This all turned out a bit rambly, gonna send it anyway. I hope you can get some positives out of it if you do decide to read it. The last three (real) paragraphs are more structured, so if you’re only gonna read part of it, make it that part.

I have noticed that playing on Foundry (or roll20 or any other VTT software) often leads to more video-gamey/war-gamey campaigns. VTTs assist the DM and players with a lot of the gamey aspects, but offer much less assistance, if any, for the other aspects of ttrpgs. This leads to a lot of the potential issues you described. In my experience, having virtual battle-map after battle-map (or a single large one) thrown at you leads to reduced creativity, especially in newer players who do have experience playing computer games.

It takes both time and conscious effort to realize that what’s in front of you is not the actual game being played but just a projection. This counts for both sides of the DM screen. Some people will never clear that hurdle or even realize it’s there. That is fine for some people who do love the video-gamey aspects but not for others who want the opposite, or at least more of a balance.

For example, personally I also DM a Pathfinder campaign on Foundry and I constantly have to remind some of my players that they don’t need to click on all the relevant buttons the system already has programmed in. They can just say what they’re doing and do a naked roll if finding the button takes more than a second.

In regards to your last paragraph. You did get an in-game reason from your DM, although they were a bit indirect with it. Your DM telling you you might have to roll up a new character also means your in-game reason is: “I feel like I might die if I try this.” My advice in that specific situation would be to lead by example and roleplay your character going through those thoughts/emotions. I know it can be awkward, might even get a giggle or two from the other people around if nobody else has done any roleplaying yet this session or campaign, but someone has to make the first step.

Also don’t forget that the players have a lot of power in shaping the game. You do not have to explore a huge cave. You can walk out at any time, go to a town and talk to people instead. It’s kind of a dick move though if you let your DM prepare this cave for days, letting them believe that’s what you were interested in, only to then not engage with it. Of course that requires all the players (or at least a good number of them) to be on board. To find out what you all want to get out of this game together, communication outside the game is required.

I’m gonna be devil’s advocate for the last three paragraphs of my rambling response:

Do you actually KNOW that the enemies you’re fighting are arbitrary? Do you know there is no explanation for the mimic and the gelatinous cube? No explanation for the moths and larvae? No explanation for the Morlocks? Is it possible that your characters just haven’t found those explanations? I’ve placed enemies in my games before and the players never found out WHY they were there (the characters never even bothered thinking about it in some cases) but there was always a in-universe reason. And even if your DM didn’t initially have a reason, I would assume they will be able to come up with one on the spot.

For example, Mimics are described as: “A mimic can remain in its alternate form for an extremely long period of time, sometimes remaining disguised in a dungeon chamber for decades. Regardless of how long it waits, the mimic remains vigilant and alert, ready to strike at any moment.” They do seek to ambush adventurers so hiding in a cave that would be attractive to adventurers is the #1 thing they’d do. It could’ve wandered in 10, 20, 30 years ago, biding its time. Saying something like “I investigate the area around where the mimic was, trying to find any hints whether it has moved recently” after combat could lead to you learning more context about how the mimic got there. Same with the moths and larvae, you could try finding out if they’ve been born and died in this cave? If something made them flee their previous homes (especially “easy” if you have anything to converse with animals), etc. I don’t think it’s the DMs responsibility to give you context unprompted. It’s their responsibility to give you context once you’re looking for context, and even then, you still might need to pass certain rolls to get context. In the end, most of the time, the DM shouldn’t and wouldn’t give you any info your characters wouldn’t have.

This also extends to other areas you complained about. If you want more information but your DM doesn’t immediately provide it, prod them for it through character actions. “What is this Morlock I’m fighting wearing?” “What’s the color of the stones here?” “How high is the ceiling?” “Can I hear anything at all?”

I think you’re on the right track with your Update though. Best of luck!

Sorry in advance for random stream of consciousness.

There’s definitely a learning curve to being a DM. And some people, like myself, just aren’t cut out for it. If you want to keep playing with these people, I would suggest being honest with your feedback. Talk to the group about how you’d like to incorporate more roleplaying and cut back on combat. It might be a good idea to try running a pre-built campaign if you aren’t already. But even those can be kinda dry without the right DM.

