>In this game, you can do anything! Your imagination is the

>>48482990
I'm going to tackle the troll.

>That's not realistic. Trolls are huge and you're human-sized.

>>48482990
>Sorry, you can only make one attack per round.
That's why you summon hordes of shit to attack for you or use AoE effects.

>>48483004
>AoE effects
Whelp I'm a dumb.

>>48482990
im taking the bait here, but "for 100$ what is the shield master feat"

>>48482990
when i read the rulebook

>>48483034

Who drew this comic? hahaha I really like his artstyle and would love to know.

Sorry for wanting to be spoon fed, but the art is simply amazing and relates to my kind of demographic perfectly.

Play OSR

No really

Uses the same core rules as DnD, but no bullshit feats or skill lists, less HP bloat, less caster supremacy and better rules on how the players are interacting with the game world instead of reading their numbers off a sheet.

But if course you'd know this if you'd stop making this thread and shitposting.

I know this is just bait, but that's a shitty example. Every game is going to have some sort of cap on actions per round.

If you want a real example of how D&D fails to deliver on "In this game, you can do anything! Your imagination is the limit!", there are better examples out there.

>Player: I wanted to play a knight that can jump super far like in old epic myths/JRPGS/my chinese cartoons/whatever.
>GM: Okay then, you'll have to start as this casting class, take these specific feats, and then pick up this prestigue class from an obscure supplement. You should be able to play the character you want to at around level... six, I'm estimating.
>Player: ...
>GM: Y'know, if the game lasts that long anyway!

Most infuriating shit ever.

>>48483557
Or, treat the shield like an improvised weapon, or one the character is proficient in, and let them attack with it as a bonus action (as per the rules for dual wielding), have it deal 1+ STR or some shit.

Or OP can just make a post complaining. At least maybe it bumped a quest thread off.

>>48483615
Wow, that's a first.

https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Ribbon

I hope the dude that made those is happy now.

>>48482990

When did you realize that "when did you realize" is the worst debate format?

>>48483643
>I wanna play a knight that can do X
>You're going to want to start as caster Y then take A, B, C and D.
So glad I left D&D.

>>48483620
to be fair, caster supremacy wasn't such an issue in 2e either
It's speeding up spellcasting to ungodly levels that fucked everything (and putting everyone on the same xp track and making concentration checks a joke an removing negative repercussions from spelss and taking away the Fighter's nice things and... fuck)

File: 1425249858984.jpg (26KB, 308x308px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 308x308px

>>48482990
Sounds like you just don't like games with rules, OP, since you described pretty much every tabletop in existence, not just DnD.

I know some kids over at deviantart who would love to play with you, I'm sure your super special half-dragon vampire with dual katanas and blood magic would fit right in.

>>48483720

Actually, 90% of systems would let him do it. Just with a penalty.

>>48483615
SHE is on deviantart under the name of 'Redlife'.
Link will follow.

File: 1352258998152.png (591KB, 900x850px) Image search: [Google]

591KB, 900x850px

>>48482990
>Okay, I charge the goblins, swinging at one with my sword and knocking the other out of the way with my shield!
>Sorry, you can only make one attack per round.

Pic related: Have you tried not having a shit GM? Or better yet, why not take in the -3 AC penalty since you've just bared yourself to the goblins?

Also, who would use their shield to knock a goblin back, if there are more than two of them? Are you expecting that your armour will save you? Fuck.

>sage because just in case this is a troll. Else, I'm not sure how someone can be so fucking stupid.

>>48482990

> plays a game
> is surprised it is a game

>>48483615
>>48483769
Here's the link.
http://redlife.deviantart.com/

>>48483656
Entirely possible in 5e.

File: 108028.jpg (967KB, 900x1347px) Image search: [Google]

967KB, 900x1347px

>>48483620

You can't swing a sword like OP described in OSR because again it is a limiting system based on bullshit.

What OP wants is Dungeon World. It's pretty much objectively one of the best currently out there. It has fast easy to use mechsnics and is perfect for beginners, it's a lot cheaper than most of

these other rules bloated systems that cost fifty dollars. There is no reason for extra rules when it is he role playing that matters. Dungeon World is fast and

innovative and still feels exactly like the spirit of ADND before DnD 3.5 destroyed the hobby and ruined a generation of role players.

Can somebody check if the OP and this guy is the same person? It's feeling like virt is getting desperate.

>>48483004
Not every game is high level with infinite spell slots.

>>48483720

>I know some kids over at deviantart who would love to play with you, I'm sure your super special half-dragon vampire with dual katanas and blood magic would fit right in.

It's funny you'd say that considering how Pathfinder allows you to do exactly that as a legitimate character option.

>>48483958
>What OP wants is Dungeon World. It's pretty much objectively one of the best currently out there.

I too like to wear my pants on my head.

>>48483958
Blah blah blah shot posting blah blah dungeon world blah blah wahhhhhh blah blah virtualoptim

>>48483745
In D&D, the penalty is called "getting good", i.e., being high enough level.

>>48482990
>Answering pic
When I found out Rifts is worse, and decided to play that instead.

File: Guard.jpg (62KB, 370x278px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 370x278px

>>48483797

>Every drawing is the exact same head and hair shape.

Is she autistic?

>>48483643
Why would you expect to get everything you want at the gate? I don't think any game does that

>>48484160
GURPS does, if you want your game to start at a high power level. HERO too.

>>48484176
Well, then, so does D&D, if you just make your campaign start at a higher level than 1st. So what's the point?

>>48484203
Exactly. What's the point of every one of these threads, when all of us could change anything we want in these systems? Every rpg ever says to change the rules if we don't like them. So why do we keep arguing over a non-issue?

File: fish_by_redlife-d5n96s5.png (244KB, 600x480px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 600x480px

>>48484144
Maybe you're just looking at the same characters a lot.

>>48484160
The problem here isn't that something is great. It's that you have to go trough stupid loops RAW to get there. Which usually means
>Caster
>Caster
>Caster

>>48484128

Well you got that right.

The more levels you have, the less viable options you have as a martial to overcome threats beyond just hitting with your weapon until they die.

For mages, it's the opposite.

>>48483998
You mean Craig?

>>48483958
Hi Craig.

>>48484505
>The more levels you have, the less viable options you have as a martial to overcome threats beyond just hitting with your weapon until they die.

I fail to see the problem with having a fighter think on his feet.

Numerous heroes in mythology were great warriors as well as quite cunning.

File: tarrasque_chan_by_redlife-d9wb2ww.jpg (118KB, 700x765px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 700x765px

>>48484249

Pretty sure I'm not.

File: robot_girl_by_redlife-d5rikf6.jpg (112KB, 599x756px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 599x756px

>>48484707
I think you may be exaggerating a little.

File: apples.jpg (357KB, 1000x721px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 1000x721px

>>48482990
I realized D&D 3.5 was garbage back in 2005-2006 when I decided it was time to start a new campaign, and I looked at my houserule binders and saw the stack of binders was taller than my stack of actual 3.5 rulebooks.

I never got to play 4e, and was content to watch the battle from the outside.

I realized Pathfinder was garbage after running a campaign of it from level 1 to level 15, wherein I realized Paizo fixed absolutely none of the problems that 3.5 had. Not only did Paizo exacerbate those problems, they introduced entirely new problems unique to Pathfinder.

I'm actually enjoying 5e a lot. It's not perfect, but I like it.

>>48484160
There's a difference between getting everything you want at chargen and playing something totally unrelated to your character concept for the majority of the campaign (because lets face it, almost no campaign gets to mid/high level unless it starts there).

Can you really not comprehend a system where someone can play a dude with a cool ability that's still level one? If a level one wizard can still manipulate reality and a level one cleric can still call down miracles from the gods themselves, my level one fighter should be able to do a cool trick like jumping really high.

This isn't "WAAHH MY LEVEL ONE CHARACTER IS LEVEL ONE WHY CANT I CAST INFINITE METEOR AND KILL GODS," this is "Why the fuck do I have to play a sorcerer for three levels when I want to be playing a fighter?"

>>48484176
Funny you bring that up, because that's one of my more liked systems at the moment, because I totally can build a low-power starting character that still fits my theme. A starting adventurer can still take Super Jump; they don't have to jump through bullshit and arbitrary hoops forever before the system deigns to give me an ability I should have had from the get go.

This has nothing to do with starting power levels and everything to do with starting *character options*.

>>48482990
you know you can do this in 5e with the shield master feat right

>>48482990
When I felt dread about leveling up.

Or even worse, making a new character was too much of a hassle.
One night my character died and I thought "cool" now I can make this new character I have been thinking about.
But then looking through the book for feats, skills, and all of the bull shit about making a new character I almost just up and left to go home.
I ended up fudging my way through character gen (albiet very underpowered) just to get back in the game without making a scene.

>>48483769
Redlife is a she? Who knew.

Is she cute?

>>48484056

That doesn't refute anything I said. try responding to my points in an adult fashion, or get the fuck out.

>>48484072

Again, has nothing to do with my argument. Keep playing D&D, though, and ignoring the dozens of better games out there.

Fuckheads.

>>48484838
>I looked at my houserule binders and saw the stack of binders was taller than my stack of actual 3.5 rulebooks.

That's your fault for coming up with so many autistic houserules though.

>>48483958

What's ironic here is that this is one of the few playstyle mismatches that could actually be helped by Dungeon World and yet the allegedly pro-DW shitposters would rather shitpost than actually suggest DW

>>48485790
Hey Craig. Why don't you go for a walk.

Leave the vodka bottle home, take some water instead. Don't want to see you die from liver failure so soon.

You have a long, long career of acting like a retard on the internet ahead of you, if you play your cards right.

>>48484704

>I fail to see the problem with having a fighter think on his feet.

Because nothing you choose to do is as viable as swinging at something until it dies.


>Numerous heroes in mythology were great warriors as well as quite cunning.

Numerous heroes also weren't hamstrung by the RAW either. Plus, magic allows for way more creativity than being a martial simply due to how many options and exploits it allows by RAW.

>>48485163
>needing a feat to hit someone with a fucking shield.
shit like this and the community is why I dropped D&D,

>>48485802

Yet the most common solution that 3.PFags spout is "lul, you don't HAVE to play by RAW, just houserule it."

I mean, there are websites that have more houserules for 3.X than Skyrim has for mods, and that's saying something.

>>48486602

Except we are suggesting Dungeon World? You're the one who thinks it's shitposting. Dungeon World is FAR better than AD&D and mimicks AD&D's style with far superior rules and mechanics.

>>48486665

Who the fuck is Craig?

