Has Fourth Edition ever received a more thorough drubbing?

Pretty accurate to be honest. He's saying anything new or controversial.

Inb4 the 4rries show up to defend their tabletop MMO.

>>50488689
>lindybeige

discarded

File: wat cat 3.jpg (197KB, 671x652px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 671x652px

>lindyposting

>>50488813
> ad hominem

discarded

>>50488825
Ad hominem is not an argument. If your argument is a personal attack, you have lost the argument because you could simply give those words to someone else and invalidate that entire argument instantly.

>>50488762
Well there is really nothing to defend. Skill challenges were a failure. Combat maneuvers were a failure to the point that 5e returned to 3.5's caster supremacy and spell slots. Healing surges were kept in because D&D is just a bad system in general that fetishizes a rest-fight-rest structure, but that's just because 5e is bad in general.

The only good ideas 4e had:

> different bonuses to hit based on weapon
> two weapon fighting is viable
> 1/2 level to attack and AC

That's it. The rest was hogwash.

>Zero mechanical diversity among classes
Spoken like someone who doesn't actually understand the system and has never played it.

If a fighter a wizard somehow had the same basic attack, they would still do different things because of class features.

>Skill are an all-or-none business
Also untrue. Trained/untrained doesn't account for other bonuses.

>Can heal / regain energy just by thinking
As opposed to waving a wand around? Makes just as much sense.

>Creature types are literally defined by their combat roles because that's all they are
Here's (you)r >Large Magical Beast.
What would you rather there be? I don't look for a fluff description for Renraku's Reds in their statblock.

> Lack of roleplaying mechanics
Much better than needing to look up tables that define if someone cries and how much.

> Shitty utility powers
> Creative actions punished by system
Examples?

> Insane focus on combat
> Martials are literally casters
Why are these problems? Don't forget that Rituals are a thing and that most classes didn't get it for free.

>>50488689
What exactly do you want out of this thread?

>>50488928
5e isn't back to caster supremacy. It's back to casters being casters and martials being martials instead of the retarded homogenised power system of 4e.

Casters aren't OP in 5e like they are in 3.5

>>50488689
> repeating the same flaws everyone has been talking about for a literal decade
The worst part about 3e/Pathfinder haters is how they bring up the same flaws every fucking time and expect people to just be shocked like they haven't ever heard a thousand times over.

Amy second Virt is gonna appear and try to convince us to play Dungeon World

>281 replies and 3 images omitted. Click here to view

>>50489009
How about the ranger utility power that is literally just movement? Because the dev's definition of utility is anything that doesn't deal direct fucking damage, but not anything that is actually useful outside of combat.

> Why are these problems? Don't forget that Rituals are a thing and that most classes didn't get it for free.

Oh, I don't know, perhaps because there is even less reason to play a martial in 4e as in 3.5? At least the 4e casters make sense. The fighter gets to do a cool attack for double damage.... but because of "reasons" he can't do it until the next day. Wait, wait, did he expend magical energy? No.... did he get tired? Not really, he's at full hp. Then why can't he do it again? Because Wizards took a page right out of the League of Legends playbook and added a "cooldown" time to everything, to add even more bookkeeping to a game that apparently didn't have enough of it already.

of course, this is the system where you start with 15 to 20 times the hit points of an average orc warrior so I guess I shouldn't be taking it too seriously.

>>50488689
Fuck off.

File: 1470841279570.jpg (282KB, 640x867px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 640x867px

>>50489063
For 4rries to admit their system is trash, and that 5e is trash because of 4e's ideas that it took with it (i.e. second wind, action surge, hit dice healing surges, hit point bloat on monsters)

4rries ruined 5e and they deserve to be punished for it.

>>50489072
Again, 4e came out 2008,
League of Legends 2009

>>50488689
Who is this autistic inbred looking faggot and why should anyone care?

Lindys opinions have been disregarded ever since his video on the bren vs. MG42.

I don't even need to see his video to know it's all based on opinion and not fact.

>>50489105
WoW came out in 2004.

>>50488968
>Spoken like someone who doesn't actually understand the system and has never played it.

Actually, I played it for 2 years. All classes function mechanically the same: they have a set of abilities split into at-wills, dailies, and encounter powers. They all have shitty attacks for extra damage. All of them are spellcasters. No, no, shut up boy. Fighters are spellcasters. Rangers are spellcasters. Because they quite literally restructured Vancian magic to drag down ALL the classes, not just wizards and clerics and druids. See in 3.5 vancian magic was even shittier, but at least you got to be OP if you could put up with erasing the shit out of your spells every time you cast one. Now in 4e you get to make tick marks on your character sheet every time you want to make a halfway effective attack. Yes, 4e totally leveled the playing field: now everyone gets to wallow in the same vat of shit.

