I'm having a small discussion with a couple of guys on Reddit on finding players for games that don't have a lot of exposure. The suggestion was made that the GM should advertise for a campaign game of D&D and then during the first session tell the group that this was going to be the only D&D session, but that the GM would happily run their (insert other game here) campaign for them instead. I told them it was a Bait-And-Switch that would probably result in some pissed off players and a poor reputation in their local gaming community.

What do you think? How would you react if you were the player in this situation?

I did an entire episode on this.

Bait and Switch sucks, and it sucks really, really bad.

If it works in the situation described, it will be a miracle.  That's the last time to try it.  The only time "Bait and Switch" has a good chance of working is with a long-established group that does a lot of different things, and has a well of trust that they can lean on.  

I'm not saying it is a good idea even then.  Usually, it isn't.  Usually, there is a better way to accomplish the same thing.  But it might be something you can get away with in such a group.

Quote from: jeff37923;1032962What do you think? How would you react if you were the player in this situation?

With fisticuffs.

Seriously, yeah. I'd be a bit upset and a lot reactive. This would make me resent the poor game they tried to trick me into playing. IE this is a great way to get players to not trust them or try their game.

Seems like a terrible idea.

The only time I considered a bait and switch game was pitching a one-shot "Deep Impact"-style approaching comet survival game that would quickly turn into Night of the Living Dead, and that was for friends that I know really well who would think that sort of thing was cool.

I was on the receiving end of that at least once, with someone pitching a D&D game that turned into giant Japanese robot adventure time, and it sucked, much as I love Robotech.

Keep the bait-and-switch in game please! (not of game)

Given that this is a leisure activity, the number of situations where it is appropriate to deceive probably have to be very well constrained and defined by the agreed-upon game--so bluffing in poker, illusions in D&D, maybe (maybe) a shyamalan-esque twist like your fantasy characters live in a low tech preserve on a futuristic planet or the like. For the deception to be about the agreed-upon game... that just sounds like a bad idea.

Edit:

Quote from: Zalman;1032973Keep the bait-and-switch in game please! (not of game)

I see I was too slow. This exactly.

Terrible idea of course.

You might get away with running a D&D mini campaign then saying "I'd like to run some Traveller now" - if you did a great job with D&D and they've learned to trust you. At least 6 sessions of D&D I think.

Given that I'm really picky about what system is used, I probably wouldn't show up for the other campaign.

"Fuck you.  You're an asshole, and my feet work."

Got to agree with the sentiments of bad idea...

It's one thing to gather a group for a particular game, say D&D, give that a good run and then say, hey, want to try something different for the next run. Or hey, we've been playing several sessions, anyone up for a one-shot of something else next week, and after that we'll get back to the original game. But those are all things done AFTER establishing a play group.

On the other hand, if you REALLY want to try some new game, advertise that. If it's not often played, chances are there ARE folks interested in trying it out in whatever circles you are advertising in.

Or you could try advertising for players interested in playing one shots or very short (2-4 sessions) campaigns with a variety of systems. You could lead with something more likely to get initial interest, and then slip the more obscure game in for a future choice.

Frank

What Gronan said.  I would actually be more likely to show up for non-D&D game as I don't actually like most versions of D&D.
If you tell me we are going to playing D&D then ask me to roll up a RuneQuest character I will be annoyed, even though I like RuneQuest. If you want to run Trail of Cthulhu advetrtise it as such, not as Call of Cthulhu.

I'm pretty flexible about what I play. Rolling up characters and playing session one, only to find out that next week instead of continuing the adventure as promised we will be rolling up new characters for a different game and playing that instead will royally piss me off. Why did you waste my time with a game you never intended to run?

I have never seen secret bait and switch work out well. Ever.

Genre bait-and-switch ("Surprise! Your modern-day characters are useless in the fantasy world they're dumped in!") is bad enough. Game system bait-and-switch is even worse.

Bait-and-switch - just don't do it.

I would find that annoying.  
If the GM said "Well this is what I'm running tonight"  I might either leave straight away and not return or perhaps play out the session, but not return unless I got a guarantee there would not be a bait and switch in future.

Quote from: jeff37923;1032962I'm having a small discussion with a couple of guys on Reddit on finding players for games that don't have a lot of exposure. The suggestion was made that the GM should advertise for a campaign game of D&D and then during the first session tell the group that this was going to be the only D&D session, but that the GM would happily run their (insert other game here) campaign for them instead. I told them it was a Bait-And-Switch that would probably result in some pissed off players and a poor reputation in their local gaming community.

What do you think? How would you react if you were the player in this situation?

OK, so I get to play at least one game of what I actually signed up for?  I'd probably stay for that game and then not come back for the next.  Open call games near universally aren't worth more than a single session anyway.  I think I may have been in all of ONE in my whole life which was worth coming back for a second session of.  So, with one game, I would get everything I would expect out of an open game.  That said, I'd think the GM was a dick for the bait and switch and GMing a game he didn't want to run in order to trick people.