90% of campaigns are high fantasy dungeon crawls where the party meet in a tavern then get a quest

Basically anything he mentioned is not dependant on the system played

>Being so fucking desperate for players you need to cater to their every whim
Be sure to cradle the balls, user

This is certainly true, but it's also definitely a mentality I've found is far more common among people who play D&D than other systems.

I can only be glad you'll never be my GM so I won't have to play a part in your glorified failure of a book.

I wouldn't be complaining about this shit if I was subject to it, user. The reason I'm mocking you plebs is because I'm above trash like DnD and Pathfinder.

Part 1

>90% of campaigns are high fantasy dungeon crawls where the party meet in a tavern then get a quest

Not mine

>Campaigns are planned first with characters being created once everything is already written, instead of writing the story around the characters

Yeah, this is better, no favouritism, no challenge made especially for them more natural

>Campaigns are run with such large groups that devoting any screentime to individuals is completely implausible, resulting in a lack of player agency and simplified archetypal character personas

Nope, I have 3 players

>People are more interested in dice rolls and builds than roleplaying and character development

I am not a player so I don't know

>People think roleplaying is when your orc murder marathon is momentarily interrupted by a moral dilemma

True

>Most players don't even know what 'metagaming' means

Bullshit

>Males playing female characters and vice versa is considered degeneracy even though creating and playing as characters who aren't like you is the entire point

Well because it is degeneracy 99% of the time, especially when males do it, they center their character around having a vagina 99% of the time instead of playing a normal person who happens to be a woman.

>resulting in a lack of player agency
Fuck this meme. "Player agency" has been worn down to mean complete control over anything that might affect your character. Your complaint has nothing to do with player agency at all. No, what you mean is a lack of character development. Not "player agency." If I hear that word again I swear I'm going to spam whoever posted it with horse gore until they shut up.

>high fantasy dungeon crawls
Isn't that an oxymoron?

How much fucking work do you want a DM to fucking do?

I do this for free you asshole

I blame Matthew Mercer.

>Players inhabit a cardboard cut-out of a world designed solely around a single questline, with varying degrees of railroading

Not my campaign, multiple quest lines

>Players don't describe their characters actions, they just say 'I attack' or 'I roll to intimidate'

I cut that shit of "I roll to" first session, they now describe actions and I tell them what to roll

>In the unlikely event that players do describe their actions, GMs stare at them in confusion before asking them to clarify if they're rolling to attack or rolling to intimidate

No

>Kobolds
>So many fucking kobolds

I am guilty of this, I love kobolds, in this campaign I have only used 2 Kobolds though

>Characters have no establishing scenes and no interparty relationships, they just appeared and now they're doing shit together

Not in my campaign, my campaign started as they were finishing a delivery and first thing I did was asking them to describe how they took the quest they just finished and how they arrived to the city

>Characters splitting up to do their own thing is either grounds for a salty storytime or downright unheard of

Haven't happened yet except for sending an invi guy to do some recognizance

>Characters have no motivations or goals beyond fulfilling whatever objective the GM pulled out of his ass and maybe one other token aspiration that will never be actually addressed in-game

One character had some but he died, the other 2 have a long term objective which theyll probably fulfill

>The deepest insight most GMs give into their world is 'the house is old' or 'the Lich has 5 HP left'

Nope

>Most NPCs consist of one trait and a quirky accent

Wrong

It seems like you are a shit DM and you are projecting a lot

>implying the average player is diligent enough to make a character early enough for the GM to plan a campaign around them
>implying the average player cares enough to develop their characters
>implying the average player cares about why they're adventuring together
>implying the average player writes relevant motivations aside from "I want to get rich/be strong/drink ale all day"
>implying the average player cares who your npc is and won't kill them if they so much as look at them funny
1/10 apply yourself next time

>Players don't describe their characters actions, they just say 'I attack' or 'I roll to intimidate'

In this case my friend did an amazing job of describing his feinting attack and it really was good but the DM said 'ok, but you still gotta roll to attack' and he did and missed. So that whole mini exposition was cool, but he should have saved it until after he rolled.