> As opposed to waving a wand around? Makes just as much sense.

Yes because that's magic which is a core conceit of fantasy. Healing surges aren't magic.

> Also untrue. Trained/untrained doesn't account for other bonuses.

Yeah no shit. Except they are still an all-or-none thing. There are no relative skill levels. If you somehow did learn a new skill at higher levels you would instantly be doing it just as effectively as a ranger who'd been doing it since 1st level.

>>50489085
Not an argument.

>>50489068
Also not an argument.

>>50489072
Being unable to understand why certain things can only happen so often instead of all the time sounds like you're just being uncreative rather than the system being bad. There's a ton of stuff that "doesn't make sense" in all D&D versions, but this is the one thing that really sticks out?

You're wrong about the HP stuff, too.

What exact power are you talking about? If it's forced movement, it's useful. If it's a minor action for a move, it's useful. Does something really need to do damage to be useful? Sleep doesn't do any damage and it's got usefulness out the ass.

>>50489132
And Everquest in 1999, before 3rd edition.
Do you think maybe mmo's drew more inspiration from tabletop than the other way around?

File: photo.jpg (74KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 900x900px

>>50488689
I'd say that Game Geeks RPG's drubbing of 4th edition is the more thorough drubbing. They do raise a lot of the same points really.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp6EbvJ0ssM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuAaL7W6SSw&t=364s

File: 1329624211583s.jpg (10KB, 251x242px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 251x242px

>>50489105
Oops, sorry, wrong game. All these shitty "MUH POWAHS" video games tend to blend together, kind of like the 4e classes when you realize they all do just about the same fucking thing.

>>50489195
These days? Yes.

File: 50489000.png (6KB, 737x85px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 737x85px

>>50488689
>>50489206

>>50489168
>Being unable to understand why certain things can only happen so often instead of all the time sounds like you're just being uncreative rather than the system being bad.

Oh look, it's this stupid argument again!

> look I made a shitty game mechanic!
> if you can't explain it, you're a bad DM!

Yeah, fuck you.

> There's a ton of stuff that "doesn't make sense" in all D&D versions, but this is the one thing that really sticks out?

Such as? Oh, are you going to go "lmao it doesn't make sense that dragons exist because of square cube law" or "haha magic isn't real"? If so you'll just make yourself look like more of an idiot. Yes, magic is a convenient excuse, and a core conceit of the fantasy premise. Except, fighter powers aren't fucking magic so why the fuck can I only use them once a day?

I know why: game balance. This is a VITAL point. Because the Wizards developers were too goddamn lazy to actually balance casters and martials, they decided to make casters into martials. Easy solution! Oh wait, why can I only cut-and-run once a day? Well, that's up to YOU, Mr Dungeonmaster. It's YOUR job to fix the glaring logic holes in our terribly designed "roleplaying" game.

>>50489208
The only people who like 4e are martialfags who are glad that their fighter can do more each round than full attack.

They know their shitty game is a tabletop MMO but they'll never admit it.

>>50489165
>All classes function mechanically the same
Have you never used class abilities like Marks? And if you're talking about bringing everybody into a vancian system, that's not really 4e's original idea, so you can't blame 4e for it.

>Healing surges aren't magic.
Wrong. Magical healing uses healing surges. Drinking potions uses healing surges. They are literally magic.

>If you somehow did learn a new skill at higher levels you would instantly be doing it just as effectively as a ranger who'd been doing it since 1st level.
First, this is wrong. Second, even if it was true, why is this a problem? At level 20 ("high level" since 4e goes to 30) everybody has at least a +10 to their skills already anyway. If the ranger only has +5 more to the skill than a wizard and the wizard picks up +5 to equal the ranger, why is this bad? Are you disregarding class bonuses and stat bonuses? Like, a wizard isn't going to get a Con bonus to Endurance, so even the Wizard trained Endurance the Human Fighter will still be better at it. And a Dwarf Fighter will be better than a Human fighter.

>>50489261
Sorry the jocks beat your ass too hard and made you go full caster retard, anon

>>50489064
Casters are objectively superior to martials in 5e. The difference is less that if 3.5, but still there.

>>50489259
>I made a shitty game mechanic!
You've failed to explain why it is a shitty mechanic in terms of mechanics and instead have basically said "I don't like it."

>fuck you.
Not an argument. :^)

>Such as?
Being able to heal for as much as you want.

>game balance. This is a VITAL point
>glaring logic holes
>terribly designed
I'm getting mixed messages here. Is game balance good? It sounds like you're saying yes. But 4e put everybody on the same vancian treadmill for balance, so that's bad? Or is it bad because it doesn't make sense to you?

