So, long and short of it. My players are having a ball. They love all their abilities, they love how tough their characters are, and the plot of the game.
I am DMing, and am sick to death of 5E. I don't think it's the antichrist of D&D or anything, but I have a number of serious complaints. The group is around level 8 (5 players) and almost anything I throw at them, even when I throw Deadly Encounters (by the book, at the very highest end of the xp budget or above), I can't challenge them anymore. Their magical items are moderate at best, one character still has none at all. I also find the sheer number of abilities the characters have is daunting to keep track of. I want to just take the campaign, wave the wand and have it switch to AD&D (1e) and keep moving on.
But how to convince the group? How do I sell them on why this needs to happen. Because, seriously, I like the direction the story is going, I love the characters (and there has been some deaths), and I'm delighted the group is having fun, but it's no damn fun for me. It's also a hell of a lot of work for me to design the encounters and opponents in the game. I personally love AD&D 1E, and have done so since I bought it (by accident) at a used game store.
Not sure if I'm venting here or not, but... advice? And please - for the love of Pete, the advice of "just run what the players are enjoying" is neither appreciated nor constructive. I don't wish to continue using the 5E engine at all, and have been threatening to cancel the game lately due to my lack of fun.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912492[...]the advice of "just run what the players are enjoying" is neither appreciated nor constructive. I don't wish to continue using the 5E engine at all, and have been threatening to cancel the game lately due to my lack of fun.
Then you are at an impasse.Ask if one of the players is willing to take over GMing duties while you play. If you're not even willing to play 5E and you're prepared to prioritize that choice over having fun with your friends, cancelling the game is the only option you've allowed yourself.
I'd say, rather than waste your time trying to explain to the players why you don't enjoy running that other game - demonstrate your obvious enthusiasm for 1e AD&D and see how that goes. Obviously, there's probably going to be a certain element of 'you just want to take our toys away from us', but hopefully they'll be mature enough, and trust you enough, to get over that in favor of everyone having a good time. At least in my experience, sticking with 1e ultimately makes for a much richer experience precisely because you're not tasked with juggling all manner of player abilities and massive stat blocks and can focus on just playing the game. You'll also be freed up to improvise encounters on the fly - which sounds like it's next to impossible in 5e.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912492So, long and short of it. My players are having a ball. They love all their abilities, they love how tough their characters are, and the plot of the game.
I am DMing, and am sick to death of 5E. I don't think it's the antichrist of D&D or anything, but I have a number of serious complaints. The group is around level 8 (5 players) and almost anything I throw at them, even when I throw Deadly Encounters (by the book, at the very highest end of the xp budget or above), I can't challenge them anymore. Their magical items are moderate at best, one character still has none at all. I also find the sheer number of abilities the characters have is daunting to keep track of. I want to just take the campaign, wave the wand and have it switch to AD&D (1e) and keep moving on.
But how to convince the group? How do I sell them on why this needs to happen. Because, seriously, I like the direction the story is going, I love the characters (and there has been some deaths), and I'm delighted the group is having fun, but it's no damn fun for me. It's also a hell of a lot of work for me to design the encounters and opponents in the game. I personally love AD&D 1E, and have done so since I bought it (by accident) at a used game store.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912492Not sure if I'm venting here or not, but... advice? And please - for the love of Pete, the advice of "just run what the players are enjoying" is neither appreciated nor constructive. I don't wish to continue using the 5E engine at all, and have been threatening to cancel the game lately due to my lack of fun.
How much experience you had running AD&D campaigns?
When you say AD&D? Are you talking about Unearthed Arcana as well? Are the two Survival books with their proficiency system are going to be part of it? Are you going to severely limit the amount of magic items, because AD&D 1st still has the same problems as 5e it just shifted over the magic items the players acquire. The UA classes are overpowered compared to the PHB classes. Then there is the fact that the Monster Manual is really OD&D Plus. So when you throw UA in the mix, the player's power curve exceeds that of the monsters.
The way I foisted OD&D, in the form of Swords & Wizardry, on my group is that I explained this is campaign I am going to run and how the rules work with it. What helped was the fact that all the options they were used were still present except they were more notes for your character sheet with much of their effects roleplayed rather using rule mechanics like GURPS advantage and skill setup.
I introduced a handful of house rules that I felt were necessary to run my setting using OD&D. They were Ritual casting, Abilities, and Combat Stunts. Ritual casting were for a cost in gold, the character could cast any spell out of their spellbook (or any clerical spell) as a ritual) The limits were that it took 10 minutes to do (think wandering monster checks), and that you could only cast spells up to half of the highest level you can memorize. Abilities work liked skills except any character can do them, some were better at a certain abilities than others. For example Fighters would good at Athletics (bending bars, lift gates, open doors, etc), and Burglars were good at Stealth. But Burglars can use Athletics, and Fighters could use Stealth. Combat Stunt allow character to things like trip, disarm, etc in lieu of damage, but the target got a unmodifiered saving throw. Which what worked against a orc or even a troll was not likely to result while fighting a Demon Lord or a high level Fighter.
I am not saying these are the changes YOU need to make, but what you need to do is think about the kind of campaign you want to run with AD&D. Add anything you need to make that campaign happen the way you want it to happen with the AD&D rules. Then sell the CAMPAIGN to the players.
Otherwise the chances are high they will say no. D&D 5e has more ways of customizing your characters than AD&D and has more details and options in how you can fight out a combat encounters. Both are the primary source of complaints back in the day about AD&D versus the competition.
You may find that, as a compromise, that you stick with 5e but you use only the four classes from the Basic book. Or those four plus a handful of others you deem suitable for your campaign. And like my suggestion for AD&D, I would recommend you think about the kind of campaign you want to run. Go through 5e and pick out everything you want for the campaign and ignore the rest. Sell the campaign to the players and why it works the way it does.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912492I don't think it's the antichrist of D&D or anything, but I have a number of serious complaints. The group is around level 8 (5 players) and almost anything I throw at them, even when I throw Deadly Encounters (by the book, at the very highest end of the xp budget or above), I can't challenge them anymore. Their magical items are moderate at best, one character still has none at all. I also find the sheer number of abilities the characters have is daunting to keep track of.
For what little it's worth, your situation matches mine.
Between teleportation, wind walking, elemental wildshapes (think earthglide and fly speed of 100ft while resistant to mundane weapons), polymorphing, reroll abilities on everybody and everything, perpetual invisibility, scrying that recharges on a short rest for the warlock... I don't know, I just don't want to cook my brain anymore for the bizarre scenarios and dick moves it takes to challenge a party that can do all those things while waving off buckets of damage.
Few fictional universes allow this many reality-breaking powers on the protagonists, and those that do have to resort to frequent bullshit excuses in order to tell any sort of human-relatable story with identifiable dramatic tension. I'm just not skillful enough to keep up.
I'm probably going to let one of my games die at an appropriate point of closure and run the other one until 10th level or so and call it quits.
I don't know what system and premise I'll switch to next, but the special powers will be much more focused and limited.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912492But how to convince the group? How do I sell them on why this needs to happen. Because, seriously, I like the direction the story is going, I love the characters (and there has been some deaths), and I'm delighted the group is having fun, but it's no damn fun for me. It's also a hell of a lot of work for me to design the encounters and opponents in the game. I personally love AD&D 1E, and have done so since I bought it (by accident) at a used game store.
Tell your group what you typed up here. Ask them if they'd be willing to switch to AD&D. If they say No, you're fucked. Quit playing/GMing.
