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 (http://2gms1mic.com/2015/09/30/episode-twelve-bait-and-switch/)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.
It's no different than showing up to a game and finding out the GM sucks at GMing and no real game session ever starts at the table.
If you or estar or pundit or bedrock did it fine I'm in. (Or gorm but gorm never would gorm is always going to run a fun house with a McD's on level 7, or Crine or....)
I signed up to play your game I am along for the ride (you change systems on me you have to convert the character). Some fucker I don't know? The first thing you do is lie to me? No.
In the right situation it would be fun to go through the looking glass. Lots of books like that. Wisard or Oz, Amber, Keepers of the Secret ways (Joel Rosenberg) John Carpenter, Never Ending story. Lots of books like that.
Fuck the Xfiles and Call of Catholu should be like that. When you pull that king of bait and switch, the through the looking glass kind make sure your players are clued in (just a bit) and look over the character sheets and make sure they have built someone that can operaye in the new environment.
But if you just want to play Amber but no one wants to play Amber so you advertise pathfi der 2.0 instead and then say "suprise it's Amber!" Fuck you. Suprise I'm not coming back next week.
A full on bait n' switch is generally not going to go over well, but I think there are BIG twists that can fit within a game's purview that wouldn't bug me at all, if done well.
Like, for Call of Cthulhu, even though it's generally assumed to be a modern horror/investigation setup... it's still totally within the scope of the source material to find yourself on an alien planet, or time-traveled to another eon... or dipping into the dreamlands.
A historical western could take a turn toward a murder mystery or a nautical voyage to exotic locales.
Traveller PCs could end up on all sorts of odd planets that pushed a particular sub-genre of scifi.
Most of the D&D games I've played have been wide open to possibilities of crossovers with other genres.
There are also a few games, like Kult that have an internal bait n' switch in the form of BIG secrets, that, when you finally discover the truth of what's going on, change the nature of the game.
But yeah, telling me we are going to play Vampire and then springing some microbrew Fate game on the group... I'm probably out the door.
Total n00b.
Everyone knows the play is: you get them to kinda like you, then you engineer a TPK and tell them sorry you don't GM all that much D&D, but you're an expert at this other game...wanna try it?
What's the point of Illusionism if you dispel the Illusion? The kids these days, sheesh.
I suppose I've been guilty of pulling a bait-and-switch before on a group of friends who have never done gaming of any sort (or at least only very superficially), so when I tried to explain to them what I was hoping they'd be down to do, they had no idea what the hell I was talking about. So instead I just told them "It's D&D" and they were much more receptive to it. In my mind that doesn't truly count as a bait-and-switch though, but I agree with the consensus.
Quote from: Thegn Ansgar;1033080So instead I just told them "It's D&D" and they were much more receptive to it.
I did something kinda similar with some kids I knew who wanted to play 'D&D'. They'd never seen the books or read them... had no specific knowledge of the game's rules... and I hadn't played any form of D&D for years... so I just ran games for them using Stormbringer/BRP and they were none the wiser and we had a great time of it.
As far as I was concerned their usage of 'D&D' was a synecdoche for 'RPG', rather than a specific brand.
It's bait and switch gaming that creates the 'horror' stories you hear about. The Kenders Thieves, the Lawful Stupid Paladins and all others. It's because the trust between players has been damaged. And Bait and Switch destroys trust.
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?
Well, I wouldn't mind, much. What's the difference with a GM that decides to try a new system and then during the first session decides it's not for him:)?
Granted, I might decline to participate, if I wanted to play D&D specifically, but the odds of that are so low it's not worth bothering about:D!
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?
It is a poor form, IMHO. You should be upfront about expectations. Otherwise, you compromise your most valuable asset, trust, at the beginning.
Dick move...period
Yeah. This would be a career killer for a DM as word of mouth will spread that they lie about what they are really running. Ive seen this all of once and its how I ended up inheriting a whole gaming group way back.
Weird thing was I ended up in the reverse. The PLAYERS kept wanting me to run different games. This went on for years. Robotech, Beyond the Supernatural, TMNT, TORG, Marvel Superheroes, Universe, Star Frontiers.
Quote from: cranebump;1033188It is a poor form, IMHO. You should be upfront about expectations. Otherwise, you compromise your most valuable asset, trust, at the beginning.
Quote from: rgrove0172;1033437Dick move...period
I mean, that about covers it, doesn't it? Why be wordy?
It's dishonest at best. If you are playing with long-time friends and know how they'll respond if you take these fantasy characters through a wavy portal into modern day New York, well, then you might just have a good time there. But using the promise of D&D as a way of suckering people into a different game would make me leave out of principal.