>>50489278
>this meme again

You're playing D&D anon. Playing the guy with muscles doesn't make you any less of a nerd than the rest of us.

>>50489292
No they aren't. Caster supremacy is only a thing in 3.5

>>50489261
This would be true, except I, OP, am a martial-fag myself. In fact I recently played a wizard for the first time in D&D. And I am enjoying it, but I always preferred martials.

Except, 4e doesn't let me play a martial. I am literally not playing a martial when I play a 4e martial. I am playing a spellcaster.

Half of what made playing a martial fun was the simplicity of it. 4e could have made martial more interesting but most of the maneuvers are just different varieties of dealing damage, or "shifting". There is nothing interesting there. Just extra bookkeeping for the DM in the form of "ongoing damage" and combat advantage that lasts until next turn, so as to break up the monotony of slogging through a 200 hit point monster.

Old maneuvers also become fucking obsolete because the game has to scale up damage for the ever-increasing hit points because the developers realized that fights would take 48 hours instead of 24 hours if they kept them as is. So you might as well erase half these powers from your sheet. It's like feat chains, except even worse. In fact it is very very similar to how those 1st level spells lose effectiveness at higher levels.... isn't THAT interesting.

Hell, my gaming group literally switched from 4e back to 3.5, spending 2 hours converting our characters and homebrewing 4e spells into 3.5, just so we could stop playing this godawful system. They hated how restricting and bland it was.

>>50489331
>So you might as well erase half these powers from your sheet.
This is literally what happens. You stop gaining encounter and daily powers and instead are told to replace them.

I really doubt that you've played 4e, because this is in the level advancement table but you seem to have missed it.

>>50489329
Denial.

Everything a martial can do, a caster can do almost as well or better.

But a martial can't cast sixth level spells.

QED

>>50489264
>Wrong. Magical healing uses healing surges. Drinking potions uses healing surges. They are literally magic.

So does resting.

> Have you never used class abilities like Marks?

Yes, and the difference in them is about as significant as the ranger's dual attack and the fighter's shit. Yes, there is minor mechanical diversity. No, it does not make up for the shitty framework the game creates to artificially drag everyone into the vancian framework for NO reason.

Hell, if wizards can have at-will attacks, then why have these once-per-day powers at all? It clearly doesn't break the game. I'll tell you why: tradition. WotC is so beholden to vancian magic it will literally destroy its own game system to fit that framework.

Marks are even more egregious dissociated mechanics than the maneuver system. They are abstract as fuck and have no real world bearing outside of their in-game definition. Again, it's a game, not a roleplaying game. I can literally see the status halo hovering over the mob's head as the tank moves up to protect the clothies before they run out of buff spells.

>>50489278
> projecting

If you actually think anyone's martial/caster preference is based on getting bullied in middle school then you clearly haven't talked to another gamer or played an RPG yourself in your life. Which would be pretty fitting for a /tg/ poster, but still.

So, is this fuckface the new Spoony?

>>50489351
Well it might have something to do with the fact that we stopped playing 4e at 6th level and converted our game over to 3.5 because it was better.

Even so... the game's designers are so eager to fill up 300 pages so they can charge a Ben Franklin for the boxed set, that they cannot conserve design space by, I dunno, not making powers grow fucking obsolete and need replacing? Perhaps have them improve over time? Oh wait, that wouldn't make sense, because they are meant to be basically spells.

4e took the Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic and made it into an entire game. Whereas Weaboo Fightan Magic was widely considered to suck, not because of power issues, but because it made playing a martial ten times more complicated and bookkeeping-heavy than it ever needed to be.

>>50489358
Of course a martial can't cast spells. He's a martial you imbecile.

If you want to cast spells roll a caster.

>>50489433
But a caster can attack.

Again, QED.

>>50489103
>4rries
Wow, this takes me back. What's next, "shit twinkie" and "DURR *clang*"?

>>50489414
>Whereas Weaboo Fightan Magic was widely considered to suck
u wot m8

>>50489331
I don't know why you're arguing with me dude. I agree with you. 4e is shit. You're better off actually playing WoW than playing 4e.

>>50489383
>So does resting.
Short rests do not inherently heal you in 4e. You must still spend surges during short rests to heal (Bards give a passive bonus to healing done during short rests). If you're talking about extended rests, well they heal you in other versions as well without being magic.

>WotC is so beholden to vancian magic it will literally destroy its own game system to fit that framework
Pretty sure 4e works very well internally, it's not nearly as broken as you seem to claim.

>it's a game, not a roleplaying game
What prevents it from being a roleplaying game? You're still roleplaying a character.