I play Dogs in the Vineyard and variants quite a bit, so most of this isn't applicable to me.
>Males playing female characters and vice versa is considered degeneracy even though creating and playing as characters who aren't like you is the entire point
Eh this is fair, but generally when people play the opposite gender they turn into the card board cutouts you detest.
>Characters have no establishing scenes and no interparty relationships, they just appeared and now they're doing shit together
Okay, genuinely a problem, but generally speaking charaters should start with some sort of connective tissue to one another.
>Characters splitting up to do their own thing is either grounds for a salty storytime or downright unheard of
Splitting the party is always a bad move. It literally takes players completely out of the game. In Shadowrun you mechanically have to split up and I've had players complain that they shouldn't have bothered to show up because they never did anything.
>Most NPCs consist of one trait and a quirky accent
Again, playing DitV, the entire game is based around what NPCs want from one another and what they want from the players. And it's set in the old west, so everyone has a cowboy accent, guilty.

This guy knows what's up.

This.
Matthew Mercer is contributing more to the downfall of the D&D community than anyone else in history. Not even Monte Cook, not even Lorraine Williams, not even Micheal Merals, not even Gary Gygax himself have done as much damage to D&D. Mercer has made the game palatable to the kind of person who spends his Friday nights playing Cards Against Humanity while slobbering microbrews all over his beard while his wife's son is sleeping in the next room. The kind of moron who thinks mirthful laughter is the end goal of everything, and fails to understand the potential that RPGs have as a fulfilling hobby. Instead, he shits on that creative potential by turning the entire game into a joke, refusing to take anything seriously and making gimmick characters, bringing along his fat girlfriend to make a shitty elf druid character that she hardly roleplays, screeching autistically whenever she rolls a natural 20 because that is the only aspect of the game that her tiny female brain can comprehend, taking copious pictures of the game and posting them to Snapchat and Instagram to show what a geek she is, before getting tired at 11 and tugging at her cuck boyfriend's shoulder so that they both leave and disrupt the immersion even further, because the game doesn't matter to these people at all. It is a mode of entertainment, nothing else. And by entertainment, I mean they consider it nothing more than a Netflix special that they can pause at any time, because it is meant entirely to pander to their enjoyment and make them laugh to cover up how empty their soulless lives are. This hobby used to be full of passionate people who cared about the game and weren't afraid to show it. Now the hobby is being diluted by hordes of casuals who couldn't give a fuck.

But what about player agency?

Absolutely not. Dungeon crawling is about as ridiculous as fantasy concepts come.

>Campaigns are planned first with characters being created once everything is already written, instead of writing the story around the characters

Jokes on you, I need to actually plan beyond the next session for that.

My girlfriend literally did that the first time I invited her to play, even to the point of being fat and making a druid.

I am not a cuck or played cards against humanity, I do enjoy craft beer while I play DnD though

It's not about extra work, it's about better direction and being less shit at your hobby. If I told you to stop playing Cookie Clicker and start playing good video games, your 'but nobody's paying me' argument would make about as much sense as it does here.
They could be having more fun.
It has nothing to do with innate ability and everything to do with false expectations. DnD is such a dominant force in the industry that even newbies will think it's the accepted norm, and are thus already set to fail. Make it clear to them how roleplay heavy your game will be and you won't have this problem, provided you aren't trying to induct people who shouldn't be playing RPGs into playing RPGs.
A 14 year old wandered into Veeky Forums without being mentally developed enough to handle the content without losing all individuality and capacity for rational thought, and this is the result.
Players aren't going to have fun by walking through your half-assed plotline beat by beat. Utilize the strengths of the medium and turn their characters histories and struggles into the plot. Nobody gives a shit about saving the King from the evil wizard, but if the evil wizard represents everything that the PC used to be and is now trying to escape from, he's going to be a bit more invested.
Dipshit frogposter. If you have 8 players then each individual player is going to hold less narrative sway. They're more liable to discard agency and instead go with the flow to whatever boring setpiece is up next. If you have 2 players, it's likely they'll say 'fuck that' to the obvious course of action and come up with something new on their own, exercising their agency.
DM was in the wrong. Rules are subservient to storytelling, as is explained in even the worst rulebooks.

Get on my level.

It's still not high fantasy.

>Players aren't going to have fun by walking through your half-assed plotline beat by beat. Utilize the strengths of the medium and turn their characters histories and struggles into the plot. Nobody gives a shit about saving the King from the evil wizard, but if the evil wizard represents everything that the PC used to be and is now trying to escape from, he's going to be a bit more invested.

Of course I did that nigger but I homebrewed the worlds and NPCs before seeing their characters, I weaved them into it. And as they make new characters(when they die) they themselves understand the setting and together we create something for them

>They're more liable to discard agency and instead go with the flow to whatever boring setpiece is up next.
And that's their choice. Thus, not a lack of player agency.