//Panjumaju
So I think we all agree that a full on bait and switch is a shit move. But how do you go to OZ? Or discover you are a shadow walking Prince of Amber. Or follow the wizard in to Finavar? Or walk the Glory Road with the Empress of the multiverse.
How do you show the players the wider universe beyond their tiny corner so that they are surprised but don't feel cheeted or mislead.
Run a D&D campaign and run the other game next.
Quote from: Headless;1033716So I think we all agree that a full on bait and switch is a shit move. But how do you go to OZ? Or discover you are a shadow walking Prince of Amber. Or follow the wizard in to Finavar? Or walk the Glory Road with the Empress of the multiverse.
How do you show the players the wider universe beyond their tiny corner so that they are surprised but don't feel cheeted or mislead.
Therein lies the problem. And a really good (as determined by their players, who have significant trust in them) GM might want to do something like this. OTOH, to allow anyone to have any faith in said GM, they probably should have refrained from what I'll call 'trivial bait and switch's such as saying you're going to play one system, and then switch to another next session.
Quote from: Headless;1033716So I think we all agree that a full on bait and switch is a shit move. But how do you go to OZ? Or discover you are a shadow walking Prince of Amber. Or follow the wizard in to Finavar? Or walk the Glory Road with the Empress of the multiverse.
How do you show the players the wider universe beyond their tiny corner so that they are surprised but don't feel cheeted or mislead.
I think that the best and obvious place to start would be to ask them if they are interested in seeing this "wider universe".
Quote from: Headless;1033716So I think we all agree that a full on bait and switch is a shit move. But how do you go to OZ? Or discover you are a shadow walking Prince of Amber. Or follow the wizard in to Finavar? Or walk the Glory Road with the Empress of the multiverse.
How do you show the players the wider universe beyond their tiny corner so that they are surprised but don't feel cheeted or mislead.
Those are the oddball cases where you might want to present the game as otherwise. But you arent changing systems. Or shouldnt be. Best example is Metamorphosis Alpha. The DM can run it as a standard post apoc setting till the big reveal. But even after its still MA rules. There are a couple of RPGs from the 90s that had that as an underlying theme. That the world the PCs were in, was not really what they thought. This well predates the Matrix and ExisteZe by many years. And even longer in literature.
Thats a "big reveal" not a bait-n-switch.
Some examples might be say Spelljammer where you transition from dungeoncrawling to planet hopping. Planescape where you transition to the weirdness of the higher planes. (which sadly came across as kinda mundane...) Or MA where you transition from post-apoc ruincrawling to "Holy Fuck we are on a space ship and it is out of control! WTF do we do!?!?!?!"
Or say Call of Cthulhu which can start off as pretty mundane. But sooner or later transitions into sanity blasting cosmic horror. End Times transitions from struggling Mars colony cut off from earth. To ever increasing encounters with the local cosmic horrors.
Quote from: jeff37923;1032962How would you react if you were the player in this situation?
Is the DM good and the other players fun?
Then I call out the bullshit bait & switch, squeeze an apology/explanation out of the GM (for the other players mostly) and then discuss what this other campaign might be. If the other campaign is good stuff, then I'll go with it.
BUT...at this point, I'm in magic pony land.
In reality, the bait & switch DM is probably either an asshat or a moron, the other players are pissed off (or so pathetic they're thankful for anything), and the "I'll happily run THIS campaign" is actually a creepy GMPC wankfest with convoluted homebrew rules that make 3e look fun by comparison in a crapass faux-LotR setting that makes Shannara look like Shakespeare.
I've never encountered a bait & switch that wasn't bait & shit.
Bait & Switch is a horrible idea.
The scenario in the OP would be off putting in the extreme. Its explicitly lying to the Players for no good reasons. If you wanted to run something else, advertise for that. It sounds like a pretty by the book "Bait and Switch" in the strict sense: advertise one thing to get them in and give another with no warning.
But I've seen the phrase used to describe more hazy situations. The module "Expedition to the Barrier peaks" (I think that's what it was called, an older D and D advnture with sci-fi elements) has been called a Bait and Switch as have revelation about a campaign that weren't obvious up front: like supernatural elements exist in a modern adventure setting.
I've been in games were there were twists. "Modern characters cast into a fantasy or high tech world" but they were either with an established group with allot of trust built up or set up such so characters were useful even as fish out of water. Or were temporary twist in an ongoing setting, sometimes brought about by PC actions. "You had to press shiny red button on the Interdimensional Thingamajig, didn't you?" Its a matter of context and cause but it a subject best handled delicately.