>>50489461
>What prevents it from being a roleplaying game? You're still roleplaying a character.
Sure, just like I'm roleplaying a military commander in an RTS game.

>>50489443
A caster won't get very far in combat without spells.

Anyone can pick up a sword and swing it.

>>50489064
casters have more supremecy in 5e then they ever did in 3e

>>50489499
>less spells per day
>more caster supremacy
Pick one, cockmunch.

>>50489414

Ah, so you admit you didn't actually play 4e, thank you.

>>50488689
We already have one thread dedicated to this cunt, fuck off.

>>50489240
Was just planning to use this one.

>>50489414
>Perhaps have them improve over time? Oh wait, that wouldn't make sense, because they are meant to be basically spells.
Well, again, you're wrong that this doesn't happen because at-wills improve over time. Honestly, the number of times you've been factually wrong just emphasizes how your argument is based more on opinions than facts.

>>50489493
Not true. Bladelocks can out damage most martial classes by polearming it up.

Early levels druids do better in melee, and later polymorph does better.

>>50489499
They really don't.

You have no clue what you're talking about.

>>50489208
Fun thing about those powers used as an example

They both SUCK

>>50488689
Fuck off Lindy, you already have a thread about your shitty videos.

>>50489110
Someone with a degree in archeology who thinks he's an expert on everything because he has a Southern English accent and wears a lot of woolen clothes.

>>50489518
>infinite cast cantrips
>infinite cast elemental cantrips
>no xp costs on the biggest spells
>restrictions on magic items that make it impossible for the fighter to compensate for the wizards extra versatility like they could in 5e.

>>50489607
*like they could in 3e

>>50489607
Anon, I've seen what cantrips are. Trust me, the fact that you can cast an endless amount of them doesn't break the game.

>>50489518
Martials don't get the spiked chain in 5e which is a big strike against them.

>>50489607
Good. Martialcucks deserve to be put back in their place after 4e.

>>50489634
This is a joke, right?

>>50489618
Reminds me of Spoony saying that a wizard's d12 damage cantrip is broken in 5e. Even though a barbarian wielding a greataxe can infinitely deal 1d12 + (1.5 * Strength modifier) damage.

>Session long fights

That was my issue with it. I might as well play Warhammer if the game is just going to be about killing things. Actually I take that back, WHFRP is a very cool game that offers a lot besides killing things.

>>50489518
they only gave them less spells per day because people were not having there partys have enough encounters per day.

>>50489383
>If the wizard can have at-will attacks, then why have these once-per-day powers at all?

Because they make it interesting, there are classes in 4e that don't have daily powers (essentials martials) and they are painfully boring to play as due to the lack of in-combat options, even if you blow three feats on martial cross training to get proper encounter powers

>>50489618
Well, warlock/sorcerer eldritch blast spam comes pretty close

>>50489618
its barely about the power it grants its about the extreme versitilty from all those elements and the money saved on crossbow bolts

>>50489684
The warlock can't do fuckall else though.

>>50489206
i fucking hate this guy

he sounds like he has stuff in his mouth all the time

plus he is one of those "old school set in his way type" whose thoughts on game design comes off more as unwavering bias rather than opinion and mostly picking favorites with the older editions

plus he's big and fat and must smell like swamp ass and bratwurst

>>50489696
>extreme versitilty from all those elements
Solved by limiting known cantrips.
>money saved on crossbow bolts
This must be a fucking joke.

Wait, wait, guys, I have something great for this.

You might think the dude in OP's video is a moron but get a load of this: https://1d4chan.org/wiki/D%26D_Optimization

Just go read the part about warhammers. It's maybe the dumbest thing I've ever read.

>>50489414
>Weaboo Fightan Magic was widely considered to suck
But that's wrong. One of the very few ways that 3.5 even pretends to function as a system is if you use Psionics and ToB ONLY (with psionics called magic, and power-points called mana.) This very board points it out constantly.

>>50489746
in 3e if you were running the game right the wizard should have been going through a good 20 or so crossbow bolts a day

File: 1455346897672.jpg (214KB, 1157x1600px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 1157x1600px

>>50488689
>>50488689
I've only played 4th edition a couple times, and one thing that stood out to me was that the combat WAS a bit slow. It just struck me as weird, because I've never encountered a /tg/ meme that was true.
Any fans of 4th know why that is? Is it bad GMing? Is it bad players? Is it lindy-posting?

>>50489758
That looks like a really bad example

A party where everyone is playing the same defender class, vs two enemies with regeneration the party has no way of stopping, while everyone in the party is aiming for defense over attack, against enemies that never attack, only boost their defenses higher every round in order to extend combat longer

Of course it takes forever.