>90%...
About 5% of campaigns around here are like that.

>Campaigns planned first...
If your GM shows up with nothing it's hard to make good characters.
Most GMs have something in mind but adapt their setting / campaign when the characters are fleshed out.

>large groups... problems...
1) most groups here are about 3-4 players, which seems somewhat ideal.
2) larger groups can make it work. If the players are interested in each other's characters they can sit back for 5 minutes while 2 people RP, and so on.

>interested in dice rolls and builds...
Not around here. Yes, between sessions you can't usually RP so you'll focus on the mechanics.

>roleplaying = murder marathon, moral dilemma
People generally don't think this.

>'metagaming'
Blatantly false. Some people don't know the word, but when you explain it they go 'Ah, I didn't know it was called metagaming'.

>degeneracy
Not really.

>world - a single questline - railroading
Beginner GMs usually do this so they don't have to keep track of anything except the party.

>'I attack' or 'I roll to intimidate'
Describing every attack is somewhat pointless, but be creative as often as you can. Not describing skills is not acceptable.

>GMs stare
Only seen this happen when the players were tired.

>Kobolds
Are sometimes used. Yes? Orcs. Humans. Goblins. Demons.

>no establishing scenes, no interparty relationships
Nah, but we usually keep it short and make it up as we go.

>splitting up
Generally a bad idea for several reasons.

>Characters have no motivations or goals
Nah. They do.

>'the house is old' or 'the Lich has 5 HP left'
Nah, lots of insight is granted.

>Most NPCs consist of one trait and a quirky accent
At first glance, everybody is a flat character.

The real problem is you, and those you chose to play with. I have played with many groups over more than a decade, and have had fun almost every single time.

character development isn't just for faggots and sissies user
final confrontations are more fun with a traditional hero than a murder hobo

more people like you please

i myself consider rpg to be an experience just like reading a book or watching a film, but with a part in the role. therefor the roleplaying is essential

It definitely is. Only in a high fantasy would running through wilderness looking for ancient temples and tombs not only be considered a viable career path rather than absolute lunacy, but also yield results because somehow the clearly traversable dungeons haven't already been looted hundreds of years ago by some other prick who had the bright idea to become a treasure hunter.

I keep seeing complaints like this over and over.

It's almost like you autistic fucks can't identify a group you're not going to get along with, and then decide to fester in the shitheap you've created for yourselves instead of just moving on like a reasonable human.

This isn't even a tabletop problem. It's a life problem.

I'm not complaining about my group, I'm asking you dipshits to explain to me why you find it so hard to have fun correctly.

...

That's because it's a game.

>Nobody gives a shit about saving the King from the evil wizard, but if the evil wizard represents everything that the PC used to be and is now trying to escape from, he's going to be a bit more invested.
Wut
You've never read a Conan story? Never seen a Bond film? Never seen a Star Trek episode? Picaresque storytelling is very suitable for roleplaying games.

No. Most fantasy rpgs do not concern dungeon crawling at all.

>a lot of GM's aren't great GMs, only good GMs.

Explained.

>only good GMs
I'd argue that almost everything OP wrote is a clear sign of being a bad GM. Not merely a mediocre one, and I only say almost because I can't be arsed to read through it again and I'm sure he was a retard somewhere.

>Campaign begins in a mercenary prison where political prisoners can be stored by different countries without backlash
>It is 4 stories tall and nestled on a mountain peak
>the walkways face outward and are regularly patrolled
>Prisoners get a great view but that's the only good thing about it
>The characters are each in a different cell on different levels
>only 1 has the skills to grab a key

Rate my campaign start, Veeky Forums

But the ones that do need to make dungeon crawling actually work.

What motivates the one with the key to release the others?

It doesn't.

He knows he needs one of the others for plot reasons (she doesn't though). another is the only healer being held there and he's in no condition to fight his way out alone, and the last is a Bloodrager that he sees as a great distraction that he can let loose