>>48489133
It's you. Craig. Remember? The fat loser with gore fantasies? The one who got banned from his LGS (where he also worked at)? The guy whose group dissolved around him because he's toxic as shit? The guy slowly but surely sliding down the slippery slope of alcoholism? Who is facing imminent liver failure, but needs the glass to not just off himself, because his life is in shambles and he has to work at fucking subway to make ends meet? The Craig who is failing his studies, and at best will be an assistant manager at a Subway in his 50's? Whose only joy in life is trying to troll imageboards but being so fucking obvious the best replies he get are a resounding "meh", no matter how retarded he pretends to be?

It's you, Craig.

You pitiful creature.

>>48489205
>all this effort
Why are you wasting your time?

>>48482990
>Why can't I just narrate what my character does in every situation?

Because that's not roleplaying, it's storytelling. And no one wants to hear about how your character did everything right and suffered no setbacks.

>>48489228
I honestly find it fun.

File: 1468245948207.jpg (53KB, 512x368px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 512x368px

>>48489264
That's really not something to be proud of

>>48489264
Do you not have a group you can roleplay with? or mini's to be painting?

>>48489114
It's because you know you hate it.

Imagine if they argued "My houseruled game is better than your game." What are you going to do? What can you possibly grasp at when they take the game to what you call unfair subjectivity, but what everyone else considers just normal gaming?

Nothing. And that makes you feel powerless.
So, you argue that the only way people are allowed to play is by RAW, because, ultimately, you're a troll.

File: 09874648203746573893.png (21KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 512x512px

>>48489289
>My houseruled game is better than your game
I mean, not to brag, but mine is.

>>48489280
I'm not, I guess. But this is an anonymous image board, I don't have to be proud here.

Besides, it's better than pretending to be retarded/arguing with someone pretending to be retarded. Not any more productive, admittedly.

I just let out some steam at some guy who wants to paint himself as a target anyway (or someone who is close enough).

I mean, what's the point with arguing with trolls? Finding creative ways to call them losers is way more entertaining.

>>48489317
You don't realize how retarded you're being right now, do you?

>>48489281
Not right now. Probably going to sleep in less than an hour anyway.

>>48489331
At least it's my own honest retardation instead of pretend retardation.

>>48489351
That doesn't make it better anon. It still means you're retarded.

Go to bed, let's hope the hangover doesn't ruin your day tomorrow.

>>48482990
>One round is 6 seconds
You're a fucking dumbass, try swinging a sword in real life you dickhead.

In reality you just have no imagination and are projecting your own fat ass failures.

>>48489376
>I'm a terrible fighter in real life, therefore a PC is too.
Care to tell me why you can't treat a shield as an off hand weapon? And why you can't make a combat maneuver with that off handed weapon?

>>48489369
Yeah but I'm retarded because I honestly enjoy being a bit retarded to let some of my annoyance at a stupid troll out, instead of "pretending" to be retarded because I want to make people upset and then laugh at them pointing out how retarded I am.

PS.: I'm on a low carb diet. No alcohol for me. But you are right, I should probably sleep.

>>48489289

Making houserules for one or two specific details is fine.

Making houserules because the vanilla game is broken is not.

And before that one fag comes in here to bitch about people not giving 3.X its "fair due," let me ask which is better.

A game that's properly made and works right out the box to provide an experience for you and your friends that you were looking for or a game that's so broken due to the incompetence of the staff that its community had to band together to fix most of the bullshit just so it worked as originally intended, which only helps you if you're aware of said fixes in the first place?

To put it another way, would you rather play FFVI or would you rather play Skyrim?

>>48483775
>sages but doesn't sage
wew lad

>>48489376

I'm an unfit fag who does sword shit just to LARP from time to time and I can still cut tatami rolls at least once per second.

>>48489376

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yegd3YpjmWY

You really think it's one attack per 6s in real life?

>>48482990
>In this game, you can do anything! Your imagination is the limit!

That's wrong though and you shouldn't tell new players that. It sets expectations too high and it only leads to disappointment when ideas are constrained by virtue of it being a game.

>>48489708
>>48489739
Guys guys, he just assumes that every saber is as heavy as a fantasy greatsword.

>>48489512
Your argument is hollow and built on vague definitions of broken.

Basically, you just hate it when you point at a flaw, and people go "that? I don't play with that."

You hate that people can dismiss your complaints as negligible or fixable, so you try to argue around that, to try and force people to pretend your concerns are important when they're not.

Why not stop, and worry about actually important things.

>>48482990
>Blast a monster in the face with an exploding fire spell the size of your torso
>11 damage

>Rogue of the same level stabs his 3 inch dagger into the monsters shoulder
>55 damage

File: mixing_3rd_party_splatbooks.jpg (66KB, 468x587px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 468x587px

>>48482990

Hold on, if you're calling a shield bash an attack then you're counting it as a strike with a weapon. So, it's a two-weapon attack, which you can do, just with a penalty.

Your GM just need some imagination, OP, and that's prerequisite to tabletop gaming. EVERY tabletop game has some blurb in its rules saying "sometimes you'll need to make shit up and that's ok it's more important than following the rules, just so long as you're fair and consistent". D&D doesn't have specific rules for jumping off a balcony and grabbing a chandelier to swing and land on someone feet-first, either, but that doesn't mean you can't do it, just kludge something together that makes some sense.

The "you can do anything" is the responsibility of the GM, not the books or their publishers. They can't think of everything and they couldn't write it all down in a finite number of pages if they could.

>>48483958
Except you can also do this in other games. Because pushing someone out of the way with your shield ISN'T an attack - it's perfectly fair for the GM to say, "okay, make an attack roll at -4 to push him five feet away." EVEN IN D&D.

>>48489407
It's called improved shield bash

>>48485266
She draws weeb art. It's safe to assume she's morbidly obese.

>>48489787

>You hate that people can dismiss your complaints as negligible or fixable, so you try to argue around that, to try and force people to pretend your concerns are important when they're not.

I could produce houserules for any system I run, but I don't, because the game's rules are usually enough to satisfy whatever creativity the players wish to utilize at character creation.

In 3.X, I have to use houserules if a player comes to me with a concept that isn't already covered in the CRB or one of the dozen splats that are available and even then, the houserule might not fix anything since I, and over 90% of the people who come up with houserules in the first place, are NOT game designers who know how to properly make a game.

>>48490124

Not always.

>>48489309

You both still sound like a bunch of 8 year olds saying "we're not playing basketball, we're playing SUPERBASKETBALL."

>>48484019
>Summons
>needing infinite spell slots
>not effective by level 3+ with one spell slot and maybe a feat

You're so wrong it hurts

>>48489787
Why do you have to fix a game if it isn't broken? Why are there so many homebrew fixes for 3.5 if it isn't a broken game?

Honestly I like Pathfinder because it has way more core content than most other tabletops. It has some annoying rules like how wonky size penalty is to keep track of in different contexts, but the combat is fine. Yeah you can't charge, do a combat maneuver and an attack in one turn at low levels but there's almost certainly feats for that later on.
Also
>tfw friends hate PF because the combat is "boring"
>absolutely refuse to read the combat rules or learn combat maneuvers
Okay I roll to hit the bad guy.

>>48490110
>you need a feat to hit someone with a shield
3.PF is just fucking terrible.

>>48490221
90% of weebs, regardless of gender, have weight problems. Even more when they have a Deviantart and draw. If she isn't a landwhale she's a Ms. Skeltal.

>>48490171
You mean the system is vague enough and lacks the degree of mechanical depth that 3.5 has.

You need to homebrew for 3.5 because it's a game where you can have fun with all sorts of little modifiers and subsystems, because they actually have a tangible impact on the game. It's a strength and a weakness, because while you often need new rules for new ideas, it's fun to come up with those new rules and to actually feel them, rather than just essentially refluffing some other mechanic.

Yeah, a lot of people suck at homebrewing, but the people who do understand the system can really flex its mechanical muscles.

I personally prefer 5e over 3.5, but a weakness of 5e is that some of its mechanics seem bland because they lack the same impact or uniqueness that you could find in 3.5.

For a game with all sorts of problems, 3.5's mechanics, for better and for worse, carried weight that could be felt.

>>48490224
>fishing
How dumb are you anon?

File: 1458852224909.png (35KB, 543x659px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 543x659px

>>48490314
Now that's just rude. What's wrong with skeltals?

>>48490314
Skeletons are hotter than normals.

I would a skeleton

>>48489739

I'd say it works out to one serious attack for damage about every 6 seconds, yes. Most of the sword to sword contact is actually jockeying for position to make an attack.

>>48490327

Enjoy being SUPERBASKETBALL champion of the whole world.

>>48490368
So, really dumb. Okay anon. Have fun.

>>48490280

>absolutely refuse to read the combat rules or learn combat maneuvers

Why would they? Most combat maneuvers require three feats to use and even then, most enemies have either a resistance or an outright immunity to said maneuver.

You can't grapple creatures that are larger than you or are incorporeal/insubstantial, you can't trip someone with more than two legs, you can't disarm someone if they aren't wielding actual weapons like a sword or dagger, sundering shit requires using the fiddling hardness rules, and shit like dirty tricks and the like are just out and out useless.

And considering you only get so many feats and you're stuck with these feats until you just retire the character, it really just ends up being more efficient to just focus on dealing damage and hitting accurately.

>>48482990

>Okay, I charge the goblins, swinging at one with my sword and knocking the other out of the way with my shield!

Can do.

>Level 2 fighter
>Sure, I have to blow Action Surge, but..yeah. Can do.

>not treating a shield as an offhanded weapon that gives +2 to AC and does 1d4+STR bludgeoning

>>48490326

You can enjoy the game for those merits if you want, but I'd rather just play a game where homebrewing is an option, not a requirement.

>>48490347

Except that in D&D even if the guy has no weapon and just stands there looking at you you attack once per 6s.

>>48490347
Yeah, your attack roll takes that jockeying into account. A hit resulting in HP damage might not necessarily have wounded your opponent, they could be put off balance, or have their guard broken.

>>48482990
Dude you've posted this same image with the exact same kind of prompt like 3 times already. You may or may not have a valid point but give it a rest jesus fuck

>>48490347

If that were true, I'd wish the game actually showed my kickass warrior actually making all those stances and slashes and shit.

Because as it stands, it just makes martials look like out of shape shitters who can't even make more than two attacks without being winded.

Even then, the worst part of the rules is the fact that with each attack you make, you become increasingly more and more inaccurate.