>>50489838
Too many tactical options presented at once.
HP bloat in MM1

>>50489838
There's a lot of choices to be made in 4e, lots of characters have off-turn actions they can take, including monsters, and off-turn actions slow the game down significantly by adding more choices, and every choice requires deliberation, so every choice takes time, not to mention the multitude of choices already available to the players every turn with their standard, move and minor actions.

Of course, this also means that in a party with a clear set plan of action, combat goes by super fast, because the choices have already been made

File: 1425412919822.jpg (7KB, 600x504px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 600x504px

>Pointless edition Wars 2010 Edition - 2.0 Electric Boogaloo: The Thread

>>50489838
I think one major problem is that 4e isn't really designed around having a lot of random encounters that you can blow through. The system is really designed to make each fight an interesting encounter mechanically. Because of this, the DM having a good sense of encounter design is way more important than in most games. You have to be thinking about each encounter in terms of mechanics, not just fluff.

If you just think, well, I need an encounter against bandits, so I'll throw 5x of this bandit enemy at them, you'll get a dull drag of a fight.

File: 1434500934185.jpg (28KB, 335x333px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 335x333px

>>50489838
>>50488689
Yup combat takes longer. I disagree with almost everything else, but yeah, combat takes longer. You can get it down to 45 minutes per fight if you're in person, and if your group understands the mechanics of their characters. The thing is, the combat (which is the meat of the game really) is fun enough to be a tabletop-wargame in and of itself, and it's a shitload faster than Mordheim, but simultaneously a lot mechanically deeper.

Combat basically IS a VERY WELL BUILT tabletop-wargame that you zoom into whenever a fight breaks out, and it's distinct from (what little there is of) the rest of the game. Some people hate this, and some people love this, but it's one of the inalienable truths of 4e. It just so happens that "tabletop wargame that's fast enough to play in under an hour, and deep enough that controlling one persona is interresting, that you can use to zoom into when your diceless role-playing results in a fight" is basically exactly what me and my table need. Been running 4e since it came out, and never looked back. Sometimes I'll run SR or AD&D2e for nostalgia's sake, or a hyper-light one-page system for a one-shot, but 4e has become my go-to system, and my players seem to love it.

However, combat does take longer than it takes in 2e or 3e (and 5e, but I don't count 5e as distinct enough from 3e to count as its own system.) You can't escape that. You can mitigate it, and what you get in return is (to me and my players) worth it.

File: 1375481425754.jpg (10KB, 152x150px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 152x150px

>mfw i unironically love 4e the most
>mfw warlord was the most fun I ever had with any class ever in 17 years of D&D

suck my cock, grognards

>>50489974
To add to this, 4e is a tactical grid based game that thrives on good environments. Which is great, but it's tantamount to saying that 4e suffers when good environments aren't available

>>50490020
>an unabashed warlordfag
Words cannot describe how pleased I would be if all of your ilk suddenly vanished in a burst of flame one day, freeing us from your "but muh warlord" bitching for all eternity.

>>50488841
>>50488902
>>50489165
Fuck off Lloyd

>>50490020
I just hope you always build you character last, or at least build your character in tandem with other people building theirs

File: Macho Man.jpg (24KB, 599x337px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 599x337px

>>50490045
i really really hate the idea of the healer being tied to essentially the cleric, as it's pretty much always been. HP was not always a purely physical representation of your life force, so I fucking loved the idea of non-magical healing. So making someone that yells at you and insults you like a drill instructor in the midst of battle to heal you really resonated with me. I'm not a DPS chaser like I used to be when I was new to D&D way back, so I really loved the feeling of battlefield of control with the non-magical healing.

>>50489905
My fucking sides...
Someone please caption this, I'm on phone now

>>50490111
>i really really hate the idea of the healer being tied to essentially the cleric
And I don't care.

>>50489358
prove it in 5e.

>>50490020
4e and Warlord are both great.
The level of customisation in 4e was also insane, from backgrounds, feats, utilities, tattoos, skills, multiclassing, paragon paths, everything really, there was so much choice for everything

>>50490150
As a fan of charOP overall, 4e is pretty good, but it's still not as good as 3.5

Because at a certain point, quantity becomes a quality all by itself

>>50489535
nice try faggit.

>>50488689
>4e is Wow Clone/MMO
>Not Final Fantasy tactics

Do people actually mean anything by beyond its 'casual population shit'.

I went and got myself a world of WarCraft account simply to see if there is any merit to it, and I cant really any similarity other than ''it's got Orcs'.

>>50490126

Well, first you give the Wizard a spellbook with every spell in the game, then you tell him to go ahead and prepare all of them, then you have a 5 minute workday....