I am writing my first real campaign at the moment, and have tried to avoid a lot of the generic tropes you expect, like a tavern opening, shipwreck, a prison escape etc. I intend to keep it short for the first one though, and while trying to avoid tried and true steps, I also kind of need them to see what characters are established, and when I hear their backstories and such I intend to implement it for personal tasks and motive.
Currently, they don't start as a party. I'm gonna try and wing some of it, but have a guideline for classes to have individual openings, and have written down several tasks for them each which I'll hand to them when necessary. They all have one major goal in common, which is how they meet. There is potential that their personal tasks contrast.
I'd like to try some puzzle elements with landmarks, hoping the players will take mental note of them if I describe them strongly, but it's not a risk I intend to take early. I know they're in to roleplaying though, so I can get them immersed easily. And the quest I have planned as a 'main' quest is something that these smaller quests I have planned have subtle clues to. Want a world that feels linked with recurring NPCs having their own goals, some that could unintentionally become enemies. Biggest concern is them feeling like they don't actually have control over what happens and that I have it all mapped out with no wiggle room, so I'm also trying to write my notes somewhat vaguely so sometimes I'll also be going along for my own ride. It's harder than I thought it would be though. I can already tell some things I plan to happen probably won't.

ITT: marks getting worked

Jesus christ

Why would mercenaries lock up a group of people in a prison cell that would make up a competent adventuring party?

Well, what are their alternatives? Asking them very nicely not to wander off?

They're locked in a cell
They ain't going anywhere
>let's put the thief looking person here along with this guy who looks like he'd make a good brutish fighter, the ranger girl and cleric

90% of statistics are made up by the speaker based on nothing

Y'know, the thing that's always bugged me about this copypasta and its brother one here is that they never actually do a good job of explaining why Matt Mercer is awful. I guess that's why it always comes off as pure salt as opposed to commentary.

Yeah, but it is dependent on the crowd playing it. The majority of D&D players rarely advance beyond the basics of storytelling or character development.

Shit DM. I do my best to encourage well thought out actions rather then basic attacking. DnD, and DnD like systems, tend to discourage that by the rules, and those rules should simply be circumvented.

Knocking over a brazier full of coals would do what, 1d4 fire damage? Why bother when swinging my sword has a better chance to hit, and does more damage? Fuck that noise.

>I do my best to encourage well thought out actions rather then basic attacking.
Shit DM, if I wanted to play pretend I would do it without rolling.

You sir, deserve DnD.

Try Fate, or something like it. Even if you don't like the system itself, there's generally a lot of good advice on creating a game and story with your players. Fate Core insists that everyone be at the table for game and character creation. At one point you turn to the player to your left and ask them how they intervened in one of your past adventures and you use that story to create an aspect for your character. The entire game is based on aspects, so they mean a lot and should come up often.

The other thing that sets these games apart is that they generally abstract wealth and other resources so it's hard to justify just doing shit for gold. Gear is pretty much meaningless, so there's no reason to hoard treasure. In order to have a good time with the game you have to make an actual character who legitimately wants to go out and do good things.

I can understand why people don't like it, but these games force you to play in a different way and that translates to being a better player and DM in other games.

>this meme again

Holy fuck, some of you need to go outside.

No one gives a shit about your campaign faggot, and projecting is usually a myth.

Player agency is basically fancier way of saying it's what my character would do, a tired old meme used to justify assholish behavior.

>Dave, this is the third time in game when - and I quote here verbatim - "I want to kill and rape that loli over there", please stop doing that
>wtf why not?
>it's ruining the game
>reeee it's what my character would do, stop ruining my player agency!

Stop playing with retarded children then.

People who cry about their player agency being violated?

No, people who don't understand that games with player agency make it clear that everyone in the group should be on the same page. If one of your players thinks the game is about sexual assault than that's on the DM and the group as a whole for allowing it. It's not that hard to communicate what the game is supposed to be about and enforce it as a group. If you can't do that, it's on you for being socially inept.

I've never seen anything in a narrative game that suggested that it was okay to torpedo the game because you had a right to. They're all pretty clear about it being a group activity.

>usually a myth
Not how myths work.

There are definitely a lot of strong lessons to take away from Fate.
Having the entire group collaborate on what parts of the setting are important to the campaign is actually pretty cool, especially the "Faces and Places" part. It's had us come up with some amazing and fun to portray NPCs in all sorts of systems.

Can't say I care overmuch for Fate Core in itself past that. The pre-configured sourcebooks are a lot more compelling, and you're better off starting from one of those rather than starting with Core and trying to fine-tune all the dials and subsystems from scratch. Of course, being an OGL game those rules are all part of the SRD, so that's hardly a problem.

They're in different cells on different floors.

None of this is true for our group or any of our campaigns over the last 10 years.

Sounds like you've just played with shit groups and DMs

I've never experienced this because I'm a good DM and I know how to communicate what I expect from my players.

>They could be having more fun.
Well that's not your decision to make.

>have fun correctly.
If you don't understand what's wrong with this phrase, you're beyond saving.