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;912513Between teleportation, wind walking, elemental wildshapes (think earthglide and fly speed of 100ft while resistant to mundane weapons), polymorphing, reroll abilities on everybody and everything, perpetual invisibility, scrying that recharges on a short rest for the warlock... I don't know, I just don't want to cook my brain anymore for the bizarre scenarios and dick moves it takes to challenge a party that can do all those things while waving off buckets of damage.
Does it seem like E6/P6 might make a comeback?
How about plain vanilla 5E? The big four races/classes. Or, if you really want to power down, this (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/157011/Freebooters-on-the-Frontier) and roll everything random (which means very few spell casters).
Some observations from DMing 5e and playing it.
1: The CRs for encounters are a loose guide at best and are not the be-all-end-all of gauges for how tough a battle will be.
2: Make sure the players arent abusing things like Polymorph, which it sounds like someone possibly is. Keep an eye on the restrictions. Teleport and Fly are two more that get abused. In fact it kinda sounds like your players are reading from the "How to Abuse Spells For Dummies" playbook. Which leads to 3.
3: If the players are trying to game the system and/or abuse magic or abilities. Then switching to AD&D isnt going to stop that. In fact you'll get instances where they can MORE abuse things.
X: Personally I'd be finding your group getting progressively on my nerves if I were the DM and that was going on. Instead I'd lock down some things and make sure the players are aware that some of those tricks dont fly. Or dont work as they thought they would. And more importantly. If they can do these stunts. So can the enemy. Its not so funny when an enemy sorcerer uses those same tricks you have been.
Probably part of the probem too is you have a large group. These tend to be ALOT harder to challenge as they can cover alot of points whereas smaller groups have more and more openings that can be exploited.
Also look at tactics for the enemy. Lowly wolves can be a threat to even higher level groups under the right circumstances. Or even just shifting to more skilled ranged combatants and mages.
As for switching to AD&D. About all you can do is pitch the idea and see if they go for it. But as noted. You may end up with the exact same problem all over.
"My players are using the game as intended, and it's annoying me. SO I want to change to a system that's even more broken and prone to abuses, that'll fix their wagon!"
Did I get that right?
Announce that you are no longer enjoying running the game because <$REASONS> but you'd dig an old-school, save-or-die, balls-to-the-walls AD&D 1e game. So much, in fact, that you'd be willing to use the same setting and characters (including the PCs), as a compromise, if everyone's game.
If you're not enjoying running the game, just don't run it. You don't have a sacred duty to run the game everyone loves when it's no longer fun for you. You're just as entitled to enjoy yourself as everyone else.
Quote from: Omega;912531If the players are trying to game the system and/or abuse magic or abilities. Then switching to AD&D isnt going to stop that. In fact you'll get instances where they can MORE abuse things.
Also this. Make sure the problem is with 5e and not with the way players are behaving. Ask yourself whether a change in setting would serve you better than a change in system, or if a simpler conversation on playstyle and expectations would save you a lot of headache.
The easiest way to up the difficulty of 5E if things are getting too easy is to change the definition of short rest to a night's rest, and long rest to consecutive nights in a safe locale. And you can always make encounters more difficult in any edition by changing the context. So more proactive enemies, more ambushes, intelligent spell use by enemies, combining monsters in cruel ways, combining traps and monsters, etc.
If you're still frustrated, convert Rappan Athuk to 5E and have at it.
Quote from: Christopher Brady;912536"My players are using the game as intended, and it's annoying me. SO I want to change to a system that's even more broken and prone to abuses, that'll fix their wagon!"
Did I get that right?
Someone seems to really like 5E.:-)
I feel like it's the fiddliness the OP doesn't like, as indicated by the tracking of all the different things a PC can do. I also find that a complete turn off, as well, which is one reason I don't run 5th. I also wholeheartedly agree with Cb here that AD&D might simply present different problems, leaving the OP in the same position as before (which is why I suggested "Freebooters on the Frontier").:-D
I'm sure that there are ways to make the game more challenging for them (for you).
Restrict how many Rests that they can take. Have the enemy also use those exploitative spells. Introduce more environmental complications that restrict movement/flight/concentration checks. Increase the DC of your challenges so that they have to use up their Inspiration. Pile on more monsters that have save or OUCH effects (Banshees, Medusas etc...).
Or yeah, just talk with them and explain that you aren't having much fun because you're not beating up their characters enough, I guess.
EDIT: if it's more about the fiddlyness of tracking their abilities... Do you supervise their choices in levelling up? Do you check up on the spells that they choose? I once missed that a spellcaster chose Flight and regretted it.
Quote from: cranebump;912549Someone seems to really like 5E.:-)
Not really. It's just that I've played 2e more than I care to remember, I have the 1e books, and given the sheer mass of conflicting stuff, AD&D really is prone to more abuse.
Quote from: cranebump;912549I feel like it's the fiddliness the OP doesn't like, as indicated by the tracking of all the different things a PC can do. I also find that a complete turn off, as well, which is one reason I don't run 5th. I also wholeheartedly agree with Cb here that AD&D might simply present different problems, leaving the OP in the same position as before (which is why I suggested "Freebooters on the Frontier").:-D
And the Players should be handling their classes, not the DM.
This is a surprisingly simple issue, with a surprisingly straightforward answer.
What you do is this: you announce that you're going to run the system you want to run. Any of your players who want to roll up characters and play are welcome. Anyone who wants no part of it are free to find a game more to their liking, and blessings upon them. You then go out and find people to top out the group to your satisfaction, and soldier on.
It's my overwhelming observation that it's ten times easier to find players who want to play the game you want than to convert existing players who already have preferences they want to stick with. Fanboy enthusiasm is far less transferable than we fantasize. Heck, would you become an ice hockey fan just because I am? Dig nautical folk music just because I drag you to the Mystic Sea Music Festival and guarantee you'll like it?
Quote from: Ravenswing;912561
It's my overwhelming observation that it's ten times easier to find players who want to play the game you want than to convert existing players who already have preferences they want to stick with.
How depressing.
Quote from: Ravenswing;912561It's my overwhelming observation that it's ten times easier to find players who want to play the game you want than to convert existing players who already have preferences they want to stick with.
That still might depend on what game you want... but if it's within the realm of D&D probably not too hard.
IME it's been the GMs who decide/declare what game is getting played and I've always been fine with that. It's usually been primarily their effort, their table, their books. It's only recent that I've seen a couple of GMs who fret over what the Players want... and on both occasions that was just about ALL on one Player who put up a lot of resistance over not getting his way. The rest of us were fine with whatever, because we liked the GM's style. Trusted that anything he ran would be fun.
Quote from: Ravenswing;912561It's my overwhelming observation that it's ten times easier to find players who want to play the game you want than to convert existing players who already have preferences they want to stick with.
Only if you are so fortunate as to live in an area with a surplus of players you can afford to just jettison those who dont want to change systems. Or can afford to jettison players at all due to extenuating circumstances. (Like one of the players is supplying the gameing locale or transportation.)
I have never read nor played 5e so I can't help you make 5e run the way you like.
I will say that if you are seriously not enjoying running your 5e game it is time to change something. Life is too short to spend *not* enjoying your hobbies. Explain to your players the reasons why you are not enjoying 5e, offer to continue the campaign with the same characters converted to 1e and see what they say.
If you all switch to 1e and the game still goes pear shaped, just try playing something else.
When your players talk about the game, how do they refer to it?
