So which is the objectively more ___fun__ game?

File: DnDBasic.jpg (146KB, 600x777px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 600x777px

>>49820745

>>49820716
4th Edition ws the most fun.

>>49820830
>not OD&D

>>49820716
>>49820745
>>49820822
>>49820904

>Implying Pathfinder isn't the most fun version of D&D.

>>49820716
This thread is a waste of digital space.

Between the two options I prefer 5e.

That being said I am mostly a Savage Worlds kind of guy anyways so take my opinion with much salt.

>>49820716
>fun
>objectivity
Not really how that works. A lot of people genuinely find yugioh and 4e fun. I do not. But that doesn't make them wrong. Just means we're looking for different things.

I'll say this: I think it's probably easier to have fun in 5e than AD&D, as it's more accessible. 5e has the benefit of ~40 years of hindsight.

File: a31fb65c5bfc016da2bddad3a8e46d59.png (200KB, 640x600px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 640x600px

>>49820920
>Implying Pathfinder IS the most fun version of D&D.

>>49820920
>Implying hitting yourself in the nuts isn't the best use of a hammer.

>>49820941
>Savage Worlds
Mein Nigga

File: pick_your_race.jpg (142KB, 700x377px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 700x377px

>>49820991
My favorite setting is Low Life; that shit is strange in all the right ways for me... Do you have any particular setting you prefer my brother?

>>49820745
The correct answer, and I say this as someone who grew up loving me some 2e

>>49821104
only played a fantasy type game with it, but I had a monk/wizard thing, pretty nice how you can do nearly anything in it

I played a sweet dart specialized fighter in 2e.
1d3+8 five times per round at weapon speed 0 is no laughing matter. Especially for those casters with no concentration saves, or those dragons with less than 200hp.

File: 1422772790856.jpg (277KB, 1297x1632px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1297x1632px

>>49820716
5e for the rules
2e for the settings

>>49821528
Is there a software builder that has all the AD&D info like the 4e character builder had?

>>49821528
agree and 2e is still in the mind set of old school but it's diffidently one of the transitional games
>>49820716
i played both and i got more fun out of 2e

>>49822191

Check on purpleworm.org, they've got one. They've also got a sweet castle builder tool based on the 2e Castles Guide..

If editions other than 2e are so good, then why do 2e video games have the best graphics, gameplay, and design?

>>49822191
There used to be, I have a cd somewhere. It was called "AD&D core rules" or something.

File: i love pathfinder.png (349KB, 1600x491px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 1600x491px

>>49820920
>>49821399

>>49820716
5e. Streamlined rules, more character options, easy to learn. AD&D was a clusterfuck with no unified mechanic, random and unintuitive rules held together only by passion for the game, which it undeniably had.

>>49823048
This post makes me sad.

>>49820716
4e is the easiest to dm, has the best comic, and doesn't require a lot of system mastery.
It's the best edition because it will make it easy to get your fun.

>>49823127
>enjoyed 2e
>still feels emotions
how

>>49822191
> like the 4e character builder had?

There's still the offline builder and the compendium at funin.space you know

>>49820963
>I think it's probably easier to have fun in 5e than AD&D, as it's more accessible. 5e has the benefit of ~40 years of hindsight.
>implying companies don't just make changes in order to push a new edition, not because they are actual improvements

>>49820920
I don't have fun when my characters are irrelevant

>>49820716

Having played both, I think probably 5E.

But I haven't taken 5E to higher levels yet, so I might well change my mind.

>>49822191
>that has all the AD&D info

>>49825137
High levels in any WotC era edition D&D is a clusterfuck.

>>49820830
kill yourself...i mean it...at least don't breed.

File: 4eCombat.jpg (107KB, 889x444px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 889x444px

>>49826043
He isn't wrong though

>>49824888
Senility.

>>49820716
>Fun
>Objective

???

>>49825068
Counterpoint: most of 4e's innovations were trying to address actual problems of the game, thus improving it.

Counterpoint pt. 2: most of 5e's design consisted in going back to older things, thus improving the game in the eyes of those who didn't like 4e.

>>49826064
Yes he is. Tabletop MMORPG.

File: Nice Meme Bro.gif (3MB, 420x300px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 420x300px

>>49827679

>>49827486
like removing modifiers for the sake of advantage? or is that a kudos to modern day rules-light gamers?

>>49827760

That rule's actually been around a while, I believe it was in one of the old Dragon magazines.

>>49827881
there's a trillion house rules / optional rules, who cares? it's core rules now.

>>49827903

I'm just saying advantage is also an old thing that they dug up when they were building 5e.

>>49825068
>implying a company would ever push a new edition if the current one was still selling properly
I don't think more than a handful of people actually know how business works on /tg/. The cost of making a new edition versus supplements is extreme, and books make no money.

That is ultimately why 4e failed - the traditional games market is not small but TTRPGs are a tiny fraction of the money. 4e didn't follow through with the other medias that are high margin, and it didn't push the video game branding. It tried to make all of its money as an RPG with probably the largest staff any RPG has had since the 80s.

>>49827679
Why do you hate fun anon?