I haven’t really played in years, but my DM got to the point where basically, the rules were just guidelines. If a player wanted to try something, the DM would just roll with it. They’d try to come up with a reasonable check for you to roll and then just see what happens. Most of the “funny” moments come from massive failures or critical successes. Ham those up. Instead of saying, “nope, you fail”, make up a consequence. “You tried to mount the giant moth, but you couldn’t get a grip and it flung you up to an outcropping” or “you missed so bad you hit the column and it comes crumbling down, you and the enemy both take 2 points of bludgeoning.”

The rules are great for combat simulation, but if combat was all you wanted, you’d be better off playing Warhammer. The best advice I can give is just loosen up. And again, like Jack Sparrow says, it’s more like guidelines. We eventually got to the point where we said, no opening the books during the session. If you don’t know a rule, make it up. The goal is to have fun, not to follow the book.

So yeah, it’s about mindset and teamwork and cooperation and communication. Being honest in what you want out of a session is the most important thing, because nobody knows what you want unless you say so. They may be able to tell when you aren’t having fun, but they may not know why or how to fix it and may just throw more monsters at it because that’s what they think will fix it.

As for player death. We embraced it. If we really liked our character, we’d just come back as MyGuy the 2nd, or 3rd, or 4th, and when we got tired of that character we’d move on to something else rolling a new character at the level everyone else was at and picking a few items to keep (assuming someone else made it out alive).

Don’t listen to the people saying you should just quit. Talk to people first, especially the DM. Tell them about what kind of game you’d like to play. This is something that groups should generally do before they start a campaign (in what some people call session 0), especially if they’ve never played together. It’s possible that the DM isn’t consciously designing the sessions like this and is willing to change it up. Maybe they’re even happy to get some feedback and the other players might also enjoy some more roleplay. Maybe the DM can’t see themselves running a game like that, but another player would love to.

If it becomes clear that the kind of game they want to play and the kind of game you want to play are incompatible, then it’s perfectly fine to say “this isn’t for me” and stop playing with them.

It sounds like you have a brand new DM not just some public game where you jump from group to group. Talk to your friend be helpful and constructive with your feedback. I have seen a bunch of new DMs be combat focused. because roleplaying can be awkward at first. he may need some help.

Some Good DMs I have played with will have a season 7. Where we get together and recap the story so far and then they ask for feedback on what we liked and didn’t like so far.

We dumped whole books like Dungeon of the Mad Mage. After most of us were not having fun and it turns out nether was the DM. We were all just playing for the sake of everyone else. Like with everything communication is essential.

That table is not for you.

No dnd is better than bad dnd.

Even someone running a pre-made I think you’ll like more because some of them are super investigation or research based.

So yeah, not for you. Maybe some of those players have fun trying to maximize damage each turn, and that’s okay if it’s for them.

I would look for a new group personally. Don’t be afraid to politely leave groups that aren’t for you. A dnd group is a huge time investment so shouldn’t just be “first group I join I’m stuck with”.

Like my dm isn’t top tier, but like we got attacked by a lesser kraken… because we “may” have stolen eggs on a whim, and we were running around manning cannons and yelling at one another and it was chaotic and fun being on that ship.

Before that we were at a carnival and we thought we were slick because we cheated and won a boat… then after leaving we realized that while we did cheat with spells to win that, the tame owl bear we bought was a druid bear covered in illusion that ran away and we just ignored the million red flags. Why was it so cheap? Why did all the animals in that stall seem almost human intelligent, reacting to the salesmen almost like they were anticipating what he was going to do?

Someone who wants to min max damage would hate a session that was about scamming carnies then protecting our stolen boat from a lesser kraken because we stole its eggs on a whim and are now looking for a place to hatch them. But to me it’s fun that we get a chance to use all our abilities in a fun way.

Different people play D&D in different ways, which is one of the coolest and most frustrating things about the hobby: there’s a group out there for everyone, but at the same time finding the right group can be painful.

It sounds like there’s a couple of things going on here: first, your DM seems to be off the classic dungeon crawl variety. This was how most games were for me Back In The Day, and the hobby originally came out of wargaming, so I feel like it’s not unexpected, particularly in Pathfinder, which is much more “combat rules” than 5e.