Do they call it D&D night or 5e night? Then you don't have much chance of switching systems without effectively disintegrating the group.
Do they call it Coffee Zombie's Campaign? In that case they might go for it if you present your case that you feel you'd enjoy the game more if you were running on a system you preferred. Even then, it's probably means a serious group split.
Quote from: Omega;912573Only if you are so fortunate as to live in an area with a surplus of players you can afford to just jettison those who dont want to change systems.
If there isn't a surplus of Players then chances are they're not going to have a lot of games to flee to either. Finding a new group, with the right location and schedule, isn't so easy.
Going from 5e to 1e isn't such a radical change that a reasonable person, already comfortably situated with time and place, is going to throw a fit and leave.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912492I am DMing, and am sick to death of 5E. I don't think it's the antichrist of D&D or anything, but I have a number of serious complaints. The group is around level 8 (5 players) and almost anything I throw at them, even when I throw Deadly Encounters (by the book, at the very highest end of the xp budget or above), I can't challenge them anymore. Their magical items are moderate at best, one character still has none at all. I also find the sheer number of abilities the characters have is daunting to keep track of. I want to just take the campaign, wave the wand and have it switch to AD&D (1e) and keep moving on.
I know you're bent on converting them to AD&D players, but I want to talk a little about this before attempting to help with your goal. I still gotta try, just move on down to ******** if you just don't want to hear about making 5e more fun for you.
The "kewl new power every level" paradigm, while beautiful on paper, does start to fail about right at the level you've noted. Once each player has half-a-dozen powers, it can become extremely challenging just to keep track of all the abilities as a DM...and it gets even worse as the levels mount past this. Trying to come up with challenging, much less interesting, fights at this level is rough. With 5 players at the table, you're looking at 40 different "I win" buttons that might get pressed on you (note: this is hyperbole, realistically, you'll have around half a dozen "I win" buttons to deal with, and a bunch of really annoying buttons).
The CR system has always been dubious in D&D, and was developed before the "kewl powers" paradigm was fully developed. A level 6-7 party can take out a CR 13 beholder with perhaps only one casualty, maybe less (just happened last week in my campaign...the ranger blew a Dex save and was disintegrated, finally done with Little Keep on the Borderlands, fwiw).
You need to start looking at the adventuring party as a puzzle, and how to deal with the powers. Toss the CR system, and throw a CR 14 encounter at them (don't waste time with "solo" monsters, as "kewl powers" make such encounters obsolete). Note carefully what aspects of the fight were a little challenging, note carefully what "I win" buttons made the fight much easier than you thought it would be.
Then do another fight (I'm planning at least 2 more Beholder battles in the next month or so), bringing in some things to stop the "I win" button that got you last time. You don't need to go all Gygaxian here. If "Counterspell" shut you down, just bring twice as many enemy wizards next time, and be more careful about Counterspell's limitations. If the Bard's "You can't do that" ability was annoying, bring a Bard (or creature with Bard power of your own) to counter it.
A few more fights like that, and you'll start knowing what buttons you need to deal with for the fights that you want to be tough (there should be some easy fights, of course, where the buttons work fine).
Start making your own monsters. Keep in mind, the 5E MM was written with almost no playtesting, so the monsters really, really, aren't able to deal with the "kewl powers", and weren't given particularly amazing powers of their own (I just got Tome of Beasts, can't tell you right off if its any better). They're *way* to weak for the CR, after about CR5 (to be fair, Gygax realized monsters really couldn't stand up to "high level", i.e., 9th level, characters in AD&D, hence the Drow, at the risk of digressing). Heck, start using "character" enemies...the point is you need to start tweaking monsters, the vanilla MM monsters just can't cut it against mid-level characters that actually use the buttons.
Bottom line, 5e is a great game, and plays well into the teens levels (I've done it)...but realize this is a mostly untested system, you'll need to put some work into it. That's about all I can is, keep working at figuring out the system until you really do know how to challenge the players.
************
QuoteBut how to convince the group? How do I sell them on why this needs to happen. Because, seriously, I like the direction the story is going, I love the characters (and there has been some deaths), and I'm delighted the group is having fun, but it's no damn fun for me. It's also a hell of a lot of work for me to design the encounters and opponents in the game. I personally love AD&D 1E, and have done so since I bought it (by accident) at a used game store.
After a PF campaign ended due to the hypercomplexity, I sold my players on an AD&D campaign.
You'll need to sell them, of course.
Key points:
Simplicity. You don't have to deal with feats, kewl powers, or all that crap.
1) Character development is ongoing. Your character develops through his choices and through play. You don't map out everything about your character from levels 1 to 20...stuff happens. Your fighter doesn't commit to the Ungoolian Axe-Mace, taking a dozen feats just so he can use it "properly." Your fighter can use ANY weapon, and does so equally. When you go to White Plume Mountain and find a magic trident, you can *actually* use the damn thing, instead of melting it down to make it into an Ungoolian Axe-Mace. There's no telling what your character will be like at 5th, or at 10th.
2) Balance is for wussies. You really can find a +2 sword at third level...the game won't snap in half.
3) Fairness is for wussies. That great sword you found? It can get dusted by a Rust Monster. You won't be able to beat on the rust monster's corpse to turn it back into a +2 sword (4e; in 5e Rust monsters can't even affect magic items...damn that's weak). Your character can get aged 20 years by a ghost, and you can't just drink ghost-juice (sold everywhere) to counter it. You won't get "I win" buttons...but the monsters do, and to succeed you need plan a little better than "I press my I Win button."
4) Magic is hard. The wizards don't get to do everything for free, it's actually easy for someone besides a wizard to counter a wizard spell. You actually have to pay attention, instead of just going through the list of "I win" buttons until you find one you like.
5) Combat is fast and easy. In AD&D, you don't have characters rushing 30' a round, zipping into a room and zipping out, while the clueless monsters wait their turn. It's more like 6' (a single 5' square). Taking movement out of combat speeds things up. Having "I attack" as the only button your character can press means the player might look up from his character sheet and see if maybe he can push a column over or something.
6) Big isn't useless. One of the weird things about 3e and later is the grid map, and the idea that all monsters take up a cube in space. I'm not saying Ogres were ever that amazing, but having them take up a 10x10 cube makes them almost immobile in combat, unable to focus on an enemy...when you get to larger creatures, a 15x15 cube monster is basically helpless. But AD&D monsters don't have be put on a grid except when you need to show something in particular. It's assumed they have reach or whatever.
7) The numbers are smaller. While this is basically just repeating the ease of the game, but the point is still you don't have to do nearly so much fiddling with the numbers. Your fighter still starts with 10 or so hit points. A huge, ancient, red dragon can breath for 88 points of damage, and many characters will never be able to survive that one attack...the dragon can do it two more times.
The thing is, of course, not alot of people can really handle the sort of play AD&D offers. Instead of trying to sell a whole campaign, start them out on a "one off" for nostalgia (Keep on the Borderlands is amazingly good for this--a thin module in page count by today's standards, but there are months of play there).
Now doing this mid-campaign is a drag, and I just don't recommend it (I don't see players parting with the kewl powers in any event), so start them off at level 1 in AD&D, as a one off. It just makes more sense.
(sorry for all the typos/errors, really gotta go)
I haven't played 5e or even read the books. Is it too hard to change a few things like upping the AC, HP and damage of the creatures to present a greater challenge? Or, is that considered cheating in your circle? Anyway, if it's an overabundance of rules and bloat from supplements or something, then yeah, I'd tell them I wanted a run a different system.