I dunno, you'd think that if I slashed a dude in the chest, I'd get some sort of bonus since my opponent is winded or reeling from the blow, rather than my attacks somehow losing more and more accuracy the more attacks I make.

>>48490334
Ass and tits are the good part.

>>48483745
And you're dumb if you think it's impossible in D&D. You can attack with two weapons without any feat investment, but the 1st attack will recieve a -6 penalty and the 2nd one a -10 penalty.

Now, if you want to charge AND do both attacks, you're just forcing it. Charging is a full-round action exactly because it takes a lot of time. It involves movement and an attack, with a bonus for charging nonetheless. It's a balance issue if you can down two enemies at level one without any investment at all. You can still do both hits with Pounce, which is obtainable as early as level 1 for barbarians. Rules aren't made up to take off the fun, they're meant to restrain retards who think they can do anything anytime so that other people can have fun too.

Also, you're not entitled to do amazing stuff without investing in feats and items unless that's the only thing you can do(AKA a caster). If you want a knight that can fight hard, you optimize fighting. If you want him to be the best blacksmith around, you pick feats for that. But don't pretend the system is to blame because you can't be all of it at once.

D&D is a broken system, but your reasons are stupid and you should feel bad for it.

>>48484160
Maid RPG and a lot of Anime-Based RPGs let you start with all your special snowflake things. Oddly enough the Dragon Ball Tabletop is the only one I've seen that says you shouldn't make a character stronger than Vegeta.

>>48483958
Good god, 10/10 shilling.

>>48482996
>I'm going to tackle the troll.
>>That's not realistic. Trolls are huge and you're human-sized.
There's a /tg/ story I retell as a cautionary tale for GMs that ends with the intelligent GM capable of verisimilitude, consistent world creation, and fully dimensional enemies was replaced by the lolrandumb idiot GM he had replaced.
The climax of the story is a halfling trying to tackle a bandit guard to knock him over the railing.
>>That's not realistic. The bandit is human-sized and you're small.

The moral of the story is never let "realism" or any other aspect of the game trump everyone's enjoyment of the game.

>>48490342
So you'd bone her?

File: Boner.jpg (619KB, 820x1625px) Image search: [Google]

619KB, 820x1625px

>>48490832

>>48490523
It's hardly a requirement, and I'd prefer if you didn't exaggerate. I can understand the sentiment, but the system is so large, with so much depth, that you could easily play it by RAW without having to homebrew anything and without much difficulty. It might require the DM to limit what's available to the players in order to evoke a particular theme or style of play, but that's no different from choosing one set of splat books over others in another large system. Most of the campaign setting books in 3.5 work very well as self-contained systems, and even caster supremacy issues get solved in them.

I'll agree that there's plenty of times where I like much more bottled-up systems, especially for one-shots, but as a whole I don't think it's fair to say that homebrewing is a requirement for the system so much as it's just a ton of fun to do.

>>48490629

>And you're dumb if you think it's impossible in D&D.
>You can attack with two weapons without any feat investment, but the 1st attack will recieve a -6 penalty and the 2nd one a -10 penalty.

I would comment on the rest but honestly, there's no better way to dismantle your argument than with the first two lines you provide.

A -6 penalty makes any attack, regardless of level, practically impossible to make.

A -10 penalty makes the the attack outright impossible to make.

If you don't believe me, let's take a level 1 Fighter, the best possible Fighter I could make off the top of my head.

So let's say this Fighter has a 20 STR (+5) and let's say that he's got a feat that gives him +1 bonus to his weapon.

With his BAB, that's about a +7 attack bonus anytime he decides to make his attack. If he decides to use TWF, his first attack would have a (+1) bonus and his second attack would have a (-3) penalty.

For reference, if the Fighter was going against a creature with only 10 AC, he would need to roll a [9] or higher for his first attack (or 60% chance of success) while his second attack would need a roll of [13] or higher for his second attack (or 35% chance of success), assuming I did the math right of course.

So with that in mind, this is to hit an AC that doesn't have any modifiers attached to it.

For reference, a goblin has an AC of 15.

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Goblin

You'd be lucky to hit a fucking Goblin with these modifiers attached to your attacks...yet somehow it doesn't make them practically impossible?

Get outta here.

>>48489819
>the fire spell "explodes" with not much force, and fire isn't a solid object so the impact is solely from expansion generated by magic that can be as strong or as weak as its caster

>A dagger to the throat is still a dagger to the throat, the point here is precision to hit at all

>>48490899
What if the goblins flat footed?

>>48490960

Then it'd have a 14 AC.

>>48490981
So that's a little better.

>>48490734
>The moral of the story is never let "realism" or any other aspect of the game trump everyone's enjoyment of the game.

Cancer. By this logic, literally anything goes.

The whole point of having rules is to stop silly bullshit from happening. You might as well do anything-goes freeform if you're not a) going to follow the rules and b) it doesn't matter if things are realistic.

The sad part is that even a halfling would have some chance of knocking the bandit guard over, so the attempt SHOULD be allowed in the rules. It'd need some penalties, unless the halfling is using some object (e.g a big bashing weapon) or technique (e.g a flying kick) to help with it.

>>48491001

Yeah.

Instead of needing a [14] and a [18] to hit, you'd only need a [13] and a [17] to hit.

For a fucking goblin, that's pitiful.

>>48490899
>waah! waah! My level 1 character isn't hitting stuff 100% of the time even though I won't spend feats! I chose the worst combat style to go featless and can't be a master at level 1! This is bad and unfair!

That's how you sound. Your fighter has a +7 to-hit total. You're trying to hit with a sword and a fucking Heavy Shield in one action as if it wasn't a terrible idea.

Now shift that stupid +1 bonus to the TWF feat. Now you have -4/-4 instead of -6/-10. Your odds of hitting a normal person (AC 10) are pretty strong now. Even that goblin can be hit with 40% chance with each attack, and you have 1 more attack than any single-weapon fighter.

Now let's say you stopped being retarded and switched to a Light Shield (or another sword if you're not autistic about AC). Now you have a -2/-2 penalty because Light Shield is a light weapon. You can hit nearly as good as a common fighter, but you hit TWICE. You're better off than a fighter with 1 sword, and way better than this character you made up, simply because you were not retarded in feat and weapon selection.

Learn how to play the actual game.

>>48491060

>The whole point of having rules is to stop silly bullshit from happening.

Considering the level of fuckery you can produce in the game by RAW, 3.X failed at that a long fucking time ago.

>>48491088

Learn how to play the game before you spout nonsense kid.

What's the point of trading a +1 bonus for two attacks that give me a -4 penalty each?

Against a 15 AC, that'd still be a 45% chance, aiming at a [12] or higher vs. a 65% chance, aiming at an [8] or higher.

That's also not keeping in mind that in order to even use TWF, you can only use light weapons like daggers, which deal way less damage than something like a longsword or a maul.

So not only are you trading accuracy in the long run, you're also trading damage as well, so overall, it's just not fucking worth it, especially when it puts you at such a disadvantage against one of the weakest enemies in the game.

>>48483958
holy fucking shit this guy never stops
kill yourself already

>>48490856
This is why I still play PF. The house rules I've been developing as nerfs for casters just so happen to also tie into the thematic elements I want to evoke for them. Spheres of power from the old 2e cleric lists are an amazing thematic element that I've been reworking because I honestly think clerics would get a much more tailored spell list depending on the portfolio of the god they worship. Its also a nice expansion of Domains.

Schools get restricted for wizards as it's like trying to become a PhD in Quantum dynamics, Marine ecology, and Taiwanese finger puppets at the same time. And then later trying to read a paper on the geological strata near the KT boundary in Lexington Ohio and understanding it to be able to use it properly. It's just not possible for any mortal. So you get 3 schools that are "near" each other in magical theory and the rest are massively penalized or even forbidden.

And so on for the rest of the stuff. The base rules give me a foundation that I can work from to restrict or alter to better fit my campaign or setting. In more restricted games I have to do far more homebrewing to get the rules were I want, but in rules lite games, there just isn't any mechanical oomph to it, and it feels like i'm just writing out the fluff.

>>48491283
Read again. You have a -4 penalty with bigger weapons like longswords(1d8). You can use shortswords(1d6) and only get a -2 penalty. And that's only for the off-hand, you can still use a longsword on your main hand.

So, in the same example, a normal knight would hit the goblin with his longsword at 65% chance, counting the +1 feat. The TWF knight can hit 50% of the time with both weapons, not only getting a higher mean damage(two attacks times .5 is bigger than one attack times .65) and a higher mean number of hits in a round(hitting at least one hit 75% of the time), you also have the bonus of attacking two enemies at once. You gain in damage and flexibility, the only downside would be 1 or 2 AC by swapping the shield, which isn't relevant beyond the first 2 or 3 levels.

File: eab.jpg (11KB, 200x234px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 200x234px

>>48483958
>0.1 shekels has been deposited into your account

>>48484046
but thats one of the many reasons pathfinder is trash

>>48491104
Do tell.
What level of fuckery can be devised.
You're going to tell me about Pun-pun?

Wait, fuck that, I just remembered I don't actually don't care about your opinion. I was just curious to see you make a fool of yourself, but on second thought, I'd rather not see someone bring any more dumb into this world than you already have.

Fuck, you dumb.

>>48491593

You're trading a net gain to your attack bonus for a penalty, just to make two attacks that are weaker and less accurate than just sucking it up and swinging with a longsword with both hands.

I also want to remind you, this hypothetical is against one of the weakest creatures in D&D, not against creatures that are actually fucking worth swinging at. Once you cross the threshold into CR5+ creatures, that TWF shit starts to get soggier and soggier until you're effectively swinging stale bread for all the good it's doing you.

Especially once you start factoring in WBL and DR at higher levels.

>>48491722

>You're going to tell me about Pun-pun?

No, nothing that even requires that much investment to break the game.

Just play a druid, choose a bear as an animal companion, and take natural spell.

You're now a bear, with a bear companion, whose just as strong as Fighter of equal level, with the added benefit of being able to cast spells while still being a bear.

And considering Druid spells are about as powerful as Wizard spells of equal level, and animals have abilities like being able to make a free grapple/trip/etc. roll whenever they strike you, it becomes especially fucking stupid.

Hell, I'm certain there's even worse ways to break the game, and most of it is found in the CRB.

There's a reason why CoDzilla exists.

>>48491788
>discussion pertaining level 1 and goblins
>"b-but when you get higher levels you won't be doing much!"

Ok, you're just a troll.

THF is superior to TWF for fighters. That's a fact. But don't pretend TWF is just utter shit, it's efficient at low levels and works great when mixed with other styles.