>>49827968
4e's business strategy was to become a subscription service with D&D Insider's character builder, virtual table, adventure tools etc. Poor management and the absurdly bad luck of a murder-suicide canned most of that plan, leaving only a gutted version of the service they aimed to provide. They did push the video game branding some time after, with an MMO I hear wasn't very good and ironically didn't play much like the tabletop. They also started publishing a comic set in 4e's world, and while it was great the writer was offered a chance to write for TV instead of silly picture books so that was put on an indefinite hiatus/cancelled.

Even with all that shit, 4e books were still a top seller in it's small niche. And though we will never see the numbers for D&DI subs it can be assumed that it made some additional profit. It wasn't until essentials rolled out and tried to be a 4.5e without admitting it, falling flat on it's face in the process, that 4e book sales slowed, and some time after WotC simply stopped printing new supplements. It was then that finally 4e dropped in sales below it's competitors, though by that point the development of 5e was underway, so they had little reason to care.

4e suffered from what I can only call a blood curse from the get go, yet still fought the good fight until it was taken out back and shot in favor of a potentially more successful edition.
Strangely, absolutely no attempt has been made to update their subscription service to be compatible with 5e. I don't know if this means it's not profitable to do so or if they simply don't have the staff to. I suppose they're still raking in profit from lingering 4e fans, but they lose it form those who convert to 5e. I don't have enough business sense to know if this is a net loss though.

>>49828328
In a way, DM's Guild might have supplanted any subscription service for regular trickle income.

>>49827968

Don't forget Essentials, the update nobody wanted.

>>49820716
>objectively more fun

You went full retard, anon.

>>49828371
It has one purpose though, you can shove it under "EVERYONE PLAYS THE SAME IN 4e!" shitters.

Not that they care.

>>49828328
Oh yes, and there was of course the massive staff lay off by their hasbro overlords, though I don't know when exactly that took place.
>>49828363
Ah, the "have your fans make your content and profit from that" plan, also known as the bethesda strategy. Probably an even better idea than the subs thinking about it

>>49827968
nice non-sequitur, anon. i stick to my original statement: rpg companies create new editions to sell new products, whether the new rules are an improvement or not.

>>49828381
make a 360 degree turn and leave, newfag

>>49828491
>360 degree turn
You went full retard, anon.

>>49828460
The staff layoff was just before or after Essentials I think.

Also the DMG perfectly encapsulates how good the 5e business case is compared to 4e. They are selling old products, homebrews, leveraging popular figures in the fandom, etc and making a profit. They essentially made the Steam of TTRPGs and I imagine they will eventually sell non OGL content as long as it is digital.

>>49828463
>non-sequitor
Considering your clinging to what is essentially a poorfag conspiracy it figures you wouldn't understand that reprinting core rules is in itself expensive.

File: ss+(2016-06-21+at+10.14.22).jpg (31KB, 204x372px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 204x372px

>>49828506
>Being this new

>>49828609
>being this new
D I P

>>49828506
every. fucking. time.

>>49828506
Lurk moar

Both games are good enough that a good group is more important than which one you use.

>>49828463
Nice moving of goalposts there.

>>49828371
As a long time player and 4e supporter, I was outraged at Essentials when it came out. However, with the later books, and particularly Heroes of the Feywild, it's grown on me. I definitely see the point of having classes with simpler paradigms, and it was fun to see the devs trying new avenues of design that, with another year of production, could have led somewhere (off the top of my head, more "monster-as-class" sets). I still think that some of the Essentials were pretty bad, especially those that clearly were pandering to the 3.x audience, but there were some good ideas too in there.

>>49832263
By Heroes of the Feywild they dropped the essentials motif. Feywild, elemental, shadow, etc were just regular splatbooks

>>49820716
4e by far.

> 4e
I recall a recent 4e General that began with a list of tips for playing/running 4e. Stuff to do with how the math behind the monsters was reworked in a later book. Can anyone help me out with this please?

The most FUN version of D&D is probably Gamma World.

>>49820830

4e was the most teamwork edition that I experienced. I liked that.

>>49832194
nice claiming of moved goalposts, anon

>>49836050
Just look in the fucking book.
Monster Manual 3 it was.
In short: halve HP, double damage, add interesting abilities, including off-turn ones if it's an elite or something.

>>49838265
It's probably the anon that made a thread asking for that same info yesterday, IDK if anyone answered back then.

I think this is the copypaste he's looking for:

If you are GMing, remember...
1. To strongly consider giving out at least one free "tax feat," like Expertise and pre-errata Melee Training.
2. To use Monster Manual 3/Monster Vault/Monster Vault: Nentir Vale/Dark Sun Creature Catalog math. Avoid or manually update anything with Monster Manual 1 or 2 math.
3. That skill challenges have always been scene-framing devices for the GM, that players should never be overtly told that they are in a skill challenge, and that the Rules Compendium has the most up-to-date skill DCs and skill challenge rules.

>>49840001
messed up the linking, sorry.

it meant to be for >>49839925 and >>49836050

>>49840001
Don't forget the pastebin.
I'm on phone right now so can't reasonably fetch it, though.

>>49839925
The damage did go up to almost double, but the hp calculations were the same. It's the defense values that were changed, along with the buffing of PC defenses/to hit through the feat taxes.
The halve hp/double damage thing is a meme people keep repeating because it's easier to remember than "Well make a multitude of small tweaks to the overall system"