No matter what, the worst thing you can do is continue to run a game that you aren't interested in. Be up front and honest with your players. Tell them how you feel and then offer to run the system that you will enjoy running. If they don't like what you are offering, then invite someone else to run a system of their choosing. If no one wants to play your game or run anything themselves then find better players because only a bunch of dickweeds would be mad at someone for not continuing to run a game that they dread.
Sounds like you're getting overrun by your players. Grow some balls. Tell them: This is the game I want to play, and this is why. It is cool because of X, Y, and Z and I want to run it. It will be more fun because A,B and C and because it's what I'm into - and I'm the GM. Anybody with me? If they don't like it, find new players who will.
That's a bit harsh. Seriously, I get where you're at. I've been there before. It is hard to change systems mid-stream especially when you are running a bunch of Disney Princesses who think their characters are entitled to ultimate awesomeness simply because they are the protagonists. So here are some more helpful suggestions - maybe:
A) Throw some encounters at them that are above their ability to defeat. Quit challenging them and pummel the shit out 'em, or at least scare them. See if they figure out when to run - or let a few of them die off - they'll figure it out. By the way, this problem is why Gygax wrote Tomb of Horrors. If you give player's problems which have no direct solution - you will be surprised at what they come up with. You don't want to be a dick about it, but you could start introducing these kinds of AD&D concepts - like there is always something beyond the PCs ability to confront directly. Make them think, use tactics and every means at their disposal. 5e is robust enough to do that unless you have already given them all free levels and vorpal swords. In short, scale up your encounters and challenges to create an AD&D-like playstyle within the game you are running now.
B) Indulge them. Let them run rough-shod all over the campaign and "win." "Oh boy, looks like you just killed the avatar of Tiamat again with your awesomely kewel powers - whoop-di-doo." They'll get bored soon enough. Then introduce them to AD&D, or better yet WFRP or Cthulhu. They'll see the light.
From now on, when you want to play fantasy, play lower level games and be stingy with XP and goodies (or play BRP or RQ which are low level by default).
I don't know if that's any help or not, but that's what I got at the moment. If you come up with a better solution let me know.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912492So, long and short of it. My players are having a ball. They love all their abilities, they love how tough their characters are
QuoteThe group is around level 8 (5 players) and almost anything I throw at them, even when I throw Deadly Encounters (by the book, at the very highest end of the xp budget or above), I can't challenge them anymore.
From this it sounds like what the players are enjoying (game balance tilted badly in their favour) is what you're not enjoying. Nasty.
I've been there (though with a long term Savage Worlds game plus houserules)...eventually we started over with a new system but it took awhile before they all reached realization that the game was now completely broken in their favour. If I could've downpowered them by converting systems that might've been better but I think convincing them could have been tricky.
Im ignoring everyone that posted in this thread. Yeah... ignore list, bitches! Nah, just kidding, but I ain't reading ya shit.
You the DM, boo. End the current campaign (I recommend a fight with a dragon in side a temple, or maybe a rogue god at the end of the world to prevent the apocalypse... you know, fucking METAL set piece showdown stuff). Then put the AD&D books on the table and say "This is what I'm running next. You don't like it? You DM".
I never let my players dictate what I'll run for them. Ask input? Sure. But If I want to run Runequest, I'm running Runequest. If I want to keep my players, I gotta keep the game awesome... but that's not up to the system.
In short: DM/GM got the power 'cause they are the one putting in the work. Most players are lazy and system-agnostic. They wanna show up and be conan or gandolf or blackleaf. If they wasn't lazy fucks, they'd have their own screen. Use the force, luke. And if they don't like it, put on the viking hat and shove a lightsaber in their eye. Make 'em play blind and in agony, because thats what players deserve!
It sounds as if your problem is that you are using the 5e Encounter Building rules. If you ignore those and run 5e as if it were 1e you will see far less of a problem. In 1e, 5 level 8 PCs would be taking on hordes of giants (Against the Giants), pit fiends, balrogs/type VI demons, et al. If you let the players choose their own threat level by eg running a megadungeon or wilderness sandbox, and use 1e style high level encounters with ancient dragons, packs of demons, dozens of ogres and hundreds of orcs, the threat issue will vanish.
Edit: Also, don't try to make every encounter balanced/challenging, that only works in 4e. My 5e groups love kerbstomp battles as much as they love taking on monsters 10 CRs above their level.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912492But how to convince the group? How do I sell them on why this needs to happen. Because, seriously, I like the direction the story is going, I love the characters (and there has been some deaths), and I'm delighted the group is having fun, but it's no damn fun for me. It's also a hell of a lot of work for me to design the encounters and opponents in the game. I personally love AD&D 1E, and have done so since I bought it (by accident) at a used game store.
One thing I did when I couldn't stand 3e was run a campaign where I used 1e/Classic monster stats while the players used 3e rules. So eg their 6th level 3e PCs would take on hordes of 8 hd, 36 hp hill giants I flipped AC to ascending and used hd = attack bonus like in C&C. I rarely had to engage with the 3e mechanics at all. And 5e is closer to 1e than 3e is. If your problem is purely GM-side then you could do something similar; used 1e monster stats and any other 1e stuff you like, but let the players use 5e.
Consider a radical departure to a rules light non-D&D game.
I personally suggest checking out these two: *they are free and excellent*
Mazes & Minotaurs
http://storygame.free.fr/MAZES.htm
Warrior, Rogue & Mage
http://www.stargazergames.eu/games/warrior-rogue-mage/
Here is my advice: Get out of the DMs chair. Be a player or just take a break. Forget conversion. Let someone else take over a bit. Study up on 5E or whatever you plan to run next.
I've done any/all of these myself time to time. With almost any system I've had problems running, it comes down to one or two problems, in regards to the game itself.
1) I don't know the system well enough
2) The players know the system better than I (or perhaps they think they do!)
I don't know which of these it could be for you. If I had to guess it would be 1, which is why you want to go back to something you know better. If 5E is not for you-then it's not. Since your players seem to love it so much its up to you decide whether to put in the time (to study it) or not. You don't have to convince anyone, just state the truth (you're not enjoying it) and ask for someone else to run something.
If your not having fun... What is the point...
Quote from: Christopher Brady;912536"My players are using the game as intended, and it's annoying me. SO I want to change to a system that's even more broken and prone to abuses, that'll fix their wagon!"
Did I get that right?
Yes. OP needs to grow some balls already. Give his group a chance to either find a new DM or group because they like 5e and the OP obviously has little knowledge of 5e. So his solution instead of actually learning the game, modifying it slightly or just letting someone else run the game? Is to go with a ridiculously broken older version. Nice solution there.
Thanks for all the feedback forumites. A few notes, since I've derived a lot of what I need here from the responses, but I think the conversation could be worthwhile to others so I'll clarify a few things.
1) I've retooled 5E. I've explored alternate options. I certainly don't stick to the crappy, useless encounter building system (though I reference it here and there to let the players know what they're fighting). What I do find is that a group of 6th level heroes took down an Adult Black Dragon because they rolled lucky three times. The "rests" system is, imho, the worst part of the entire game. It destroys, utterly, any ability to challenge the heroes because all they have to do is take 5 and large swaths of abilities return. No, I'm done with 5E - it might be the game some people are looking for, it isn't for me. I've looked at altering how rests work, but an awful lot of abilities are tied to rests, and some are very useless if short rests are too long (like the alternate rests system suggested in the DMG). I've even noted that the characters lacking a need to ever "return to sanctuary" is in fact crushing the challenge of the entire game, they don't see it. They aren't looking. They love playing overpowered Mary Sues who tromp from one god kicking encounter to the next.