You can pump Power Attack and THF for massive damage. But so can a rogue with TWF for massive precision damage, also stacking with any effects that trigger on a hit. And TWF is more poison-friendly if you choose a debuff route.

You have many ways to use TWF efficiently, the problem here is that you're moving goalposts all the time. First it was "he's worse than a sword-n'-board hitting!", then it was "b-but a THFer can do better at level 1!" and now is "t-think of the future!". TWF is a great style for people that don't pretend taking 20 levels of fighter, and even then, it's a nice option if you don't plan on pumping only damage.

As a final note, if you think damage is an efficient way to deal with CR10+ encounters, you're just bad and never played a mid-high level campaign.

>>48491866
Oh, you're that faggot.
You never shut the fuck about you're whole bear thing like you think anyone gives a shit or that it actually breaks the game.

Go on, start typing up the numbers, I don't believe you, etc.

>>48491956

>THF is superior to TWF for fighters. That's a fact. But don't pretend TWF is just utter shit, it's efficient at low levels and works great when mixed with other styles.

It IS utter shit mate.

Why invest valuable feats into something that you know has a definitive cap on how useful it'll be vs. investing in something that you know will be useful all throughout?

>You have many ways to use TWF efficiently, the problem here is that you're moving goalposts all the time.

Yet each and every single one will eventually become less useful over time than simply going for THF from the get-go.

Certain creatures are immune to precision damage, most poisons are either costly, ineffectual, has a chance to fuck you over if you roll shitty enough, or a combination of the three, and even then, you're much better off just tagging mofos with poisoned ranged weapons just so you're not eating a counterattack when the creature eventually just laughs off your shitty ass attacks.

>As a final note, if you think damage is an efficient way to deal with CR10+ encounters, you're just bad and never played a mid-high level campaign.

Nobody said damage was an efficient way to deal with high level encounters, I'm just saying that TWF is shit simply because you're investing twice the resources for half the returns the longer you play.

I mean, it's easy to claim that I'm moving the goalposts when you keep putting words in my mouth and attacking my argument based on the shit you claim I've said.

>you can't do literally anything
>therefore, the game is garbage
Please, tell me a game in which your character is omnipotent.

>>48491959

Different anon here, you're not really helping to disprove the stereotype that 3.X causes brain damage.

>>48492153
What stereotype?
You mean that dumb meme you've been trying to force?

You've got to get off 4chan, mate. Not just so you can get a fresh perspective of how sad you are, but so you'll finally stop shitposting.

>>48492138

>Wanting a viable character who can swing a sword and bash someone with their shield is the same as wanting to me omnipotent.

Seriously, you guys are not helping to disprove the stereotype that 3.X causes brain damage.

File: 8e9b539ccea01c3bc594d5e3fac4c9d8f7ecc70eb2dcf440e700ffc89107e8f8.jpg (95KB, 625x468px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 625x468px

>When did you realize D&D was garbage?
>D&D
>with no qualifier for edition

Name a serious, game-breaking flaw in 0e. Go ahead. I'll wait.

>>48492189
I don't play 3.5. But OP's criticism was literally, "someone said to me, 'you can do anything in this game,' but there was something I can't do."

The game has to place limits on what you can do in combat. It doesn't actually happen in rounds in-universe. If you want to describe how you bashed someone with your shield and then swung your sword, feel free. But everything that's described in rounds happens all at once, and while you're trying to fight, you're actually ducking around and dodging and you can only get in an average of one good hit per six seconds.

The NPCs are fighting just as hard as you are, and it's not a cinematic story-type game.

>>48492153
>>48492189
>if I force this meme enough, it might stick!

No, it just paints you as a giant faggot. Do start wearing a trip so people can filter you.

Man D&D sluts are out in force today.

Every other thread is you fags getting butthurt that someone doesn't like your game.

Do you retards never learn? Stop replying. Just go be in a thread you enjoy or something.

Why would you come to a thread that was made specifically to shit on D&D? Do you like the abuse or something?

>>48482990
>when did I realize D&D was garbage

When I played a better game. I was able to make exactly what I had envisioned. We were all balanced. And turns didn't take 2 fucking minutes.

>>48492307
I'm mostly confused about how everyone acts like the (at least) 9 different D&D versions are the exact same game, and thus that realizing one version is garbage means realizing all editions are garbage.

I'm also bored and feel like shitting on your shitting on D&D.

>>48492348
What edition of D&D had you been playing, and what was the better game?

>>48492356
So yes you want to just be part of a pointless argument.

Well I got a game to prep for, so have fun.

>>48492379
Thanks. What system are you using for the game you're prepping for?

>>48492307
Nice attempt at damage control, I guess.
But really, just fuck off and die already. You and your three friends have been shitposting about how much you hate D&D in every thread you could, and somehow you think you can try and play on some sort of high ground?

There's no escaping you, because you're shitposting in random threads and in the generals, hoping to get a rise and then making these threads when you don't. So, here you go. People come here to call you retards in your specially made trolling threads, so that no illusions are held.

You guys are annoying cunts who deserve to be banned for all your shitposting, but at least in these little containment threads people can watch you look like idiots as you struggle to make arguments when you hardly even know the system you hate.

>>48492113
You're wrong in so many levels. As expected of a THF purist.

Just to show you're wrong, I'll go the poison route. With poison, you take either the Master of Poisons feat or the Assassination weapon bonus(+1 equivalent). Both are great for poison users as you can't poison yourself, and Assassination increases poison DCs by your enchantment number, so a +3 Assassination Shortsword adds +3 to all poison DCs. Master of Poisons also lets you apply poison as a swift action.

Now, to get the poisons, most can be made with Minor Creation and usually last for the most of the day. For free. Ask your wizard for it. And if you can't, 1 level in Psi-warrior gives you level 1 Minor Creation.
If that sounds cheaty or doesn't go well with your "muh pure martial" mind, you can grow all plant poisons and any animal poison can be extracted with a DC 15 Handle Animal check. Most poisonous animals cost as much as a single dose of their poison, so even the most expensive ones can be mass produced with a small investment and little downtime. By level 10, you'll be drowning in strong poisons.

Now, you might be thinking, "hey, I bet you're just using poisons to lower foes' STR and CON to debuff them, right?"
Wrong.
Large creatures have a ton of STR and CON. Poison can set a stat to 0, so you make an enemy helpless. You can disable anyone with DEX poisons and any caster can have casting stats reduced to the point of being unable to cast at all.

>"B-but there are monsters immune to poison!"
There exists at least one special poison for each poison-resisting creature type. As you're growing your poisons anyways, it's a simple investment to have those ready too.

To end it all, Tumble lets you not trigger AoOs. You get that with a level of Rogue, along with your precision damage if you plan on going that route. Let your THF buddy distract your enemies while you actually deal with them.

>>48492393
Savage Worlds with houserules.

>>48492369
>What edition of D&D had you been playing
3.5. Also had experience was AD&D, 4e, and 5e. First better game was nWoD, but it's not the last.

>>48492250

>The game has to place limits on what you can do in combat.

Using a shield as a means to force an opponent off-balance is one of THE most basic forms of S'n'B combat that you can reasonably learn.

Yet in D&D, a dude who is supposed to be a commander or a veteran needs to invest in a feat just to utilize this one basic move, while the mage can take a feat that allows him to cast spells without having to wiggle his fingers or speak.

>But everything that's described in rounds happens all at once, and while you're trying to fight, you're actually ducking around and dodging and you can only get in an average of one good hit per six seconds.

Which is pretty fucking stupid when you're fighting shit like giant bees, zombies, goblins, and other creatures that would have little to no training or reliable means of keeping you on your toes and forcing you to press for an advantage.

I'm not playing Errol Flynn here, if I wanted to play a faggot who tiddles his sword a few times before he actually lands an attack, I'd play a Bard, at least they get spells.

>>48492198 here.
Come on, anybody? Could it be there ARE no serious flaws with 0e? Or maybe you've played one campaign in 3.5, the DM hooked up with your crush, and now you know all about D&D and how it sucks.

Look, I'm sorry you had a bad experience with the worst edition of the game, but unless you can actually explain why every edition of D&D sucks, I and everyone else will be forced to make the reasonable assumption that you're full of shit.

>>48492461
enjoy.

>>48492459
>needs to invest in a feat
>feats were introduced in 3.X
OP said "D&D is garbage" not "the edition of D&D that everyone but its players agrees is garbage, is garbage."

>Which is pretty fucking stupid when you're fighting shit like giant bees, zombies, goblins, and other creatures that would have little to no training or reliable means of keeping you on your toes and forcing you to press for an advantage.
Good point. I'm sure that to any reasonable person, fighting giant bees and owlbears and shit would be easy. Also, goblins would probably at least train some.

>>48492459
The point is everyone starts with barely any knowledge of how to fight. The fighter gains a ton of feats to represent his growth in weapon mastery. If something is simple, it has little prereqs, such as Shield Bashing.

>>48491722
>You're going to tell me about Pun-pun?
pun pun is impossible by raw

>>48492415

>Let your THF buddy distract your enemies while you actually deal with them.

Or I could just take my big stonking sword and murder the bastard without having to jump through a shitload of hoops just to achieve the same effect making anyone who plans me harm a swift and painful death.

And unlike your convoluted plans, I can do this at level 1 and just watch my attack/damage numbers rise as I gain more levels and feats over time.

>>48489309
But tell me, what the fuck is a Yellow Dragon?

Reminder that Gygax was top tier DM because no matter what his group was like, he always tailored the adventure so that everyone had fun.

D&D 3e was released in 2000. 3.5 was released in 2003. Anyone who complains about "D&D" without any kind of qualifier, then goes on to list complaints that only apply to third edition or newer is too stupid to realize that "third edition" means there have been at least two prior and too lazy to Google and find out more about it. There's also a good chance that, given that 3e was first released in 2000 (and 3.5 in 2003), they're at most sixteen years old.

Mods should comb these threads for anyone who does that shit and just ban them. The board would improve dramatically.

File: fightertable1.png (22KB, 626x395px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 626x395px

The best way to defeat a troll is to outfight them and then burn them.

Here's a table that tells you at what level you get to make multiple attacks against multiple targets.

>>48482990
>what is two-weapon fighting, with shield as the second weapon

cmon baitmeister, your examples get lazier every thread

>>48492520

>The point is everyone starts with barely any knowledge of how to fight.

If I'm playing a Fighter, whose whole purpose is being the best fighter on the team, I expect to have a definitive leg up on the other classes when it comes to combat experience, especially if all fighters are some variant of veteran or commander or something.