>>50488689
stop posting this stupid fuck

>>50490175
There was none, but 3.X crowd, playing WoW in their free time, was unable to figure out better insult, so it sticked.

File: smug rohan.png (734KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

734KB, 1280x720px

>>50490198
>so it sticked.

File: absolutely.jpg (239KB, 1044x770px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 1044x770px

>>50488689
>How to make proper bait thread in two simple steps:
>1. Make it edition war
>2. Add lindybeige photo

>>50490175
It does have a bit of a similarity in terms of set combat roles.

But yeah, it's definitely got more in common with Disgaea/Tactics Ogre/FFT than any MMO

File: agvq60W_460s.jpg (32KB, 460x285px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 460x285px

>>50490203

File: just stop....gif (3MB, 573x523px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 573x523px

>>50488689
>Two threads with this ugly mug on them going alongside

>>50490214
Which is it not much of a reason to call it a video game. I guess people just forgot its roots as a tactical war game.

DND always was at its core about killing things and taken their stuff. DND isn't tabletop Wow, Wow is computer DND.

>>50490004
>You can get it down to 45 minutes per fight if you're in person, and if your group understands the mechanics of their characters.

I never got this meme. Even in epic level, we rarely had a fight go over half an hour after the monster math fixes. The only times it did was when the DM purposely made the fight tougher, usually for plot reasons, or we put ourselves in a bad spot that attracted more hostiles than normal.

Then again, we typically knew our characters inside and out and always knew what we were going to do by the time our turns came around.

>>50490214
>It does have a bit of a similarity in terms of set combat roles.

Honestly, this complaint would be more valid if MMOs, and RPGs in general really, didn't crib the combat role thing from D&D in the first place.

>>50489544
> they both suck

Like 90% of the powers in the system.

>>50489775
>This very board points it out constantly.

And this very board is wrong.

Nigga 3.5 functions as a system just fine. You have taken a badly balanced system and acted like it does not even work, like it's fucking FATAL or something. Have you ever played a real campaign of 3.5? One that DIDN'T have pun pun the fuckin kobold in it?

>>50490114
Hold down power and down volume button... you're welcome.

>>50490020
> i enjoyed playing a class
> therefore 4e is the best edition

4rry arguments everyone!!

File: Frog And Toad Are Shitposters.jpg (36KB, 356x334px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 356x334px

>>50488689

>>50490591
Ehh, more like 70%

If you've been listening to 2hu, stop

>>50490805
>Check /tg/
>Pretty normal
>Go to lab
>Make dinner
>Check /tg/ again
>Full of shitposting in a way I haven't seen in ages
The hell happened?

>>50490897
I have never even read a 2hu post. These are observation I formed on my own by playing D&D 4e for 2 years and realizing it was complete shit.

>>50488689
>> The session-long fights
This is because you're at a table with retards. You have all the info in front of you, and it's far more streamlined than 3e where you have to reference three books to properly use a single monster
>> Lack of roleplaying mechanics
ABLOOBLOOBLOO I CANT GODMOD NPCS WITH MY +20 TO CHARISMA AT LEVEL 4 ABLOOBLOOBLOOO
>> Shitty utility powers
Don't use them
>> Insane focus on combat
ABLOOBLOOBLOO I CANT GODMOD NPCS WITH MY +20 TO CHARISMA AT LEVEL 4 ABLOOBLOOBLOOO
>> Zero mechanical diversity among classes
Confirmed for not playing the game
>> Martials are literally casters
Confirmed for not playing the game
>> Creative actions punished by system
Confirmed for not playing the game
>> Hit point bloat
Fixed in Monster Vault to a massive degree though a second nerf is worth doing
>> Skill are an all-or-none business
One point in Autohypnosis is infinitely more powerful than one point in most other skills in d20
>> Can heal / regain energy just by thinking
Confirmed for not playing the game
>> Creature types are literally defined by their combat roles because that's all they are
Confirmed for not playing the game

Saged hidden reported called the cops called section 9 Agent 47 dispatched nuclear launch detected I am the reinforcements.

>>50491339
>Don't use utility powers

What the fuck is wrong with you? Utility powers are fantastic in general

>>50491315
Ah, well, to each their own.

File: 1414529079546.gif (964KB, 400x293px) Image search: [Google]

964KB, 400x293px

>>50490632
>Nigga 3.5 functions as a system just fine.

>>50491370
Meant to type "You don't use them" as in he's an idiot that doesn't use them. It's 4am.

>>50491370
I think he means don't use the shitty ones in particular

>>50490632
>And this very board is wrong.
No, no they're not. You being handicapped and totally unable to understand anything that is not a fucking autoattack, let alone not associate them with spellcasting, is not my problem.