2) I tried stepping down from DMing. Out of the group, one is a good DM, one has some DMing skills but tends to run lacklustre campaigns, and the others are younger and have no experience nor interest. It's just not the practical solution. The one who is a good DM is running a different game, and wants to play. I want to run a game, its where I have more fun to be honest.
3) I can't chuff my group off. Two of them are my own teenage sons, one is basically a brother to me, the other is one of my closest friends and my daughter. This does, indeed, completely alter the terms, but I didn't want the advice to focus on that point, so I committed it from the initial ask. Needless to say, I'm not "firing" that group. I am, however, going to just tell them what I'm running, and be as polite as possible in saying "this is the deal".
4) I have run AD&D and have never found it, or OD&D, anywhere near as complex as 3rd, 4th or 5th edition. The amount of player options on a sheet at 10th level on the typical character sheet between the pre-3rd and post 3rd characters are significant. I actually find it difficult to plan for too many varied abilities, and while I do look at what players choose when they level up (and make suggestions on ones that make sense for the personality of the character and the saga), it's the player's character. They're just using what's available to them, and not breaking the system. My choice for AD&D is that I always find the mix in AD&D personally satisfying.
5) My way of dealing with players who try and exploit the system is to tell them to stop being a dick, or I'll return the favour. I have indeed returned the favour many a time when the BS didn't stop. We're friends, we talk about things in the system that's unbalancing it often.
6) The reason this entire game hasn't already switched to something else is that the two mature members of the group have never shed their mentality of "play one character until it dies", and are very invested in their characters and the story of the game. This means they are always reticent to ever reboot a game, switch to s/e, or make alterations. This has the bonus of them being invested in a game, the downside being obvious. They also don't seem to get the campaigns come and go, and that we need to be able to switch things up when things aren't fun.
7) While I own a copy of all of the AD&D books, I stick to the core three. Period. I might drag in an option or two from UA, I would never use the classes from it. I also find it easier to "hack" AD&D, make my own classes, and even work with players to make a custom class. As Doom pointed out, the numbers are smaller, the choices are more finite and easier to gauge the outcomes of. I have seriously considered OD&D, and even bought the collectors box when it came out a few years back, but the game feels very unfinished. AD&D feels very complete, and there are a lot of classic modules I'd love to run for it.
My take away is that I need to just put my foot down, be honest with my friends (my sons don't have much choice). They enjoy my game a lot, and always enjoy my games. We mesh well together as a group, with only minor stylistic play style issues that creep out. 5E has just enhanced the issues that vex me the most, and delight my two fiends the best. It's amplifying the usually subtle disconnects in our play.
Quote from: J.L. Duncan;912652Here is my advice: Get out of the DMs chair. Be a player or just take a break.
Excellent suggestion, in general. Easy to forget what it's like on the player's side. Speaking of: if your players are having a good time, it seems you're doing something right.
I get into these reboot phases a LOT. But that's because I constantly want to try new stuff. I've had to resist the urge to system jump, because I'm sure my players get tire of it. My compromise is to adapt small things using the current system, and to ask player opinion if I want to do something radical. It's good to be talked down sometimes.
Quote from: S'mon;912642It sounds as if your problem is that you are using the 5e Encounter Building rules. If you ignore those and run 5e as if it were 1e you will see far less of a problem. In 1e, 5 level 8 PCs would be taking on hordes of giants (Against the Giants), pit fiends, balrogs/type VI demons, et al. If you let the players choose their own threat level by eg running a megadungeon or wilderness sandbox, and use 1e style high level encounters with ancient dragons, packs of demons, dozens of ogres and hundreds of orcs, the threat issue will vanish.
Edit: Also, don't try to make every encounter balanced/challenging, that only works in 4e. My 5e groups love kerbstomp battles as much as they love taking on monsters 10 CRs above their level.
Very much this. If you want to challenge the players after a point then the CR has to go.
And yeah. Not all battles have to be challenging. Sometimes its fun to actually get to show off how mighty you are. It gets old when its 24/7 mighty. It aso gets old being in a life or death battle 24/7.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912656The "rests" system is, imho, the worst part of the entire game. It destroys, utterly, any ability to challenge the heroes because all they have to do is take 5 and large swaths of abilities return.
alot of "boo-hoo-hoo me make up excuse to quits mean ol gamez!"
1: Limiting and denying short rests is key to keeping the 5e game on track.
2: Sounds like you got talked into, or talked yourself into, running 5e when you really didnt want to and have been looking for, or making, excuses to end the game and go to something else? Why didnt you just do this in the first place?
X: As for the players who like to stick to one character/campaign/system being "juvenile"? Really? Since when did players who fidget and cant commit to a game or system replace maturity?
My D&D experience is limited, but I read through the thread out of interest and I think I know what I might likely try in such a situation, where the players are enjoying their power trips and I'm not, and I've given up trying to get the system to be something interesting to me, and I've talked to the reasonable players about it and they aren't sympathetic enough to want to change systems, and I want to keep all the players, and some of the players like to play to the death of their PCs, and there isn't a replacement GM.
I would think about if there is a way to fairly rapidly escalate the campaign situation to a dramatic climax. Does the group have some focus or goal or something they would die to protect? Are there villains or situations which could be escalated to a dramatic climax situation? Are there things that would tempt the PCs into going all-out to get them? Are there other states that the game could get to that would constitute an end game, where it would satisfy them that they'd "won" and it would make sense to retire, or that they'd died trying for something that was worth dying for? Assuming something in that general range is conceivable (which I can think of even as new elements - e.g. Magnificent Seven), I'd see about arranging for an escalation to climax that can wrap up the campaign, and gives them a reasonable chance to prevail but be seriously challenged, but to lead to a conclusion where it will feel like the campaign is complete.
In general, when my players have found some very powerful abilities or techniques or whatever, and are enjoying that, and there's no natural way that situation is going to end any time soon, I feel it's best to let the players enjoy their exploitation and think about ways those activities would naturally have results that involve a different level of play from the specific exploit event. For example, if some adventurers can be invisible and teleport and think to go steal the king's treasure, I'd rather game that out without deciding I need to have matching anti-magic waiting for them, but then see what happens when the players now have lots of conspicuous gold and the king's men realize a bunch of treasure was stolen. Maybe even invite another player or two (even people from the Internet) to play out being the King's advisor charged with solving the situation, and/or the mercenaries, bounty hunters, or wizards who get paid to track them down, or something. The meta-situation can get pretty interesting (to me anyway) even if I hate the game system...
But I'd much rather also play using a system I find interesting too. And I think that over-easy healing and resurrection and repair and so on tend to escalate combat so that there are few if any meaningful setbacks or costs to battle, at least for the PCs, which can often tend to devolve play into something much less interesting to me than when PCs can actually be meaningfully injured/killed and their toys can get broken, etc.
So, is there some interesting situation(s) that can develop that would lead to a climactic finish of some sort, that lets the players see if their wicked powers can take it on or not, in some way that will be fun and interesting and lead to an end of campaign either way?
Quote from: Christopher Brady;912536"My players are using the game as intended, and it's annoying me. SO I want to change to a system that's even more broken and prone to abuses, that'll fix their wagon!"
