So what exactly is a good thing about d20/D&D 3.x/PF? What

>>44122371
Nothing, there are better systems. The only up-side was the OGL

>>44122371
Its ubiquity (i.e. easy to get a group), and the OGL.

Almost every single thing about the system is broken or cumbersome in some way. Even the core mechanic, its one saving grace perhaps, is inherently flawed and consequently there's been a recent shift away from that model into bounded probability subsystems.

The only good thing about it is the sheer stupid amount of content available for it, and that sorta falls flat due to most of that content being overpowered, underpowered, broken or utterly non-functional. Then again, the precedent was set in the PHB, so what can you expect?

It's fun

>>44122371
There are only 2 things I can think of. First, like >>44122667 pointed out, it's incredibly easy to find a group, to the point of triviality. Second, while the game itself isn't that fun to play, it easilly has one of the most fun character creation processes. Optimizing a character is a genuinely satisfying puzzle-game, that varries depending on what material is allowed, giving it infinite combinations. Actually playing past the point necessary to prove that your build does its trick is sort of pointless, but the character creation is fun enough to count as a game in itself.

>What does it uniquely have that no other game or system can replicate?

The better part of 40 years of grognardery

holy fuck neo/tg/ is shit

>>44122371
>What does it uniquely have that no other game or system can replicate?
It captured the public eye and had enough marketing behind it to make the most out of the birth of the internet. As such, the OGL really used and abused the easy share nature of web forums allowing the name to spread.

>>44122797
The subgame of character creation is probably the only thing I can think of, yeah. There are other games with a similar level of detail in character creation, but the thing about character building in 3.PF is that it's not only detailed, but it's challenging. And that, while absolutely a terrible thing for actual gameplay, perversely enough makes the character building process fun and interesting in its own right.

If I want to make a character to do something in a competently-designed system, there's not all that much to it. The options that provide the abilities I want are right there, intuitive to find, and they work. Not so in 3.PF -- at least, not for a good chunk of things. You have to dig around for the right feats, magic items, multiclassing, etc. to actually pull off what you want. And that holds for builds from the fairly basic ("I want to make a town guard type guy who uses a polearm to keep enemies out, and I'd prefer not to suck at it") to more exotic and/or minmaxed ideas ("I want to make Misaka Mikoto from A Certain Scientific Railgun, see how much damage I can get into a single shuriken using a lightning-themed psionic build").

So, in other words, its greatest flaw turns out, ironically enough, to be its major unique "strength".

>>44122371
POPULARITY, BABY.

WoW shits on all MMOs
MtG shits on all TCGs
Warhams shits on all mini games
D&D shits on all PnP

Such is life in the zone.

>>44122961
Is that why 3.PF is so popular on /tg/?

Because /tg/ only builds builds and never actually plays the game?

>>44122371
It's easy to figure out and d20/5% increments is really intuitive, both for players and GMs.

>>44122371
A large playerbase and number of splatbooks. It was the dominant gaming system for years, and it has a lot of volume.

>>44122371

People really like rolling d20s. It's an iconic part of the hobby. d20+modifier versus a target number is extremely simple. Very little math involved, high being better is intuitive, large range of results.

Most people just want to play a game and throw some RNG into the mix to maintain tension. They're willing to throw mathematically 'good' dice mechanics out the window if they're annoying to use. Fun is still the goal of playing a game.

>>44122371
It's popular and good enough. People have enough trouble finding a good group, much less a "good" game. Also in it's own way min/maxing is fun.
I have two groups one where we tell a story with some dice to help, and we may never return to golarion/forgotten realms/eberron.
I also have a group where it's four of us vs the DM I've gone through 5 characters in 10 levels and 3 years. Not all of those characters died some just didn't have a reason to continue so I made a new characters. Both are fun and I'm excited for each session

>>44122371
>What does it uniquely have that no other game or system can replicate?
A huge market and memetic share of the populous, that is all.

>>44123409
A fistful of d6s is better than a d20.

>>44124941
I disagree. Unexpected events are more fun in a group setting then just getting nice safe statistical averages.

With a d20 roll, one in every twenty rolls (a nat 20) is going to make something unique and exciting happen. If you play with critical fails, then 1 in 20 rolls something amusing will happen.

With a fistful of d6, if you roll a large number at once (which you usually will be, because players tend to pump up things they actually use a lot) you just end up getting the same marginal success every single time. At worst you get a small devation. Throwing the dice is little more than a formality. BORING

>>44125111
People need to remember why they are using dice in the first place and not just doing freeform RP or static numbers. Unpredictability and random chance are fun

>>44125128
No, the purpose of using dice is to prevent thinking ahead from being too important, because that makes games grind to a halt.

>>44123028
Migth be. Also the fact that it's been around for ages means a lot of people here have played it at some point, probably even as the main/oly game they've played due to its ubiquity.

I do agree that the main selling point of 3.PF is (aside from the ubiquity) is the OGL and amount of customisation. Mechanically it's clunky, oftentimes outright broken, and suffers from huge amount of rule-bloat, but it's very conductive for homebrewing and allows for a lot of detail in character creation (even if you'll very easily get a character that's essentially uselsss, but if you know the game well enough to recognise what works and what doesn't, I suppose that adds to the fun of character building since it's like a puzzle you have to solve).

I've never actually played 3.PF but I've still written some homebrew for it because most of the rules are freely availeable and the system allows you a lot of freedom in designing your own classes and races. I've treid to do that in 5th edition as well, but it's a lot more limited in that regard.

>>44125111
So I made a homebrew system that runs on a 3d6 system with some tweaks. I kind of disliked the d20. the thought of my master swords man arbitrarily disarming himself, or what have you, once every 20 swings was ridiculous.
So I built a system, a generic system without the d20. 1 out of 186 was more palatable for a chance for something catastrophic or epic. but I found combat kind of boring, the dice roll didn't matter because the bell curve was so steep.

just my experience on boring d6's

I feel that it's a case of there being enough supplemental reading that you can find rules to cover the strangest requests. Plus it's probably just a case of momentum, I like them because it's what I started with, I'm sure others are in the same boat.

>>44124941
a couple of d10s is better than a d20 and d6s

Is that a fucking wu-tang cup?

>>44122371
>wu tang can ain't nothin to fuck with.

>>44123409
>Very little math involved
Once your character is done, and assuming you understand the system. I'd say about a third of the 3.P players I've known cannot calculate their own to hit values, AC, saves, and akill bonuses, some after more than a year playing the game.

I'm serious.

File: 1350537437451.jpg (121KB, 662x807px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 662x807px

>tfw no Wu Tang x Medabots

File: 1333550821473-267x300.jpg (37KB, 267x300px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 267x300px

>>44122371
Market saturation, accessibility, and the ability for DMs to say what they do or don't want. That and the system can be customized to suit the needs of the user.

Also noticing in this thread the sheer number of game-ist types here who are only focusing on the rules to have fun.

My answer is simple. Pic Related for you guys.

I find 4/5e completely watered down and poorly supported, and I find anything earlier than 3.5 either overly complex or sadly busted.

3.5 is better than 4, and has far more options than what 5 provides.

File: Mr Johnson.jpg (55KB, 628x587px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 628x587px

>>44122371
Simple to learn, massive (and I really mean it) amount of books, very fun char-gen, and incredibly easy to find a group.

>>44123235
>and number of splatbooks.

GURPS