game Master than with the game itself, always.
Legba 01-06-07, 10:27 PM	Truth be told, I hardly play any more. I don't have the time, and my life is focused on different things these days. I'll have the odd game (which I sometimes enjoy, and sometimes don't), but mostly I just pick up the books, read them and enjoy the ideas and plot hooks I get. Sometimes I write them down. So I guess the gene hasn't completely left me. Can you grow out (or rather, appart, as CharlieBrown said) playing roleplaying games? Yes you can. But I think the question should be "will you?" and that can go both ways. Emanuel
dcross 01-06-07, 10:39 PM	Additionally, there is the large task of working. Schedules and life simply move to the forefront of issues being addressed. D&D is simply left behind. That's really it. Nobody who loves the game grows out of it...they just run out of time. :(
Milothethief 01-06-07, 11:30 PM	Truth be told: I told myself I would 'grow out of DND' when I graduated high school hehe but... here I am ;)
Ulorian 01-06-07, 11:53 PM	That's about as accurate a picture of clubbing and social drinking as "A bunch of nerds doomed to a life of eternal loneliness sit around mentally wanking about what it's like to be Gandalf or an elf lesbian with giant breasts" is an accurate picture of the pen-and-paper RPG hobby. And about as mean.Couldn't have said it better myself. Shouldn't be too harsh, seeing as he's only 14, so I doubt he's had firsthand clubbing experience.
Anaxander 01-07-07, 04:00 AM	Truth be told, I hardly play any more. I don't have the time, and my life is focused on different things these days. I'll have the odd game (which I sometimes enjoy, and sometimes don't), but mostly I just pick up the books, read them and enjoy the ideas and plot hooks I get. Sometimes I write them down. So I guess the gene hasn't completely left me. Can you grow out (or rather, appart, as CharlieBrown said) playing roleplaying games? Yes you can. But I think the question should be "will you?" and that can go both ways. Emanuel I agree. "Growing out" of a game has the connotation of mental growth, seeing the game as a finite stage in life, which is not the same as being forced to leave the game due to outside game concerns.
seanichu 01-07-07, 08:47 AM	the number of parents who play D&D with their kids nowadays pretty much proves both parts of that wrong - you don't grow out of it, and it can't be that cluttered if you can teach it to someone as young as six or seven. :D Thats true, I know someone who tought there 4 year old how to play D&D.
R99 01-07-07, 08:53 AM	Solialization That's about as accurate a picture of clubbing and social drinking as "A bunch of nerds doomed to a life of eternal loneliness sit around mentally wanking about what it's like to be Gandalf or an elf lesbian with giant breasts" is an accurate picture of the pen-and-paper RPG hobby. And about as mean. I see my post was incorrect and clearly uneducated, so I apologise for for it. And english isn't my strongest subject.
BobSutan 01-07-07, 02:42 PM	"Baseball is something you grow out of, when you become an adult I mean. The idea, the prospect of the game is fun, but it's too cluttered by the rules to go anywhere." "Football is something you grow out of, when you become an adult I mean. The idea, the prospect of the game is fun, but it's too cluttered by the rules to go anywhere." I can go on and on, but you get the point...
BobSutan 01-07-07, 02:43 PM	Thats true, I know someone who tought there 4 year old how to play D&D. I'm working on it. its the math and his inability to read yet that is holding us back.
a_psh 01-07-07, 03:55 PM	I can go on and on, but you get the point...And yet people basically do grow out of kickball, and whack-the-ball-on-the-little-stand baseball (or is that a kind of softball?), and schoolyard dodgeball, and tag, and hide-and-seek, and all kinds of other games, don't they? Why, you could even say that some of those are, in fact, rules-cluttered (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_server_rules_in_Four_Square). So I'm not sure this is a fruitful line of argument.
SneakyPetey 01-08-07, 05:55 PM	and whack-the-ball-on-the-little-stand baseball (or is that a kind of softball?) You're talking about "T-ball." It's an introductory version of baseball meant to hook kids on the sport at a young age. Sort of like D&D basic and Expert were to AD&D... ;)
johnhansen 01-08-07, 09:51 PM	Originally Posted by R99 I see my post was incorrect and clearly uneducated, so I apologise for for it. It's is OK, R99. Uneducated as you maybe about pubs and clubs you were not completely wrong.