Did I get that right?
Yes.
Quote from: Skarg;912782So, is there some interesting situation(s) that can develop that would lead to a climactic finish of some sort, that lets the players see if their wicked powers can take it on or not, in some way that will be fun and interesting and lead to an end of campaign either way?
Following on this note, can you get an agreement from them to switch to something else once the campaign is considered finished? That would give them some choice in the matter, and might make the transition both possible and amenable to them.
Having played a lot of different systems (like a lot of people here), the main thing I can say in defense of the more rules light systems is that things seem to move more quickly, simply due to less combat bookkeeping, thereby allowing for a wider range of events from session to session. Our latest affair is much more old school in nature and execution, which has led us to cover about 3-4 months of game time in 6 actual sessions, scattered among various events (to include a moderate expedition into the near wilds and back). Since the players noses are off the sheets (not a lot of kewl powerz), they are more into logistical schemes and plans. For example, there were a pair of discussions last session, one about porting out their treasure haul (they decided to keep their load within weight tolerances, so they wouldn't be slowed down going home [shortage of rations, worries over wandering monsters and such]), the other about what to do with their haul when they got back (they have enough coin to become major players in their base town--they even talked about heading back to a natural rock/cave formation that would serve as an excellent base of operations, save for its remoteness from civilization).
Long story short: since they aren't aiming for the next power combination, they talked more about their campaign choices. Their actions. We still have a sort of meta-thread going on, but it is now secondary to the conceits of sandboxing. Since I can whip up things quickly and easily, not being constrained by encounter building and such, it's been much more rewarding for me personally as the GM. All this has come about because the system keeps the classes discrete and unique, and the numbers low (a 2d6 fireball spell is bad news to most things). This would have been impossible to figure out without playing the game. As someone who's hopped around a lot, I feel like I've finally lit on something that works for me. I will readily admit, however, the same style of play we're using is also easily doable with other, rules light systems.*
*For the record, we're running Dungeon World characters, with the Freebooters on the Frontier/Perilous Wilds moves. The characters basically have fixed HP (DW), and the healing is slow (Freebooters). So everything can be dangerous to them, whatever their level. The (mostly) fixed HP's means Armor is more important, tactics are paramount, and proper logistics can save your ass (my God, rations actually mean something!). I've damned near memorized monster creation, and where I haven't, I can just make it up. It's quite fun. Now, if I can just get our mage to agree to running the Freebooter's spell system...
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912656Thanks for all the feedback forumites. A few notes, since I've derived a lot of what I need here from the responses, but I think the conversation could be worthwhile to others so I'll clarify a few things.
1) I've retooled 5E. I've explored alternate options. I certainly don't stick to the crappy, useless encounter building system (though I reference it here and there to let the players know what they're fighting). What I do find is that a group of 6th level heroes took down an Adult Black Dragon because they rolled lucky three times. The "rests" system is, imho, the worst part of the entire game. It destroys, utterly, any ability to challenge the heroes because all they have to do is take 5 and large swaths of abilities return. No, I'm done with 5E - it might be the game some people are looking for, it isn't for me. I've looked at altering how rests work, but an awful lot of abilities are tied to rests, and some are very useless if short rests are too long (like the alternate rests system suggested in the DMG). I've even noted that the characters lacking a need to ever "return to sanctuary" is in fact crushing the challenge of the entire game, they don't see it. They aren't looking. They love playing overpowered Mary Sues who tromp from one god kicking encounter to the next.
That's a you problem. Has zero to do with the players or the system. You just suck.
Use that tissue that rattles around inside your skull and think of other ways to
challenge your players that doesn't involve hit point loss.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;9126562) I tried stepping down from DMing. Out of the group, one is a good DM, one has some DMing skills but tends to run lacklustre campaigns, and the others are younger and have no experience nor interest. It's just not the practical solution. The one who is a good DM is running a different game, and wants to play. I want to run a game, its where I have more fun to be honest.
No, you have the most fun running the system you popped your cherry on.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;9126563) I can't chuff my group off. Two of them are my own teenage sons, one is basically a brother to me, the other is one of my closest friends and my daughter. This does, indeed, completely alter the terms, but I didn't want the advice to focus on that point, so I committed it from the initial ask. Needless to say, I'm not "firing" that group. I am, however, going to just tell them what I'm running, and be as polite as possible in saying "this is the deal".
"Sons, I know you are having a blast playing in this campaign, but I, your father, am not. So fuck you am I switching to what I find fun, deal with it."
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;9126564) I have run AD&D and have never found it, or OD&D, anywhere near as complex as 3rd, 4th or 5th edition. The amount of player options on a sheet at 10th level on the typical character sheet between the pre-3rd and post 3rd characters are significant. I actually find it difficult to plan for too many varied abilities, and while I do look at what players choose when they level up (and make suggestions on ones that make sense for the personality of the character and the saga), it's the player's character. They're just using what's available to them, and not breaking the system. My choice for AD&D is that I always find the mix in AD&D personally satisfying.
In other words you're fucking dumb.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;9126566) The reason this entire game hasn't already switched to something else is that the two mature members of the group have never shed their high school mentality of "play one character until it dies", and are very invested in their characters and the story of the game. This means they are always reticent to ever reboot a game, switch to s/e, or make alterations. This has the bonus of them being invested in a game, the downside being obvious. They also don't seem to get the campaigns come and go, and that (unlike high school gaming circles), adults need to be able to switch things up when things aren't fun.
So says the tool who finds enjoyment in only one game system.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;9126567) While I own a copy of all of the AD&D books, I stick to the core three. Period. I might drag in an option or two from UA, I would never use the classes from it. I also find it easier to "hack" AD&D, make my own classes, and even work with players to make a custom class. As Doom pointed out, the numbers are smaller, the choices are more finite and easier to gauge the outcomes of. I have seriously considered OD&D, and even bought the collectors box when it came out a few years back, but the game feels very unfinished. AD&D feels very complete, and there are a lot of classic modules I'd love to run for it.
My take away is that I need to just put my foot down, be honest with my friends (my sons don't have much choice). They enjoy my game a lot, and always enjoy my games. We mesh well together as a group, with only minor stylistic play style issues that creep out. 5E has just enhanced the issues that vex me the most, and delight my two fiends the best. It's amplifying the usually subtle disconnects in our play.
And now we know why you force your kids to play with you.
(Sommerjon is obviously using some of the techniques learned at Trump University. That was obviously $33,000 well spent!).:-)
No amount of tweaking is going to get you to enjoy 5E. So, bite the bullet and chuck it. Port their characters over. Give them some cool items. You might even find them a different GM if they want to continue with what they have. Then run what you want to run. It will feel a bit shitty because it's arbitrary, but, in the end, if you're running a better game, then the change will be worth it.
P.S. I can actually empathize. I had a similar experience with 4E. Had to give it a shot to see how it played. Seemed like the players were good with it, overall. But one too many sessions of the Gnome's "I DETECT ALL MAGIC ALL THE TIME!", those scaling skills, that board gamey feel, and, finally, that session-long single combat encounter where everyone felt tired at the end...and that was it. I wasn't spending another 4 hours of real time simulating 5 minutes of campaign time. Blew that game right up. Bye. Some left, some stayed. And that was fine with me, man. I guess that was a dick move, but seeing as how I'm the one who's organized every single group I've played here in small town America, I felt like I was entitled to run the system I wanted to run. My mistake was not announcing from the get go that I'd never played it, wanted to see how it went, and reserved the right to toss it. I think that would've helped. Not sure how the players would've reacted to that, but at least they would've been forewarned.