>>50488689
>lindybeige
lel

>>50490175
>>50490198
In FFT, the classes are actually distinct from one another and use different resources.

In 4e just like in WoW, everyone has exactly the same number of abilities and use the same resource.

That's why people call 4e a tabletop conversion of WoW.

>Lyndisperg
DUDE FANTASY MAGEEEK SWERD ISN REALISTIC REEEEEEEEEE


Of course is a D&PF3.5 sperglord thread

>>50494554
Essentials and Psionics say hi.

In fact, since there are utility, feat and class powers of all variants, it's quite unlikely that everyone will have the exact same distribution of powers (like, a druid starts with 3 attack at-wills instead of 2 + his transformation to begin with, while a wizard starts with 2 attack at-wills and 3 cantrips, has the spellbook feature for double amount of dailies etc.).

>>50488813
>"I'm going to disregard the validity of the points solely on the basis of not liking the person who made them, because that's smart, right guys?!"
Fucking really?

>>50489684
Eldritch Blast Spam is just an archery character. That's not broken.

>>50488689
>take /tv/ /lit/ pasta
>rework it
>post on board that hasn't seen it yet

wow this is (you) farming on a whole new level I hadn't even conceived.

>>50490175
4e is FFT with a rigid forced class-and-role system, shittier multiclassing, shittier number balance for PVP/PC Betrayals a la Gafgarion, and (IMO) also shittier resource system than a basic MP system with some abilities not costing MP.

I like FFT/Disgaea/Tactics Ogre, but 4e does a bad job scratching my FFT itch.

>>50494644
Actually, Lindybeige doesn't particularly like any edition of D&D, he's complained about other editions as well.

He's british.

He prefers Runequest.

>>50494785
> a rigid forced class-and-role system

>shittier multiclassing

I wish to understand how anyone can look at FFTs grindy as shit multiclassing system and say "yes, THIS is what I want in my tabletop RPGs".

>>50494832
In FFT I can assign a full secondary set of class features as accessible in combat.

/EVERY/ character on your team will have two classes worth of abilities by the second half of the game.

4e does not do offer that degree of multiclassing. It's version of that is shittier.

Hence, shittier multiclassing.

>>50494855
Hybrids literally do that.

>>50494867
So long as you never want to change your secondary skillset, and with various caveats, yes. Hybrids are the shittier version of FFT multiclassing I was referring to.

>>50488689
If you can't roleplay well in 4e, that says more about you than it does about the system.

>>50494855
By the end of a character's career, they will have 2-4 at will attacks, 4 encounter attack powers and 4 daily attack powers, as well as 7+ utility powers of varying frequency.

3 of the encounter powers come from his class, 1 from his paragon path. 3 of the daily powers come from his class, 1 from his paragon path. His utility powers are 5 from his main class, 1 from his paragon path, 1 from his epic destiny.

Someone who takes all the multiclass power swaps will have 2 primary class encounter powers, 1 multi-class encounter power, 1 paragon path power (which can be from one of his multi-class's paragon paths.) Same with his daily attack powers.

So with daily and encounters, the character can have a 2/2 split between his main class and his sub-class.

The only time you'll have an actual limited dip with your multi-class is in the utility powers, which have a 4 main class, 2 multiclass, 1 epic destiny split.

In addition, the primary multiclass feat usually gives either a class feature of the class, an at-will power, and/or a free skill training in a relevant skill for the class.

>>50494885
Ah, gotcha.

I still don't think that giving players the ability to just swap out half their character willy-nilly in a tabletop game is a good idea, as I feel it leads to inconsistent characterization ("weren't you a necromancer yesterday?"), and also mention that technically you have retraining for that.

>>50494931
ideally youd need to be able to build and learn several classes worth of stuff, and then you'd be able to equip different ones, just not mid-fight.

I don't expect the 4e crowd would go for having equippable framework for "current class, secondary skillset, reaction skill, support skill" any more than they'd go for all classes running off of MP.

Simply explaining why 4e doesn't scratch my fft itch.

>>50495004
I'd be open to MP, personally, but it'd probably have to be FFTA2's MP system. FFT's straight MP system is basically superfluous.

>>50488689
So at this point Lloyd is just shitposting on 4chan in the desperate hope of attracting viewers?

What a sensible business plan

>>50494554
What so sorcerers and wizards having different numbers of the exact same abilities is somehow better?

I don't understand how two classes getting the same number of a thing is bad. Is it because you can't handle playing a fighter with something more to do than just power attacking?

>>50494802
>Implying he played anything else than ADD when he was in high school

>>50488689
> The session-long fights
> Insane focus on combat
> Zero mechanical diversity among classes
> Martials are literally casters
> Creative actions punished by system
> Can heal / regain energy just by thinking
>spot-on

>>50495134
>british

of course he played Runequest. it was published by go back then.