Some people enjoy suprises, others react badly to anything but what was 'written on the label" occuring in a game. Twists in games work best when, like in other entertainment, they seem coherent and consistent not just pulled out of thin air.
But like many things, bad idea or not can depend on your skill and execution. I've really enjoyed some things I wouldn't have if they done by a less talented person/gm.
man, I wish I'd read this thread years ago before I did my Stargate SG-1 game (that turned out to be a one shot...
I thought it made sense in the lore of the setting, PCs are part of the Stargate command, and explore other worlds, since SGC doesn't use a Dial Home Device, they can dial worlds that DHDs can't. The dialing computer glitches the address they intend to try, but the new address connected. The PCs end up in a swamp type environment. there is no solid ground, all landmasses, such as they are, are all large clumps of plants thet have grown together around the gate and its DHD (which are on something that floats, but they aren't sure what).
Soon the natives, humans modified to be able to live underwater come along and welcome the visitors, they have legends of others coming through the gate, but this is the first time anyone has ever seen a visitor. Locals are friendly, almost too friendly, and don't really want the PCs to leave, but are excited at the idea of going with.
Eventually the PCs ask what the locals call their home world. R'lyeh is the answer.
Quote from: remial;1034476man, I wish I'd read this thread years ago before I did my Stargate SG-1 game (that turned out to be a one shot...
I thought it made sense in the lore of the setting, PCs are part of the Stargate command, and explore other worlds, since SGC doesn't use a Dial Home Device, they can dial worlds that DHDs can't. The dialing computer glitches the address they intend to try, but the new address connected. The PCs end up in a swamp type environment. there is no solid ground, all landmasses, such as they are, are all large clumps of plants thet have grown together around the gate and its DHD (which are on something that floats, but they aren't sure what).
Soon the natives, humans modified to be able to live underwater come along and welcome the visitors, they have legends of others coming through the gate, but this is the first time anyone has ever seen a visitor. Locals are friendly, almost too friendly, and don't really want the PCs to leave, but are excited at the idea of going with.
Eventually the PCs ask what the locals call their home world. R'lyeh is the answer.
Your idea wouldn't have bothered most of the people I am with at all unless you completely changed the setting to focus solely on the Mythos, rewriting the overall Stargate SG-1 setting to fit and not the other way around (which I get the impression is what you did) and possibly not even then. Some of them would have gotten a kick out of it. Personally, I don't put crossover and homages under "Bait and Switch".
The only misstep you may have made is using this as the first scenario in your game,IMO
Yeah, to me remial's game is not a Bait-And-Switch as much as it is a nice new twist on an ancient trope.
Quote from: remial;1034476man, I wish I'd read this thread years ago before I did my Stargate SG-1 game (that turned out to be a one shot...
I thought it made sense in the lore of the setting, PCs are part of the Stargate command, and explore other worlds, since SGC doesn't use a Dial Home Device, they can dial worlds that DHDs can't. The dialing computer glitches the address they intend to try, but the new address connected. The PCs end up in a swamp type environment. there is no solid ground, all landmasses, such as they are, are all large clumps of plants thet have grown together around the gate and its DHD (which are on something that floats, but they aren't sure what).
Soon the natives, humans modified to be able to live underwater come along and welcome the visitors, they have legends of others coming through the gate, but this is the first time anyone has ever seen a visitor. Locals are friendly, almost too friendly, and don't really want the PCs to leave, but are excited at the idea of going with.
Eventually the PCs ask what the locals call their home world. R'lyeh is the answer.
Quote from: CarlD.;1034480Your idea wouldn't have bothered most of the people I am with at all unless you completely changed the setting to focus solely on the Mythos, rewriting the overall Stargate SG-1 setting to fit and not the other way around (which I get the impression is what you did) and possibly not even then. Some of them would have gotten a kick out of it. Personally, I don't put crossover and homages under "Bait and Switch".
The only misstep you may have made is using this as the first scenario in your game,IMO
Quote from: jeff37923;1034488Yeah, to me remial's game is not a Bait-And-Switch as much as it is a nice new twist on an ancient trope.
1. As long as the PCs remain game-viable in the new context, sure.
2. For the main set-up (SG-1), this should be one of many worlds the campaign explores, rather than using the main set-up to get the PCs to the setting the GM wanted all along.
Quote from: jeff37923;1032962...and then during the first session tell the group that this was going to be the only D&D session...
I would have been packed up and at least half a mile away before he finished explaining. :D
I would be really pissed off if I was lured into one game for the purpose of playing another. Now, if the GM played a full campaign and then said, "I'm thinking of switching to a different system, anyone on-board?" I would probably give it a shot.