It's like having a character with a background in being a soldier, yet still has to spend resources to learn how to handle a fucking weapon. It's stupid, especially when all it does is force you to spend a resource to have something that you should've had on the outset.

>>48492664
So start at higher levels. Some people like playing someone who starts out as a nobody and through grit and courage becomes a badass. The fact that you don't like something about it doesn't make the game garbage.

>>48490347

Except system never even pretends that's the case.

Even meh systems like Warhammer had over a dozen options for standard attacks with a sword without any feats or special powers.

>>48492728
>start at higher levels
>full casters now render you even more useless

wonderful idea m8.

How about we just not play any version of D&D or Pathfinder.

>>48492760
In older versions of D&D, the caster would level slower than you.

>>48492760
>How about we just not play any version of 3rd edition or Pathfinder.
fixed that for you

He's a goalpost troll. I've seen their kind before. They evade logic and empirical evidence by moving the goalposts. Very frustrating. Ignoring them is the best weapon.

>>48492796
And older versions of D&D were far from balanced.

>>48492800
Nah any version of D&D. Why are you so desperate for people to play D&D?

>>48492642
And yet they still max out every single time.

/tg/, easiest board to troll.

>>48492728

The problem is, the Fighter starts off as a nobody and just becomes less relevant as time goes on, in spite of the fact that he's supposed to be someone who has seen several tours of duty in the past.

At higher levels, the mage will just keep getting more and more powerful, with a carte blanch of spells to help him gain additional effects and abilities after each 8 hour rest period.

I would love it if I could play a Fighter or a Monk or a Rogue and see him grow from some common nobody into a fucking badass, but unfortunately, the only way to be a badass is to either abuse the rules or abuse magic, which undermines the entire fucking point of leveling in the first place.

File: arguing in bad faith.jpg (66KB, 828x334px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 828x334px

>>48492808

>They evade logic and empirical evidence by moving the goalposts. Very frustrating.

Tell me about it.

3.PFags are the worst.

>>48482990
No Investment At All methods:
>Be wielding a shortsword or other Light weapon, and use two-weapon fighting

Investment methods:
>Be any martial at level 5
>Or a fighter at level 2
>Or a level 3 barbarian or ranger, possibly
>Or have Shield Master
>Or have Two-Weapon Wielder
>Or be one of the various archetypes of non-martial classes that get a second attack early on
>Or be under Haste as anyone
>Or-

Without leaving the core book. Anyone other than a sickly wizard is capable of doing that, and many can do it from level 1.

Yeah, I took the bait.

Most games
>I want to hit with my shield and then slash them with my sword
>okay, let's roll your attack vs their defense, and add in a circumstantial bonus

DnD
>I want to
>do you have the right feat?
>no
>then no, basic attack only
>okay, then I want to build a character that can do that thing
>alright you'll need these two classes, these 3 feats, and at level 9 you can finally do that cool thing

>>48492893
I don't understand your image.
I don't understand your post.

What point are y-
You know what? Fuck it. You sound like a terrible person, so I don't really want to know what's going through your head.

>>48492566
You're cute. I bet you also think anything that heals is unkillable.

File: Untitled.png (1MB, 1140x759px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1140x759px

>that one fag who uses a d43 when attacking with this thing because of a typo

>>48492975
DnD pre-3e
>I want to hit with my shield and then slash them with my sword
>Okay, roll an attack with your sword.
>18!
>You smack them with your shield, staggering them, then follow up with a fierce slash with your sword!

>>48492992

Just because someone's smarter than you doesn't mean they're mean anon.

Sometimes you have to hear something you don't want to hear to become a better person.

Fuck all this player-centric logic, DnD is even worse on the DMs than it is on the players.

>>48492975
>have you tried not playing 3.5pf.png

Shit, that solves most complaints about "DnD". When you play the absolute worst version of a game (or the houseruled knockoff), you have no right to shit on the franchise as a whole.

File: homer.jpg (131KB, 560x561px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 560x561px

>>48482990
When I picked up 5e and realized that they still haven't innovated in any way beyond their basic templates that have existed for 40 years. You can be a fighter, a wizard, or a rogue, or you can be a modified version of the above classes that has features from them in slightly different arrangements.

I was thinking that d&d could offer a deeper character-building and role-playing experience compared to mainstream entertainment shit, only to find that it's actually just an ancient and incredibly limited relic that is surpassed even by some video games.

>>48493000

Combat healing is actually less viable than just hitting people until they die mate.

>>48492975
>>48493019
>most games
>"I describe my attack!"
>Whatever, it doesn't really matter, just roll your attack, it's all the same

>3.5
>"What mechanical depth! My choices have meaning and weight!"
>Truly the greatest system ever conceived, and how it will infuriate those too stupid to understand it

>>48493048
Tell me about how hard it is to run games of OD&D and BD&D.

File: abe.jpg (26KB, 498x412px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 498x412px

>>48493045
No, I'm pretty sure you're an idiot.

Like, I want you to wear a trip because I'm sure you're an idiot.

>>48493066

>Fuck those grapes, probably sour anyways.

This is what you sound like.

>>48493083

No, I think you're just too immature to understand what I'm saying.

It sucks but someday you'll reach maturity.

>>48493063
>what is Regeneration
>what is Fast Healing
Oh, your DM haven't used those yet, huh? I guess he doesn't want to hurt the THFer's feelings.

>>48493091
I didn't realize lacking choices and content was a 3.5 problem.

>>48482990
>You have a limited amount of things you can do in a 6 second round
>Why cant I do lots of stuff!

>>48493124

Again, TWF would be hit hardest by either of those things than the THF.

>>48484858
>because lets face it, almost no campaign gets to mid/high level unless it starts there
my 3.5 campaigns literally always last into at least level 15.

File: absolute garbage.jpg (36KB, 490x393px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 490x393px

>>48482990
Garbage ain't that bad.

>>48493131

Having more content doesn't mean shit when only about 20% of it is useful throughout the game.

Especially when there are games like GURPS or WoD that provides just as many options to the player.

>>48493235
You are not the norm and please don't pretend like you are

>>48493292
I've played 3.5 in multiple different groups, both DM and player, for the last decade and I have never had campaigns end at low levels.

No one wants to play low level/low power characters. It's fucking boring and defeats the purpose of having SO MANY different character options in 3.5.

I'm sorry you've only ever played with shitters who can't DM past level 3.

>>48490224
Are you talking shit about superbasketball, motherfucker?

>>48485802
I won't deny my autism, but I was trying to fix a game I perceived as being broken. Eventually I realized that the game was beyond fixing, and I might as well either try to write my own game or switch to something else. I have since done both.

>>48493320
>No one wants to play low level/low power
False. I have two low power groups right now. We're just not playing D&D so they have lots of options.

Also progress is tracked through things like political and social influence, renown, etc along with wealth and property and knowledge.

Granted we don't play with levels either.

>>48493292
>>48493320
I've had multiple groups progress through the levels. Both ones I've run and ones I've played in.

>>48489047
>Throwing ball bearings, creating rough terrain and forcing balance checks every turn
>Carrying multiple oils for different enemies
>Using ambushes to kill the enemy off faster
>Pinning an enemy with a teammate and killing them with a crit.

>>48493424
Sounds boring. I don't roleplay to do shit I could theoretically or actually do in real life.

>>48493438
Good to know you can become the social, political, or military leader for a nation, if you really wanted to.

>>48489864
>Okay Frank, I'm going to need you to roll a jump check, a climb check, and then a tumble check.

>First one is DC 10, Second is DC 10 + 5 if the first check fails, Third check is DC 10 + 10 if the second check fails

>Failing the third check causes you and the enemy to take falling damage equal to the distance traveled.

>>48490434
You can trip something with more then two legs, it just gets bonuses for stability.

>Can't disarm someone if they aren't wielding actual weapons
What are you planning on knocking away?

>Hardness rules being hard
It's literally just damage resistance.

>>48493465
I lead a team every day at work. It's not something I want to do in my free time. I would rather throw fireballs and shit.

>>48493248
>only about 20% of it is useful throughout the game.
But that's all of D&D, not just 3.5

>>48493514
You can throw fireballs and shit in real life too anon. And it's even more fun in real life.

Also leading a small team at your local business doesn't really compare to leading a platoon of infantry into battle, weaving your way through court politics, or gathering hundreds of thousands of students and followers to your religion or school of thought.

>>48492745

Describing how you make your attack is your job. If you're spending every turn going "Uh, I guess I attack with my sword again" that's on you.

>>48493428

>Ranged attacks
>situational use, not worth the encumbrance
>Countered hard by shit like Scent/tremor-sense/life-sense/etc.
>Again, why not just hit them with my weapon and cut the bullshit?

>>48493428
>Why are you throwing ball bearings at archers?
>Totally worth the encumbrance when you have a magic backpack/handy haversack capable of storing over 500 lbs and letting your Quick Draw them as a free action
>So don't try and ambush those specific enemies


Listen, if you want to do the exact same action in every combat, forever then feel free. That's your choice. If that's how you have fun, have it your way. But it's not how I have mine. I play both martial and caster characters who focus on using every in game advantage they can, from Oil Flasks to throwing sand.

>>48493582
>>48493695
Whoops, responded to myself.

>>48493710
Might want to go sleep anon. You're getting confused.

>>48493724
Yeah, I'm about to. Currently 47 hours into what's looking to be a 60 hour work week.

Just two more days, I just have to keep telling myself that.

>>48493748

Sleep anon. Your health is more important than this bait thread.

Question to everyone:
In DnD, an attack is an attack, you can flavor a 1d8 longsword swing with "I spin my blade fiercely" or "I use the momentum from the jump to slash his chest" but it ultimately is 1d8, unless it is circumstantially modified.

In other systems, how is it different? If there are 50 sword moves, do they amount to anything other than 1d8?

Like, everyone is shitting on DnD for lack of variety in moves, but isn't that just expected from the player/GM? To give their unique character a unique fighting style? Do other systems have mechanical differences for doing these 2kool4skool moves, or is it just a validation so you can say "see my dhampir cocksplitter CAN swing his sword in a 360 circle, it says it right here"?

>>48493748
meh you'll be fine.

>>48482990
Go.
Away.
Virt.

>>48493695

>Why are you throwing little metal balls while the martials are engaged in melee?
>Applying oils is a standard action and provokes AoO IIRC.
>The problem is, there are tons of creatures with a passive perception thing to counter ambushes.

>Listen, if you want to do the exact same action in every combat, forever then feel free.
>That's your choice. If that's how you have fun, have it your way.