And you know what? I'm gona tell you, with full confidence and awareness of thevthousands of shitposters I'll trigger: Dungeon world, apocalypse world and other pbta-games were made exactly to tackle many of these problems.
That's right, bring the hate, but anyone here who actually understands the system knows what I'm talking about.

I've never heard anyone on Veeky Forums complain about Apocalypse World, its always been hate thrown at Dungeon World for trying to mesh to different styles of play into a mess that satisfies nobody.

Oh they do, the salt has spread from dw to ptba in general. And in my opinion, the mesh of different playstyles in dw if you actually understand the system. If you use bonds, fronts and most importantly the moves as written in the rules, you'll actually run it like you would run apocalypse world.
The problem is that dw thematically resembles classic fantasy rpg's and people confuse it with a ruleslite hack of d&d or something. Many times have I seen a gm frustrated because dw doesn't provide the same mechanical character progression or structural combat rules they were expecting from a fantasy rpg.

>you'll actually run it like you would run apocalypse world.
And it will still be shit, because Koebel doesn't understand AW.

>Why bother when swinging my sword has a better chance to hit, and does more damage?

Uh... no shit? Do you really expect a brazier of coals to be in any way better than using an actual fucking weapon?

4e tried that. The general rule was 'If it's not easily repeatable, it should be on par with an encounter' and 'If it's one shot and risky, it should be on par with a daily'.

if it smells like shit wherever you go...

Check your shoes.

my go-to level "how did you meet" is all of them in a caravan, before being waylaid

i give the players a destination, and everyone comes up with a story about why they are headed there, and how they got here

then they are attacked, so even complete strangers have to fight together

ITT one true way-ism

You've never studied after hs. Do people in school make you feel insecure or inferior somehow? Stop projecting. No one gives a shit

>not having a session 0
>not playing wildly different systems and settings and tones to stretch boundaries
>not talking with players about what kind of campaign they would like
>not building a setting with player input at least once
>not building 'colour in the blanks' settings where aside from the big details, it's generated as you go

People who just run DnD 3.pf over and over again in the same setting are The Cancer, but there's a shitton more to TTRPG.

Kek, well baited dude

And most if not all of this problems stem from playing D&D and its derivates

>Implying half-hour shouldn't speak ebonics
Ay yo hol up.

Well thats just kind of what RPGs fans are into.

Look as frustrating as it is: no one plays an RPG to tell an epic story or create a meaningful experience, they do it to be autist and crack one liners for people its a time to fuck around and just play around. Its just a fancy board game to most folks.

Don't ever speak again in your life.

...

I'm partial to how character creation works in Hillfolk. The world itself isn't as important in it as it is in Fate, but instead an enormous focus is put on character relationships.

It goes something like
>GM: Aight, this game is gonna take place in a fantasy world awfully similar to Europe during WWI with huge diesel powered mechs. You're the inhabitants of a small nation, recently occupied by one of two warring empires. Player 1, who's your character?
>P1: Oh, uh, I'm Wilhelm and I'm an, uh, engineer.
>GM: Ok. Player 2, who's your character and what is your relationship to Wilhelm?
>P2: I'm Frieda, a young freedom fighter, and I'm Wilhelm's daughter.
>GM: Player 3, who's your character and what is your relationship to Wilhelm and Frieda?
>P3: I'm Manfred, the chief of the military police force which has been stationed in the country, I'm Manfred's de facto employer and I once caught his daughter snooping around where she wasn't supposed to.
And so it goes on until all players have stated their character's names and relationships, and then it goes on to desires and dramatic poles and a bunch of other sweet stuff.

>not have fun correctly

sorry for doing that.

I dunno, i do like doing some worldbuilding and building my character's personality and forming friendships with other characters.

Although i'll admit this is thanks that i usually game with close friends, but truth be told when i was part of a WoD crossover i had a pretty easy time roleplaying, after the introductions, with everyone and we had a good time.

% of campaigns are high fantasy dungeon crawls where the party meet in a tavern then get a quest
true, 100%
>Campaigns are planned first with characters being created once everything is already written, instead of writing the story around the characters
True, only way to roleplay.
>People are more interested in dice rolls and builds than roleplaying and character development
True, this is how its meant to be.
>People think roleplaying is when your orc murder marathon is momentarily interrupted by a moral dilemma
It kind of is, though.
>Most players don't even know what 'metagaming' means
I certainly don't.
>Males playing female characters and vice versa is considered degeneracy even though creating and playing as characters who aren't like you is the entire point
No, it really isn't.
>Players inhabit a cardboard cut-out of a world designed solely around a single questline, with varying degrees of railroading
If you aren't railroading then you are gonna have to create a story outside of their characters before they even make their PCs. How is that even possible?
Got bored of your shit opinion, OP. So I will stop right here.