If you wanted to have a conversation about 5e techniques and tricks, specific pitfalls to avoid or "How should I houserule Power X", then there's probably a lot of people to help.
People are right in that AD&D does have even more "I Win" buttons than 5e. However, in 5e, it's all baked into the classes. With AD&D it's built into the magic items and the spells. If you stay RAW on spell learning and acquisition, and don't go crazy with handing out magic items, you have way more control.
If I'm reading you right, you're aware that AD&D has problems, it's just that you know how to fix AD&D's problems and you don't know how to fix 5e's problems and you're tired of trying. Or that you know how to deal with your group in AD&D, where in 5e, they are curbstomping you. Fair enough, a man's got to know his limitations.
You can't stand GMing something anymore and are having no fun, then that is what it is.
I'm not going to suggest 5e changes, because to your group, they would amount to a Nerf.
Personally, I wouldn't convert, either, because then you have to deal with the "I used to be like X and now I'm Y." syndrome. You know your players, so I'll ask you a question.
Do they like the setting? Are they in it for the NPCs, the world, the work you've put into it? Or are they in it for the system, the widgets, the interaction of powers, the builds, the kicking the living shit out of everything?
Have you ever played any other RPGs with this group? If so, what do they like, what do they hate?
With two good friends and three offspring, you obviously have players who care about YOU more than your role as entertaining screenmonkey.
Know the feeling. I like 5e. One of the players and the group he wants me to DM for doesnt because he cant char-op min-max with it and wants to go to 3e and because that group prefers 3e. Im not overly fond of 3e. Or more aptly. Just totally disinterested in it.
Let all the PC abilities also be allowed to the NPCs. Sure, it can be a bookkeeping headache. But when your players know the entire town has access to everything you can do, and possibly even better, then you start to pick your battles.
Overwhelming numbers kill. I never run "0th level commoners" as NPC statlines.
Sommerjon...being a dick one QUOTE Statement at a time. :D
Quote from: CRKrueger;912805Do they like the setting? Are they in it for the NPCs, the world, the work you've put into it? Or are they in it for the system, the widgets, the interaction of powers, the builds, the kicking the living shit out of everything?
This is what I was trying to get at with my comment way above. Are they wanting to play your campaign or are they wanting to play D&D5e?
I went through this stuff a long time ago with Palladium games. The crew I played with didn't want to play campaigns. They wanted to play Palladium system games.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912492SI am DMing, and am sick to death of 5E. I don't think it's the antichrist of D&D or anything, but I have a number of serious complaints. The group is around level 8 (5 players) and almost anything I throw at them, even when I throw Deadly Encounters (by the book, at the very highest end of the xp budget or above), I can't challenge them anymore. Their magical items are moderate at best, one character still has none at all. I also find the sheer number of abilities the characters have is daunting to keep track of. I want to just take the campaign, wave the wand and have it switch to AD&D (1e) and keep moving on.
Well,
say the above words to your players. Problem solved.
Why the hell is this thread five pages long? What happened to "be a normal intelligent mature adult and solve a problem the obvious and easy way"?
For the record Coffee Zombie, I don't think you deserve the abuse you've been getting for all this.
Quote from: Kellri;912879Sommerjon...being a dick one QUOTE Statement at a time. :D
Too subtle?
I'm no Rhodes Scholar, but when a moron comes trotting in here, says his gaming group is having a total blast playing, but he(the moron) is not cuz...he can't figure out how to make the group fear him?
Some where's there's more to this than what he(the moron) is saying.
That and he came here to confirm that his total devotion to 1e is justified. You know liking preaching to the choir.
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;912958For the record Coffee Zombie, I don't think you deserve the abuse you've been getting for all this.
Why not?
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;912958For the record Coffee Zombie, I don't think you deserve the abuse you've been getting for all this.
Its the way he worded the opening post that draws fire.
I doubt thered be so much negative if the OP had said something like "I played 5e thus and thus and after some thought I still prefer AD&D and plan to go back to that."
Sommerjon, show us on the doll the naughty place where the bad DM in your past touched you.
This site brings out the worst in most.
Stay classy.;)
Quote from: Omega;912989Its the way he worded the opening post that draws fire.
I doubt thered be so much negative if the OP had said something like "I played 5e thus and thus and after some thought I still prefer AD&D and plan to go back to that."
Yeah, agreed. I was sick as a dog and gliding low on cough medicine and humdrum. But my fault, I could have worded it less whiney/conflicted. Basically, was just venting. On the upside, the advice was great, both positive and negative.
To Gabriel2 (was my phone atm so it's harder to look back in posts) my players want to play my campaign, but also enjoy the rules. It's rarely hard to sell them on a new game, or a new idea, but I tire faster of a stagnant experience than them. So instead of making them choose between my game and the rules, I'll just tie up the game, and we can figure out together what to do next. But generally, for reasons, I had finding it hard to talk to them about this all. Problem solved - I'll just fess up about how much it really does irritate me and be done with it.
To estar, you got me thinking, and I think I may actually try either OD&D (or a clone) or even LL, since I like the smaller, tighter rules set. :)
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;913022To estar, you got me thinking, and I think I may actually try either OD&D (or a clone) or even LL, since I like the smaller, tighter rules set. :)
Check out Basic Fantasy Role-playing Game as well. The free .pdf is a winner. It's not the clone most true to the B/X or even BECMI games, but it does a good job of sort of updating them. Some examples include ascending AC, race does not equal class, and it flat out removed alignments. And, if you decide you must own the print copies, they are sold at cost. Of course, nothing scratches my nostalgia itch more than opening up Moldvay's red cover Basic book.
Quote from: Harlock;913042Check out Basic Fantasy Role-playing Game as well. The free .pdf is a winner. It's not the clone most true to the B/X or even BECMI games, but it does a good job of sort of updating them. Some examples include ascending AC, race does not equal class, and it flat out removed alignments. And, if you decide you must own the print copies, they are sold at cost. Of course, nothing scratches my nostalgia itch more than opening up Moldvay's red cover Basic book.
To add to this, the website has a ton of free stuff to add on as well if you're interested. There's a number of free adventures as well as extra classes, races, or other/alternate rules to try out for those who want them. I've got all of the BFRPG stuff in PDF as well as print (including multiple core books of various releases) and it's my favorite game for putting together a short campaign or just a one-night session since the rules are incredibly simple and familiar and, as mentioned, every player in the group can get a book for less than the cost of a single typical RPG book from one of the major companies.
Quote from: Sommerjon;912966I'm no Rhodes Scholar...
You should have stopped right there. Less really is more where you're concerned.
Quote from: Omega;912989Its the way he worded the opening post that draws fire.
I doubt thered be so much negative if the OP had said something like "I played 5e thus and thus and after some thought I still prefer AD&D and plan to go back to that."
This sounds like the, "HE STARTED IT!" defense. Not that folks need an additional excuse to act like a dick, but doing so, and blaming someone else for your own douche baggery, is...is...well, I guess you can run for President of the United States.
Quote from: cranebump;913187This sounds like the, "HE STARTED IT!" defense. Not that folks need an additional excuse to act like a dick, but doing so, and blaming someone else for your own douche baggery, is...is...well, I guess you can run for President of the United States.
and +1
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;912958For the record Coffee Zombie, I don't think you deserve the abuse you've been getting for all this.