I don't want to just swing my sword at a dude's face until he dies like some shitty as JRPG protagonist though.

It's just that it's the only viable means that martials have to maintain at least one iota of relevance before the mage is able to just throw SoL/SoD spells until the fight is over.

>>48490734
>There's a /tg/ story I retell as a cautionary tale for GMs that ends with the intelligent GM capable of verisimilitude, consistent world creation, and fully dimensional enemies was replaced by the lolrandumb idiot GM he had replaced.

THEN TELL IT DAMN YOU

>>48492461
I was going to say that there isn't any falling damage, but it's in the Boarding rules.

So instead I'll say that 0e has a very serious flaw in that it doesn't explain shit. Worst offender is thief skills.

>>48482990
When the DM had us play tic-tac-toe on his phone for the door puzzle, and we had to unlock all 8 possible directions.
Oh and if the computer won an direction that was solved that one reset.

After an hour (yes, a FUCKING HOUR) just wore the mechanism out, and the lock fell apart. I suppose it could have been any game, except maybe FATAL, because we weren't buggered by trolls with randomized nipples every time we lost, but it still soured D&D for me.

File: 1469046609978.jpg (769KB, 900x1086px) Image search: [Google]

769KB, 900x1086px

>>48493782
Anyone on this? I'm looking to get a group into not-DnD so I'm wondering what the differences are.

>>48489417
Shut up craig

>>48494506
Well thanks, I'll stick with PathFinder, as it seems these "indie" games are naught but memes in the end.

>>48494232

Sounds like your DM was shit. It wouldn't have mattered what game he ran, you'd have been soured on it.

>>48494178
This is true. Retroclones fix this flaw, though. S&W Complete is the ultimate dungeoncrawl experience.

>>48493782
>>48494319
Short answer is no, beating enemies requires reducing their HP which requires dealing damage. You can use the shittiest popular system ever or you can use my system waifu six people have ever played, but you're still stuck in that basic setup unless you design it out, at which point you deal 1d8 sanity damage instead of 1d8 HP damage.

That said, some systems do explicitly tell you to mess around more than others. Exalted comes to mind for a more thematically enthusiastic system, even if it mechanically doesn't actually reward you all that well. More specifically, you get a small bonus to your action if you describe it beyond "I hit him with my sword," and another small bonus if the action uses your environment in some way. It's nothing amazing, but it does help set a tone.

It's also just vaguer and piss-poorly balanced, which makes it a lot easier to let players grab people in headlocks or split-kick people or something on GM fiat.

>>48482990
> what is cleave

>>48490309
You can, by default:

A. Hit someone with a shield
OR
B. Be meaningfully protected by your shield

You can't do both at once without a feat.

>>48482990
That is literally a full attack
You're not even trying anymore

>>48495037
This solution is the good one.
Play Fantasy Craft.

>>48482990
It's not garbage, OP is garbage!

Heh, frawress victoly. His Troll Style is no match for my Epic Debate Style! He won't show his face around here, let me tell you.

>>48483958
I missed you, even if nobody else did.

>>48493782
There are systems like GURPS and RoS/SoS that throw a ton of options at the players while keeping HP or equivalent. Are you going for a hit location? Are you making an especially agressive attack? Are you attacking with a perticular technique? What's the injury type? All those factors have an actual result in-game. A spinning elbow strike to the solar plexus is going to have a much different result that a stamp kick to the wrist or a knee to the groin, while systems with more abstract combat would group all that under "You make an unarmed attack, roll 1d4+STR for damage."

Then there are other systems that go in the oposite direction, such as Legends of the Wulin, and remove HP entirely in favor of a descriptive approach. Rather than taking your enemy's HP to 0, your goal is to set up and then exploit weaknesses until they can no longer affect you. Succeed on your attack roll? Don't roll to reduce HP, assign a type of penalty; you screwed up the qi in his arm and paralyzed it, or kicked him off balance, or did something else to make his life tougher. Clever descriptions can sidestep the penalties for only so long, and it's possible to land so throrough a blow that the enemy is taken out/suffers lasting consequences ranging from long-term injury to a crisis of faith or crippling grief.

>>48482990
>Okay, I charge the goblins, swinging at one with my sword and knocking the other out of the way with my shield!

OK, what's your dex?

>12

your sword attack is at -2 and your shield is at -4 (actually -6, cos you're not proficient with "shield"), and you lose your AC bonus from the shield.

Roll "to hit".

>>48482990
>Sorry you need a feat to charge.

>>48483958
Anon, a couple of friendly comments :

>1.
/Tg/ tends to mostly dislike dw and view it as one of the least good aw adaptations. People are unlikely to believe it's good even with a solid argument to back it up.

>2.
Your arguments in the last couple years have been pretty weak, and most of your posts were simply poorly thought out attacks on d&d editions, rather than saying anything true or good or unique to dw.

For instance, yesterday you claimed dw invented degrees of success, and that's why it was good, then people pointed out degrees of success have been around *at least*since marvel superheroes in 84.

Tl:dr; you'll have better luck if you focus on the good parts of dw, and be factual, than if you get emotional and complain about another game. Additionally it will be an uphill battle because of dws existing rep (deserved or no) , and the nonsensical bs other dw fans have been spouting here.

Best of luck showing people why you like what you do, and getting them to like it too.

>>48497730
Last couple threads * not years

to be honest, I disliked D&D from the second I opened the rule book for the first time

>>48498538
So, because you have been well trained by /tg/.

Because if you haven't actually looked at something, then you haven't formed your own opinion; you're just being a good little sheep and doing as you're told.

>>48482990
>I will decapitate the King and marry his daughter.
Fucking D&D, my DM and other players are such faggots.
All I wanted was to be the King and they were all "stop, dont do that" fucking pussies

Honestly, always found it pretty garbage, but this recent campaign i've been in is just dire. This is a campaign in which raining men and raining instruments is normal, but trying to give a living plushie bear a sword makes the DM erupt into a hissy fit that could have registered on the Richter scale.
However, that being campaign specifics rather than system specifics. I hate how Initiative has to be done each round to make the combat more boring, I hate how 'dodge' is a feat or some bullshit, I hate spells can only be used once per day. Also, i've never understood why in combat a 20 is a crit but in normal play 20 is a fail, why does it swap.
Although, I will say i've had a better time with 3.5 than with AD&D, so there could be something in that.

>>48489819
>Blast a monster in the face with an exploding fire spell the size of your torso
>11 damage

>Rogue of the same level stabs his 3 inch dagger into the monsters shoulder
>55 damage

...

You are the most ridiculous faggot if you think "a bad hit against a dodging monster with a spell you channeled poorly" should be more lethal than "A well executed stab into a vital area"

>But I said fire/face dagger/shoulder

But maybe you shouldn't have, faggot. It's not the rules fault that you used bad flavor text that didn't match the result. That way you can complain about even the best system.

But if you have two weapons(or a weapon and a shield other than tower shield) you CAN, in fact, make an attack with each. You take a ton of penalties for doing so without proper feats, but you can still at least try to do it.

>>48482990
you can very well do that as a human lvl 2 fighter/barbarian with lion spirit totem and three feats you fucking faggot

File: wh.png (372KB, 478x675px) Image search: [Google]

372KB, 478x675px

>>48495015
>Short answer is no

That's just wrong. Have a look at actions summary from an old and not so great system.

On top of this you have hit locations and completely different critical hits depending on hit location.

>>48491956
>As a final note, if you think damage is an efficient way to deal with CR10+ encounters, you're just bad and never played a mid-high level campaign.
The post was a long time ago but holy fuck that is so wrong. Good luck landing your save or suck when enemy has +30 to his saves.

>>48482990
>You can be anything you want
Can I be that?
>No

>>48491060
>Cancer. By this logic, literally anything goes.
Not really. Anything in the game that tries to trump everyone's enjoyment of the game? Does not go.

>The whole point of having rules is to stop silly bullshit from happening.
Yeah, silly bullshit shouldn't trump everyone's enjoyment of the game.

>You might as well do anything-goes freeform
No thanks

>if you're not a) going to follow the rules
If the rules say everyone's fun ends, veto the rules
>and b) it doesn't matter if things are realistic.
A fully defended bandit compound realistically will be able to shut out any attack plan generated by a handful of nerd hobbyists.
But banging your head against a brick wall stops being fun pretty quick.

>>48498750
>Shoot a crossbow bolt through the eye and brain of a bandit, shattering his skull and destroying his prefrontal cortex
>11 damage

>Spray a cone of chilly air at a dude, providing him with a refreshing breeze
>55 damage

makes no sense

File: retard2.jpg (247KB, 1224x1445px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 1224x1445px

>>48498983
>description of the attack result before considering damage

>>48494173
>THEN TELL IT DAMN YOU
Fine, here's copypasta from the last time I brought it up.

Forever ago (read: more than a year) I read up on Sup tg archive a thread where anon, possibly the OP, told a very long story describing how his GM was lolrandumb and had no sense of story, reason, or consistent reality to his game.
Anon hated it and took over as GM.
His game was well thought out and intelligent but his players chose to go back to the lolrandumb GM (because he was so fixated on it being realistic that they had no fun)
The anon had no idea where he had gone wrong and felt his players were just insane.

Details I remember:
The challenge of his scenario was a bandit fort that was actually defended with reasonable defenses such as magical "alarm runes" and no breadcrumbs to get in.
His idea of a clue to gain access was a regular patrol route.
After two botched attempts due to never before needing to think for themselves, the players manage to get the halfling up onto the wall of the fort, sneaking along when he gets discovered by a guard.
The halfling decides to bumrush the guard and knock him over the wall before he can sound the alarm.
The GM vetoes it because the halfling is too short to do that and it wouldn't be realistic.
The halfing's bumrush accomplishes very little, the alarm is sounded, and they run away.
This is where I think he screwed up as then his players only half-heartedly tried again once more before giving up.

I went looking for it before because it is the finest example of I've ever seen where intelligence, thoughtfulness, and care and be applied to a game by the GM only to have it ruined because the GM wouldn't let the players have fun.
It was like a reverse version of the "Yellow Dragons" screen cap.

If anyone remembers it or can find it I'd appreciate it.

>>48489866
At least in 5e, shoving is a defined action that takes up an attack.

>>48499064
>The GM vetoes it because the halfling is too short to do that and it wouldn't be realistic.
>The halfing's bumrush accomplishes very little, the alarm is sounded, and they run away.

This is where the GM fucked up. We have stats for a reason. If the halflings stats would allow him to do it, just think of it as midget strength.