Next, your DM is new. It takes a long time to get used to running a game. It can be pretty stressful trying to make sure you’ve got content to fill the four hour slot for your friends, and particularly in rules-heavy games one of the easiest things to do is just prep a combat encounter, 'cause that’ll take a lot of time. For me, I know my players well enough that I can count on them spending an hour talking to some previously-inconsequential NPC, and they trust me enough to be okay with going in the direction I gently nudge them, most of the time.

So I guess long story short is: don’t give up on TTRPGs. Whether or not to give up on the game you’re in is up to you. You’ve got options:

You could talk to the DM. Letting them know what you like might be more effective than telling them what you don’t; some people can get defensive.

You could take the plunge and offer to run a oneshot (which will almost immediately be more than a single session). Showing the DM what you like instead of just telling them can be really effective, and who knows, maybe you’ll even like it?

You could find a different group. If you’re in a town or city of any decent size, there are likely other gamers around; maybe another group will suit you better.

Here are a few cents from my side. I’ve been running games for about 20 years now, and if I had to start out now, it would be daunting. Critical Role and all of that set the expectation so high, and a lot of our communities don’t take you seriously until you created your own world. Creating a dungeon with monsters to fight seems easier than creating social encoungers.

So here is my insight: Talk to your gm what you like and what you dislike. Also, check other systems, maybe something free-flowing like blades in the dark is more up your speed.

Tell your GM you are fine with a premade module. way easier to prepare and most of them are a good mixture between combat and social encounter. If you want to stick with dnd, maybe still have a look at paizos Abomination Vault adventure path, its foundry module is delightful and its a really fun adventure with a good mixture of dungeon crawling, fights and social encounters.

Do a session 0 and decide, what kind of game you want to play.

Get your GM a copy of the Return of the lazy GM. It helped me so much with just letting go and get the players to do things. Encourage your GM to let a session run by the players and tell him when you had fun.

I almost bet the GM found a map they thought looked cool and is just throwing stuff at you to fight because it’s faster and easier than coming up with storylines and characters with motivations. I get it, we GMs get busy with life and stuff too, but if you’ve been doing this for a while, there’s always a reserve of characters or stories that you made but didn’t use which can be pulled into the current game. With a new GM, they may not have that luxury.

All that said, the best course of action seems to be the thing you’ve already concluded: talk to the GM and the group. Maybe let someone else try being GM if it’s just the case of the current one being busy. As others have said, running a prewritten campaign is just fine, especially in Pathfinder. Heck, you can even buy many of them as foundry modules with music, maps and handouts all ready.

Sounds like a table that’s not a good fit for you. Sounds like I wouldn’t like it either. It’s 100% ok to politely exit. Tell them you appreciate the work they put in, but you’re looking for a different kind of game.

Side note: if you want more roleplaying pathfinder and DND aren’t really the best for that. They’re combat games first. Probably check out some pbta games, or fate, or the world of darkness games.

Out of curiosity how old is everyone at this table? Is everyone new to pen and paper rpgs there? Because it sounds very similar to some embarrassing stuff I ran when I was a teenager first planing DND. Lots of half baked ideas and semi railroading.

You entered a time tunnel to 1988. It’s the only explanation that makes sense!

Seriously, there are multiple ways to play this game. There is nothing wrong with an old school dungeon crawl, but it’s not the only way to play. I have two regular games going on right now and they are very different from each other in tone and content. Your table clearly has a different vision than you do. Also, playing online exacerbates this problem.

Have a look around, see what else is there, see how other people play. No one is “doing it wrong” but they are doing it differently.

I just want to add to what everyone else has said: the only way to ensure you get to play in a D&D game that fits the style of play you are looking for is to be the DM yourself. It is a lot of fun and you get to create the kind of story that you are interested in seeing play out.

Looks like you’re in a very combat focused campaign. With my irl group we half roleplay and half just say stupid things for like four hours and then fight something at the end. Our last fight was against Richard Simmons and our wizard like solo’d him while the rest of us had to get Brawndo-addicted obese people out of bed and to safety and I became addicted to Brawndo in the process. Brawndo is what the plants crave, it has electrolytes.

As for advice, maybe find a group that is not so combat focused?

You want a cRPG, e.g., Skyrim or the Might & Magic series or any open world games. D&D at its core is combat oriented. Heck, try the Baldurs Gate series for the best of both worlds.