+1. So much one-true-way bullshit. I play and enjoy 5e but it's obviously not for the OP.
Quote from: cranebump;913187This sounds like the, "HE STARTED IT!" defense. Not that folks need an additional excuse to act like a dick, but doing so, and blaming someone else for your own douche baggery, is...is...well, I guess you can run for President of the United States.
Well true. You are a dick sometimes. But I dont think we'd want you running for president.
Quote from: jeff37923;912990Sommerjon, show us on the doll the naughty place where the bad DM in your past touched you.
It's his bi-weekly driveby against something vaguely old school. Nothing to see here, move along.
Quote from: Omega;913619Well true. You are a dick sometimes. But I dont think we'd want you running for president.
They should just hold a National Lottery, pull someone's name out of a goddamn hat.
One thing to remember is that NPC enemies can do all the things that PCs can do.
Quote from: yosemitemike;913625One thing to remember is that NPC enemies can do all the things that PCs can do.
PCs are like Batman: their very existence escalates evil doers. As they gain new powers, gadgets and abilities, so do the villains.
Take the Flight spell or Dimension Door, for example. I say that when the party suddenly has access to either of those, the DC level of the campaign alters a bit. Not to punish the players, but to reflect the sudden increased power level.
That means, of course, that the DM must keep notes about how characters level up, especially spellcasters.
Quote from: CRKrueger;913621It's his bi-weekly driveby against something vaguely old school. Nothing to see here, move along.
Old school? :rolleyes:
It's the system 98% of you popped your
Lets play pretend virginal cherry on, and you imprinted hard on that shit. Let's not forget the micromanaging you are able to do er.. sorry, the rulings not rules.
It's not osr or old school it's a bunch of has beens and never weres flailing about looking for validation.
Quote from: Sommerjon;913651Old school? :rolleyes:
It's the system 98% of you popped your Lets play pretend virginal cherry on, and you imprinted hard on that shit. Let's not forget the micromanaging you are able to do er.. sorry, the rulings not rules.
It's not osr or old school it's a bunch of has beens and never weres flailing about looking for validation.
Oh, I'm sure everyone WAS something, and maybe still is. Just like you, sir, are...certainly something...(and always was?).
Quote from: Omega;913619Well true. You are a dick sometimes. But I dont think we'd want you running for president.
Hmmmm...uncalled for, and, well, not even funny. But I guess it wasn't meant to be? But since I can be a dick sometimes, how about you go fuck yourself?:-) There. Now it's justified.
(My run for president post wasn't intended to be a jibe at you--sorry if it came out that way)
Quote from: Necrozius;913634Take the Flight spell or Dimension Door, for example. I say that when the party suddenly has access to either of those, the DC level of the campaign alters a bit. Not to punish the players, but to reflect the sudden increased power level.
That means, of course, that the DM must keep notes about how characters level up, especially spellcasters.
Significant NPC enemies will be at the PC's level or above it. They will have access to dimension door, flight and so on if the PCs are high enough level to have access to them. It's just how the game scales as character level increases.
Quote from: cranebump;913889Oh, I'm sure everyone WAS something, and maybe still is. Just like you, sir, are...certainly something...(and always was?).
I'm right.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912492I am DMing, and am sick to death of 5E. I don't think it's the antichrist of D&D or anything, but I have a number of serious complaints. The group is around level 8 (5 players) and almost anything I throw at them, even when I throw Deadly Encounters (by the book, at the very highest end of the xp budget or above), I can't challenge them anymore. Their magical items are moderate at best, one character still has none at all. I also find the sheer number of abilities the characters have is daunting to keep track of. I want to just take the campaign, wave the wand and have it switch to AD&D (1e) and keep moving on.
But how to convince the group?
Quote from: Ratman_tf;912516Tell your group what you typed up here. Ask them if they'd be willing to switch to AD&D. If they say No, you're fucked. Quit playing/GMing.
Yeah...that's one way...I suppose.
Or, you could wrap up your 5e campaign with some big epic event. Give the players some fulfillment and closure. THEN start a AD&D campaign from scratch. You're players are invested in the characters they have been developing. You can't really expect them to ditch all that on a whim. If you do, you are constantly going to be second guessed and spend your energy fending off direct comparisons between the editions. Why can't my character do this? Lame! Better to make a clean break and start fresh.
That's what I would do, anyway.
Quote from: Sommerjon;913978I'm right.
if you were actually as right as you think you are, you wouldn't need to dress up your claims in needless bravado and crudity. Further, being right isn't an excuse for shitty manners.
Quote from: cranebump;914185if you were actually as right as you think you are, you wouldn't need to dress up your claims in needless bravado and crudity. Further, being right isn't an excuse for shitty manners.
I'm so sorry.
I didn't realize you needed to be talked to like a child.
there, there, it's all right there, there.
Quote from: Coffee Zombie;912492I am DMing, and am sick to death of 5E.
But how to convince the group?
Lots of posts like this lately. I dunno, it was pretty obvious to me what 5E was going to be like when the rumblings started and even more obvious when the details started to appear. 5E is cut from the mold of corporate gaming. All your complaints about it are valid, just like the ones Brendon is voicing in his posts and others elsewhere. All of the design features that make the PCs too hard to challenge were completely predictable from the beginning. But, if you basically have a campaign you like except that you have a hard time challenging the players, I'm pretty sure throwing more of what's in the adventures already would increase the challenge. Why not do that? Because one of the biggest problems with 5E and D&D in general as "a thing" is that people who play it concede too much authority to the system itself, the monolithic thing of WoTC, codified rules that are above campaign, setting, and GM. The "challenge rating" concept has neutered many a modern GM, doing away with the idea that there are just doors that should not be opened, and that sticking your hand into the wrong black mouth without testing it first with a pole could be the difference between rolling for treasure and rolling up a new character. It's a mindset problem as much as anything else. If you have to "justify" doing anything to your players then the problem isn't one I know how to solve for you. Up the number and/or level of encounters seems pretty easy, but I'll bet you don't do it because you'll get tears from the table once they calculate the challenge rating. You'll have tirades from entitled players about how unfair it is. You'll have that yacking mouth in your ear (you know the one I mean) hour after hour until you either give up or you finally decide you don't actually care anymore and you're gonna do it your way. But this will be true even if you switch to another edition. That won't save you. That yacking whiner will still whine as long as his whining gets what he wants. Easy gold. Safe adventures.
The edition you use is really a separate issue from the challenge problem, but it's still a factor in your enjoyment. I don't have the problem with complaining players but I still detest 5E just like I detested 4E. I would say change editions. If you change the game to something you like better, you're going to enjoy it more and so, therefore, should your players. You could "sell" a different edition by touting it as being way more dangerous. You might be surprised that that has appeal, at least for some players. Somebody is sure to complain, but if they like the game they're in now, it's pretty hard to imagine them not showing up for something new and different. Even if they dont want a change, curiosity is going to bring them to the table. BTW, the tales of player deaths make great stories. Even if some players decide to sit the new game out, they're gonna start hearing about the carnage they missed seeing. Maybe players you find to replace the whiners will be better players. Change isn't always a bad thing.
Next time you sit down at the table just say it: "This game is too damn easy. It's boring. Nobody ever dies. Everybody roll 3d6 6 times in order." Wear wraparound sunglasses. It helps.
Of course, if they really complain you could be a heartless bastard and roll them with Shadowrun.
"You thought you had it bad before? Duck these motherfucker."