Not the guy you're talking to but I side with him. It doesn't always have to be killing and raping lolis but that and similar examples are used to get the point across. But I've seen similar behavior that wasn't as egregious but still rubbed the rest of the group the wrong way.

The first example that comes to mind is a wizard that would literally kill everybody he came across during any dungeon crawl. So it didn't matter if you were a slave locked up in a cage (actual example), a child hiding under a bed (actual example), an otherwise neutral creature that inhabits the dungeon but isn't sided with the bad guys, a harmless pet dog, prisoners, etc. the wizards reasoning for slaughtering anything that was alive in whatever dungeon we were raiding was that we could never be sure if they were actually allied to the bad guys, or else had some means of magical control castes on them by the bad guys. So killing them was ALWAYS the most logical thing to do for the sake of the safety of the rest of the party.

After he torched two naked, tortured, and abused slave girls chained up to a wall that were half unconscious from starvation with a burning hands Spell, literally the rest of the group including the DM had a long OOC talk with the player about his character's behavior.

Sure enough, the player WOULD NOT BUDGE because "it's what my character would do", it was a "logical" thing to do in his mind, and it's not like he was raping or torturing anybody in detail, Right?

All right, time for some bait analysis.

>90% of campaigns are high fantasy dungeon crawls where the party meet in a tavern then get a quest
D&D is popular and an enduring brand. Sure it may be garbage in some respect but its accessible, has brand recognition and people are nostalgic about it.

>Campaigns are planned first with characters being created once everything is already written, instead of writing the story around the characters
From experience I'd say this isn't always true.

>Campaigns are run with such large groups that devoting any screentime to individuals is completely implausible, resulting in a lack of player agency and simplified archetypal character personas
Not true either.

>People are more interested in dice rolls and builds than roleplaying and character development
Blame the really bad shit from 3rd edition. Also some people do want to have a bit of fun with hack and slash. Some people like Planescape Torment but can still kick off a new game of Diablo sometimes, you know?

>People think roleplaying is when your orc murder marathon is momentarily interrupted by a moral dilemma
I know what you're trying to imply, but the moral dilemma of 'orc murder' can be someone's first introduction to any kind of tabletop gaming not just about murder hobo-ing.

>Most players don't even know what 'metagaming' means
Have you tried not playing with idiots?

>Males playing female characters and vice versa is considered degeneracy even though creating and playing as characters who aren't like you is the entire point
>using degeneracy
Translation: I am an easily offended idiot who think one random crossposter from tumblr or /pol/=the entire hobby. Don't play with dickweeds.

>Players inhabit a cardboard cut-out of a world designed solely around a single questline, with varying degrees of railroading
Try playing with better GM, maybe?

>Players don't describe their characters actions, they just say 'I attack' or 'I roll to intimidate'
Trying playing with better people. Also some people are just kinda shy or bad at describing.

>In the unlikely event that players do describe their actions, GMs stare at them in confusion before asking them to clarify if they're rolling to attack or rolling to intimidate
Again, find better GM.

>Kobolds
>So many fucking kobolds
They're a pretty easily useable low-level, low-hp monsters. That and swarming (and traps) is kinda their shtick.

>Characters have no establishing scenes and no interparty relationships, they just appeared and now they're doing shit together
You know what I'm gonna answer to this.

>Characters splitting up to do their own thing is either grounds for a salty storytime or downright unheard of
Splitting the party can be a serious drag on a game's pacing. Since you're trying to act like this highbrow genius, surely you know what 'pacing' mean, mmyes?

>Characters have no motivations or goals beyond fulfilling whatever objective the GM pulled out of his ass and maybe one other token aspiration that will never be actually addressed in-game
Yet again: find better players and GM.

>The deepest insight most GMs give into their world is 'the house is old' or 'the Lich has 5 HP left'
I'm repeating myself.

>Most NPCs consist of one trait and a quirky accent
And I'm repeating myself again.

2/10, you sound like a douchey blowhard who is overreacting to the fact he's surrounded by crappy, idiotic autistic players and GM with little to no talent. If you can do better, by all mean, try running a game of your own.

If not quit bitching and go play FATE with hipsters.