>>48498983
>cone of cold
>refreshing breeze
You're a special kind of retarded, assuming this isn't just bait.

>>48483643
>Player: I wanted to play a knight that can jump super far like in old epic myths/JRPGS/my chinese cartoons/whatever.

>GM that's knows what they're doing: Okay. There maybe a mythical item/weapon/armor/dildo/etc that can grant you the ability. Dare you take the adventure for it?

People need to stop blaming the system instead of their shitty GM's for lack of imaginative input in their games.

>>48489866
Pretty sure that's what a bullrush is.
Although it is a problem (in PF anyway) that the one fucking situation bullrush/drag/re-position would be fucking worthwhile you get penalized for it. Not to mention there's no reason to not consolidate all those into one single combat maneuver they all do same fucking thing.

>>48490434
I don't know why you would think grappling an incorporeal/insubstantial/larger than you target would be a good idea.

You can trip someone with more than two legs, they just get a bonus against it. Although some things like Cubes can't be tripped outright.

Disarm works against any held item that can't be stolen, so does Sundering. If you can't figure out how hardness works you're probably just retarded.

Dirty Trick is out and out useless unless you spec for it, which can be said of all the combat maneuvers really.

>>48491866
CoDzilla only happens with shitty GMs though.
Any decent one will start to throw time/debuffs at you to stop a one man roflstomp

>>48499223
Of note: fighters don't require the DM to actively manage them and keep them from breaking the campaign.

I never understood this argument: Hey DM, just change your entire campaign up and then these caster classes won't be overpowered!

That's still a huge sign of imbalance.

>>48499223
Yeah, good thing fighters aren't susceptible to those things.

>>48493782
In a system with degrees of success, the GM can offer different secondary outcomes depending on how the player describes their action. For example, in Edge of The Empire, every attack roll has a "succeed/fail" result (determines whether you do damage), and a "advantage/threat" result (causes other effects).

>I do a spinny attack
>Roll "success with threat"
>You spin around and hit the guy for 1d8 damage, but you dizzy yourself. Take the "disoriented" condition.

>I do a jumpy atttack
>Roll "failure with threat"
>You leap through the air with your sword, but the enemy sidesteps the attack. You continue to tumble through the air past the enemy, and land flat on your face (you are knocked prone).

>>48482990
So you don't want to play a game, you want to narrate cool shit your character does. Cool. Maybe tabletop games are just not for you then, they have rules. Try freeform roleplayinh.

>>48499174
Same to you.

Player: I wanted to play a guy who can turn into different animals and rain fire down from the sky.

>GM: Okay, just pick a caster class.

>Player: I want to play a guy who emulates ancient legend, with awesome feats of strength, tons of crazy athletics, etc, etc,

>GM: okay, here's all the extra work I have to do now to fix the campaign up to try to enable you.

I won't argue that caster/martial imbalance isn't fixable by a talented GM. I don't think anyone is arguing that. But the fact that it takes a talented GM to fix it is a sign of imbalance. See: >>48499241

Other systems don't require me to babysit my players and make sure the wizard isn't casting too many spells on the fighter's pie. Other systems don't require me to monty haul the ranger and impoverish the druid to keep things even.

>>48498983
>Shoot a crossbow bolt through the eye and brain of a bandit, shattering his skull and destroying his prefrontal cortex
>11 damage

>Spray a cone of chilly air at a dude, providing him with a refreshing breeze
>55 damage

You are the most ridiculous faggot if you think "a bad hit against a dodging monster with a loosening crossbow that you are wielding poorly" should be more lethal than "Inhaling the Spirit of Winter in the fullness of its wrath."

>But I said crossbow/brain chilly/refreshing

But maybe you shouldn't have, faggot. It's not the rules fault that you used bad flavor text that didn't match the result. That way you can complain about even the best system.

>>48493066
Most games have the decency to at least not bury their combat maneuvers under dozens of feats. You'd know this if you played something other than D&D.

>>48499223
>CoDzilla only happens with shitty GMs though.

Literally every game of D&D I have ever seen except those where the GM decided to play the opposition as if they're storybook villains instead of thinking creatures with goals of their own.

>>48499303
>Most games have the decency to at least not bury their combat maneuvers under dozens of feats

What you're describing is literally 4e.

>>48499314
>Literally every game of D&D I have ever seen

Correction: 3.X game. I haven't seen it in Basic, 2E, 4E or 5E (Though I have not played a lot of 5E so it might crop up later)

File: 1467393247145.png (27KB, 215x203px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 215x203px

>>48499318
>The only systems in the world are D&D and 4e
Is this what he meant by this?

>>48499241
You don't have to actively manage casters either if you know what you're allowing in your game.

The only real imbalance is that magic is the ultimate power and some classes have an inherent access to it via spell list while others don't and have to use magic items/gear they themselves can't create.

>>48499109
>This is where the GM fucked up.
Exactly
>We have stats for a reason. If the halflings stats would allow him to do it, just think of it as midget strength
He decided the physics just didn't allow for a halfling pushing a human up and over the wall and vetoed it.
His consistent and logical setting was more important to him than the incredible progress the players had made from being spoonfed plot and solutions to coming up with and executing a viable plan.

>>48499223

Why does the GM have to babysit his party just to make sure that the resident mage doesn't render most of the other classes useless?

It just sounds like twice the busywork for a fraction of the returns, especially when you stop to consider how you're effectively warping reality just to fuck with this one guy who chose a wizard or druid.

>>48499343

>You don't have to actively manage casters either if you know what you're allowing in your game.

Literally most, if not all, of the most broken shit you can have is found in the CRB.

Even then, the amount of time, effort, and research that you would have to put in just to disallow all of the game-breaking shit a mage could do would, honestly, be spent learning a better system that doesn't require as much effort just to keep every option on the table at the same relative plane of power.

I mean, do you even realize how many spells there are?

>>48499275
Why is the GM complaining about his job exactly?
If he can't handle that then he can at least suggest something else or meet his player half-way.

File: sw.png (587KB, 876x889px) Image search: [Google]

587KB, 876x889px

>>48493066
>Whatever, it doesn't really matter, just roll your attack, it's all the same

I bet you never even played a system that was not D&D.

And SW is still simple as fuck compared to most systems.

>>48499382
Because game-balance and designing an adventure is the GM's job?

I don't see how it's realistic for the players who picked a caster to never be counterspelled/dispelled/etc.

>>48499411
Actually most of the broken shit/exploits were removed or nerfed in the Pathfinder's Core Rulebook. Even spiked chain fighting got neutered.

The amount of time and effort is as simple as stick to Core until you have an idea how adding Ultimate/Advanced/Etc content will effect your particular game. But most people are so quick to just throw in everything but the kitchen-sink and are dumbfounded when there is a mess to clean up. Same problem with 3.5 really.

>>48499425
He isn't. He's just stating that according to core rules, casters get reality defining powers, and martials get the ability to long jump slightly more than an Olympic Athlete. Sometimes. You don't have to do any work to make casters interesting to play. You do have to do work to make martials interesting to play.

You don't have to do any work to keep martials at the right power level. You do have to work to keep casters from breaking your game (and take a toxic GM vs. Them attitude while you're at it)

>>48482990
>tens of thousands of games use D6
>not D&D

Fucking special snowflakes, I tell you

>>48499505
How often?

5e bounded accuracy is such that a fighter might miss 30% of the time on average opponents. Assuming a +3 stat, and a +4 proficiency bonus, they roll 1d20+7. IIRC, the average AC is around 13.

So 1d20+7 versus AC 13, that's a miss 30% of the time.

Should spells be counterspelled 30% of the time?

The problem with what you're suggesting, is that the initial system isn't designed for parity between martials and mages.

Most damaging spells a mage casts with saves, still do something on miss (successful saving throw). DnD is a low magic setting, so it doesn't make sense for everyone to be throwing counterspells around.

And we're ignoring the elephant in the room: Out of combat spellcasting. Where it isn't reasonable for someone to be counterspelling the party. A mage can save all their spell slots towards solving out of combat issues (which, according to the DM's guide, should probably account for a full 2/3rds of the game), and just cast cantrips in combat. They're still more useful than a martial, and almost as damaging.

The core problem with caster balance in 5e is that casters interact with an entirely separate axis of the game from martials, but don't lose out on anything important for it. You can have a caster replicate any feature of a martial, and still offer more utility in almost all aspects of the game while doing it.

File: casters vs martials.jpg (26KB, 396x222px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 396x222px

>>48499241
>I never understood this argument: Hey DM, just change your entire campaign up and then these caster classes won't be overpowered!

The people who make this argument are caster players

File: who.jpg (17KB, 400x530px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 400x530px

>>48499523
>Actually most of the broken shit/exploits were removed or nerfed in the Pathfinder's Core Rulebook. Even spiked chain fighting

That's retarded. If you're removing anything that looks vaguely out of line to the point where spiked chain fighting is getting the hammer, the ENTIRE BLOODY DRUID CLASS SHOULD HAVE BEEN TORN OUT OF THE BOOK.

Oh look, still there, still full casters who double as frontliners with a second fighter as a class feature and then some class features.

>>48499505

>Because game-balance and designing an adventure is the GM's job?

Designing an adventure? Yes.
Game-Balance? No.

The most a GM should ever do in relation to balance is telling THAT GUY who wants to recreate Pun-Pun or Old Man Henderson to fuck off and even then, that's just exercising common sense and not actually tweaking the rules of the game.

>I don't see how it's realistic for the players who picked a caster to never be counterspelled/dispelled/etc.

Because a) in a world where magic is supposed to be rare and mysterious to the average person, such countermeasures shouldn't be widely available or even known to most people and b) Anything that fucks mages ends up fucking over martials twice as hard due to how reliant they are on magic items.

That and for every defense against magic, there're ways to work around that defense using some other form of magic, magic that the martials will never have access to.

>>48499532
>tens of thousands of games limit themselves to the d6
fify

>>48499600
>Should spells be counterspelled 30% of the time?
>>48499622
>b) Anything that fucks mages ends up fucking over martials twice as hard due to how reliant they are on magic items.

Apply more spell resistance to everything. Spell resistant dragonblood kobolds. It's like 30% counterspell and I'm pretty sure it doesn't fuck martials.

>>48499523

Pathfinder made every fucking issue worse while barely addressing the actual faults with third edition.

Hell, the most broken shit in core 3.5 is still there in PF.

The solution to caster imbalance has been obvious since 2005.

You can learn spells, but it comes at the cost of learning skills.

>>48482990
Who hurt you OP?

