"If you'd rather play D&D, are you willing to DM while I recharge?"
In my group, yes. :| We actually have plenty of players willing to run games.
That said, they're also willing to try out new games, so it all works out just fine. :)
I think it's an error to treat "I play DND" the same as "I play RPGs". It's like "I play baseball" vs "I play sports".
There are too many reasons to succinctly list why people might be sticking to DND.
In my experience, you'll have better luck finding players who want to play something else rather than trying to convert DND players.
I haven't played Pathfinder 2e but my understanding is it had a lot more choices at the turn level and character build level. that's good if you want that, but I think for a lot of people the shallowness of 5e is a plus. There are other games that would also be a good fit if you're not looking for deep tactics or builds, though.
I run two groups right now - one for d&d and one for Blades in the Dark. Blades group are people with whom we tried D&D before but they found it too combat-focused and "like someone put his gross math fetish into a game". First group I may one day run Pathfinder 2e for ew camapign. Second one I don't even suggest this option.
People complain about it a lot, but I've never actually ran into a system that uses any maths beyond what a five-year-old should be capable of. Closest I think might be Mutants and Masterminds with stacking multipliers, but still just some extra steps. Nothing that knowing your times tables wouldn't prepare you for.
Fuck I love Mutants and Masterminds, but only one of my partners and none of my friends are as into original capeshit as I am; so... [sob]
me slowly putting away my logarithmic power curve and orbital mechanics RPG that no one will ever play
People just don't like homework. (Which is perfectly understandable) And for most people most of the time, learning a new system is homework.
Some people never really learned DND either, but kind of get carried along by the group. I feel like you could switch out systems on those people and they wouldn't do any worse.
But I get it. Some people are more casual. Some people have executive dysfunction. My current strategy is to find people who want to play what I want to play, and it's working okay. Still makes me a little sad that DND is so mega popular, but okay.
I also feel like D&D is kinda hard to learn and has decades of terminology and baggage that contribute to that. Ah well
It's like "I play baseball" vs "I play sports".
I think more like "I play baseball" Vs "I play softball/rounders/cricket".
It's not that difficult to convince people who enjoy little league to try standard baseball.
D&D and Pathfinder are like Baseball and Softball, maybe. But going from D&D to Fate or PbtA is like changing to football or fencing. It's very different. Trying to get someone who's playing Baseball to take up soccer is tricky. D&D is baseball. Pathfinder is softball. Easier transition.
I gave my 8 players a Condorcet poll for which game I should run next. Their main gripe was a Condorcet poll sounded complicated (it wasn't).
Kevin Crawford's "Without Number" games swept the podium (Stars, Cities, Worlds) knocking D&D to fourth place.
The real big table might be a factor. Combat is just so much faster.
My old irl group had a lot of diversity in the games we ran. My personal favorite was Trail of Cthulhu
My players love Pathfinder, but after running a 1-20 campaign for years I needed a break from it. So far this year we've played Apocalypse Frame, Delta Green, and Troika. It's been a blast trying out different systems and settings, had a few surprises about how much we liked or didn't like different mechanics.