>>48498634
>initiative has to be done each round to make combat more boring
This is only true in older editions.
>feat
This is only true in newer editions.

No edition of D&D has both of these unless you houseruled one of them.

>>48499647

Again, where the fuck are these things coming from?

SR isn't supposed to be a bandaid that you can throw onto a creature to humble the caster a bit, it's supposed to represent a creature that's capable of ignoring magic as a whole due to some special ability that's related to its physiology or its power.

Also, for the record, there are spells that ignore SR, so even that won't work to slow the resident mage down.

>>48482990
When I realized it was the only tabletop game I would ever be able to play.

Fuck you, /tg/.

>>48499696
>Again, where the fuck are these things coming from?
Again, dragonblood. Or whatever reason you feel like. Or no reason; it's not like the PCs have a thaumatological lab to investigate why a monster has spell resistance.

>SR isn't supposed to be a bandaid that you can throw onto a creature to humble the caster a bit, it's supposed to represent a creature that's capable of ignoring magic as a whole due to some special ability that's related to its physiology or its power.
Do you also think AC isn't supposed to be a bandaid that humbles the fighter etc etc, it's supposed to represent full plate the platening? Because that seems about equally retarded.

>Also, for the record, there are spells that ignore SR
Most of which are stupid and should do no such thing. Creating a wall of stone is SR:No with good reason, spell resistance won't let you phase through the wall once it's up. But far too many spells that cripple monsters or shoot monsters in the fucking face are SR:No and should be rewritten to SR:Yes. Also, the author should be reeducated by getting shot in the kidney with a fantastic "Illegal:No" gun that for unspecified reason makes the police not care. See how the author likes it when it's his protections being thrown out the window without explanation.

>>48499505
>Because game-balance and designing an adventure is the GM's job?

Why am I paying WotC then? Just to burn money?

>>48499744

>Again, dragonblood. Or whatever reason you feel like. Or no reason; it's not like the PCs have a thaumatological lab to investigate why a monster has spell resistance.

You can't just slap SR onto every other enemy and call it a day though, it still has to make some degree of sense for why this particular creature has SR in order for the players to accept that, yes, this creature is in fact special enough to ignore your maximized fireball spell.

>Do you also think AC isn't supposed to be a bandaid that humbles the fighter etc etc, it's supposed to represent full plate the platening? Because that seems about equally retarded.

No, because unlike SR, martials don't have a way to ignore AC and just deal straight damage on a miss.

Though you're right, AC is fucking retarded but for different reasons.

>Most of which are stupid and should do no such thing.

Welcome to third edition D&D, where the numbers are made up and the rules don't matter.

>>48499647
>Apply more spell resistance to everything. Spell resistant dragonblood kobolds. It's like 30% counterspell and I'm pretty sure it doesn't fuck martials.

SR is not a great mechanic for multiple reasons.

First and simplest: "Your class is OP so here's an arbitrary reason it doesn't work" is unsatisfying. If you didn't want your NPCs turned into frogs, you shouldn't have included a "turn them into frogs" power. Letting the player pick "Turn them into frogs" and then afterwards arbirarily declaring "Except half the time it doesn't work" is shit style.

Second, because a skilled wizard overcomes SR easily anyway by using spells for things that SR doesn't apply to. SR doesn't apply to my ability to teleport away, summon monsters, then teleport back with the monster brigade. It doesn't apply to my ability to sneak past you while invisible. It doesn't apply to my ability to disintegrate the earth under you, or summon a Wall of Stone above the hole afterwards.

And SR definitely does not apply to my ability to cause the entire adventure to revolve around me. If I forget to memorize teleport so we cannot go to the dungeon 500 miles away, the Fighter is not going to be able to finally shine as he shows off his horsemanship because we're just going to teleport there tomorrow instead, nobody wants to ride 50 miles today and then teleport 450 miles tomorrow when we can just relax today then teleport 500 miles tomorrow.

>>48499880
>retarded DM or retarded player can ruin a game for everyone
excellent observation, do you have anything else to add?

>>48500313

This is an issue that's divorced from the human element though.

This is an issue with the game being poorly written and poorly balanced.

If I can win every encounter the GM throws at me in/out of combat by choosing magic, then why shouldn't I pick the option that would allow me to have the most perks for the least drawbacks?

Why should anyone choose a martial character when at the end of the day, they can only interact with one specific area of the game and only in a way that's rendered moot as soon as the mage's turn comes up?

You can say "well just don't pick those options" but if the game designers didn't want me to choose this option then why would they bother making it so powerful and efficient for what I need it for in comparison to everything else in the game?

If you want to play a weaker character then go ahead, I'm just wondering why we're pretending that the guy who swings a sword is just as good as the guy who can teleport 500 miles away in six seconds just because they level up at the same rate.

>>48499174
>Player: I wanted to play a knight that can jump super far like in old epic myths/JRPGS/my chinese cartoons/whatever.
>GM: Kay, here's a magic item crutch that anyone can use. Or you can just play a wizard and then do it yourself.

>>48500429
Ok, ok, calm down buddy, I'll let you play a caster so it's all ok.

>>48499880
>First and simplest: "Your class is OP so here's an arbitrary reason it doesn't work" is unsatisfying.
Spell resistance isn't arbitrary, it's the arcane equivalent of armor class. Otherwise I agree.

/tg/, I'm utterly disappointed in you.
You should know better.

>>48499662
>Skills
>Being relevant at all when magic is introduced in to the mix

Why learn lockpicking when you can Knock or stealth when you can go Invisible or diplomacy when you can Charm or yada yada yada.

One or two spells can replace entire skills for not only the caster but the party as a whole.

>>48500429
Except you can't have the game without the human element to begin with.

Incidentally, it was 3.0 that specifically made "wizards gain every spell ever" an issue. Before that point, they had to get lucky and collect the spells they wanted or spend loads of time researching and paying to learn spells. Likewise, 3.0 removed the great equalizer that was initiative from the game, replacing it with 'instant spellcasting'. Spell resistance in AD&D/2e was "this is the percentage of success/fail your spell has - period." Fighters and rogues gained levels insanely fast compared to clerics and wizards, and the saves scaled with level at a fixed rate, with only tiny modifiers granted by magic or - if you had a kind GM - magic items.

So, WotC are the reason we can't have nice things.

>>48500532
>Why learn lockpicking when you can Knock or stealth when you can go Invisible or diplomacy when you can Charm or yada yada yada.
Because the wizard in your party isn't a retard and prepares other spells so that he doesn't waste slots on something a rogue can do with a fucking fork and 30 seconds of time.

>>48499642

No system is as limiting as d20. You have flat 5% for everything.

>>48500563

>Except you can't have the game without the human element to begin with.

Which I'm not disagreeing with, I'm just saying that issues concerning the rules would still be there regardless of whether or not someone is actually playing it.

Like a glitch happening due to odd collision detection or something of that nature.

>>48500605
You mean a flat increment of 5% that's easy to calculate that goes from 5%-95% in simple and manageable units.

Oh, and there's also stuff like advantage/disadvantage/rerolls that alter the probability into a curve.

In short, you're a moron who doesn't understand dice or systems.

>>48500588
>What are scrolls?
>What is leaving a spell slot open and preparing a reality-warping spell in less time than it takes the rogue to crack a lock?

Honestly the best 3.PF group is all casters and some NPC hireling meatshields and one specialist. Everyone gets to do something and no one is stuck playing the sod who is only useful when the casters deign overshadowing him to not be worth the meager effort.

>>48500492

Why are 3.PFags such faggots when they lose an argument?

>3.X is broken
>Okay, prove it!
>Okay, here's some proof
>That doesn't fucking count/you're being petty/you don't actually play the game/it's not a problem at my table xD

Nobody here is saying you can't enjoy your shitty ass game, just have the balls to acknowledge its faults, rather than pretending they don't exist because you go out of your way to either ignore them or slap a house rule onto everything.

>>48500666
>wasting gold and spells
Now I understand, you're simply too stupid to play the game

>>48500657
On d20, the roll is just as likely to produce a middle-of-the-road bog-standard average result as it is to produce a critical success/failure. You're just as likely to do okay as you are to fail spectacularly or succeed effortlessly.

Fuck that, bell curves all day e'rry day.

>>48493782
as a GURPS player: making deceptive or telegraphed attacks (increasing or decreasing your own skill to do the same to the opponent's defense roll), different types of attacks in weapon stats (average sword can do both thrusting and slashing attacks, which have their uses), all-out-attacks (giving up your active defenses until your next turn in order to drop the hammer on an enemy), and general variety in things you can mechanically do (slams, retreats after attacks or parries, hit locations being more or less standard, grappling being ezpz to understand and use, and so on)
it means a lot more when your ability to focus your all into a single attack in order to try to win the fight with your next blow can be accurately represented by using something like a 'strong' or 'determined' all-out attack.

as far as snowflake fighting styles go, there are combat styles and techniques, although i don't recall any specific examples off-heart and i don't have access to the books right now, so maybe later once i'm back home.
they more or less give you bonuses to specific skills and allow you to buy off or negate penalties to certain actions within skills, though, making it easier to do your circle attacks or whatever.

anyway, from what i've encountered so far in 3.5 and its derivatives you need to specifically buy these abilities with feats, and even then they're pretty bare-bones. not a whole lot of it is immediately available to any combatant and nor is it entirely supported.

basically: you need a suite of basic options that any combatant of any level can utilise, and then expand off of that.

as an addendum to all of that: i've had deeper 1-on-1 combat in a fucking rules-lite ghostbusters game than i ever have in 3.5

>>48500511

>Spell resistance isn't arbitrary, it's the arcane equivalent of armor class.

Except unlike armor class, there isn't a way for everyone to raise their SR naturally outside of being a specific type of creature or buying certain enchantments.

If everyone had some degree of SR, just like everyone had some degree of AC even without armors and shields, then there wouldn't be a problem.

But since SR is so uncommon to find, it just makes it seem as though the GM is just throwing it in to neuter your class, especially when it happens with every other enemy you encounter.

>>48500695
Sorry I'm not a fighter and I don't have to stockpile my cash for magic swords and armor just to stay relevant. I think after shelling out a pittance for some utility scrolls (or just fucking crafting them myself due to a free level 1 feat), I'll go buy a metamagic rod to be even better at both my job and your job.

>>48500695

Why even argue if you're just going to advertise how stupid you are?

Are you Richard Petty?

>>48500657

90% of D&D combat is still a flat d20 roll.

It's a fucking joke. And throwing everything, attack, defense, armor into one single roll where every result is 5% is so retarded it's mind boggling.