>>50495163
gw

fucking autocorrect

>>50488689
He's the personification of the word "ackshully". Why would I listen to his drivel? Take your eceleb shit to /v/.

>>50494885
But that doesn't make any sense in a tabletop. If you learn to Black Mage, Time Mage, and Summoner, why can you only be two out of those three at a time? Hell, if you then add Knight to the mix why can't you cast spells from one but not all three?

>>50495570
He's a qt middle aged man, and I just want to listen to him explain outdated 40k rules to me even though I have no interest whatsoever, and there's reruns of The League of Gentlemen playing quietly in the background, while we snack on oddly flavored crisps. Do you not get the appeal?

>>50494554
have you ever fucking played wow

>>50494720
an archer has to replace there arrows

>>50495090
did not work for gen 13

>>50495685
Appeal of what? Spending time with lower middle class guy from Southern England that makes for his living by being grumpy uniformed pleb in the internet?
Sorry, no appeal for me. I had half of the campus of guys like him back on the uni. I would have to be insane to willingly spend more time with this type of person.

>>50495163
I'm not questioning him playing RQ. I'm just pointing the only D&D he ever played was ADD

>>50495860
You don't have to have a stick up your butt, you choose to have a stick up your butt.

>>50495898
Or you choose not to have one and not endure the pain, like every sensible person.

But it's not like you don't enjoy harming yourself

>>50495685
>Do you not get the appeal?
i am not a faggot, so no

>>50495685
I recommend making an effort and acquire some fucking taste

>>50488689
>>50489206

Surprisingly well said.

Problem is many people who like 4e often just say "It's not like that", or worse yet constantly point to 3es failings in comparison but never ever describe why 4e is a good RPG system on it's own.

>>50496116
See >>50490004. Once you use the HP bloat fixes, 4E offers fun tactical combat that a lot of RPGs struggle with, while still presenting a competent roleplaying system for the noncombat aspects.

>>50488841
>>50494708
he's severely mentally ill and all of his previous opinions are abject trash

instantly disregarding his opinion is the only sane response

>>50496301
>Expecting from Lloyd to understand why people discard him on the basis of him being Lloyd

>>50495817
Gen 13 and Witchblade both bother me on a personal level.
If you wanna draw porn, draw porn. It's the 21st century, no one is judging. Don't give us all this pre-internet-era wank material for 14 year olds. 14 year olds have moved on to better stuff now. They have iPads.

Both series deserved nothing but ignoble death.

>>50496399
Witchblade ended almost 2 years ago.

And I guess you never read it after Marz took over the writing and basically rebooted it from cheesy porn to pretty good stuff. But then again I don't blame you, I've got my hands on Marz's issues by pure chance, otherwise I wouldn't bother after initial few porn-tastic issues of Witchblade.

>>50496430
I did not, but I'm openminded enough to allow for the possibility that I'm a judgmental asshole who assumes stuff.
Maybe I will poke around. When does it get good?

>>50496399
Hey, fuck off, Witchblade was pretty good, even it took them almost half of the run to figure out what kind of story they want to tell and what kind of imaginery use for that. Around 80 or so issue, it turned into really, really good urban fantasy.

And unlike a lot of comics, it actually had a proper ending, wrapping the whole story and characters rather than being simply cancelled or running for ages.

The actual porn stuff was Witchblade/Tomb Raider crossover, for very obvious reasons. Bu then again, stand-alone TR comics also turned pretty good after initial few issues.

>>50496479
Marz took over in issue 80, so it's a good moment to "start", as within next few issues you can actually notice the progression and all the changes. By issue 90 or so it's completely different series.

>>50496505
>>50496481
At least something productive happened in this thread. Thanks guys, I will give Witchblade a second chance.

>>50496430
>Witchblade ended almost 2 years ago.
Shit man, I feel old now.
I still remember all the hype when first issues rolled in in '95

>>50496481
>stand-alone TR comics
Wait, there was stand-alone for Lara?

I guess I will have to dig it out, the Dark Horse Comics series is just pure marketing garbage.

>>50489103
Ah. So you either want to troll or you're autist. Either you're just here for the (You) or you honestly can't comprehend that people can't have fun with things you don't like. Either way, not worth the time to argue with.

>>50496590
Anon, DHC is a company that exists solely due to making marketing garbage for past decade.

I still fully believe that the only thing wrong with 4e is the 3.PF fuckers who constantly fucking whine about how it 'DOESN'T FEEL LIKE D&D' and cry 'MMO GAME all the fucking time.
Like i can't even run a goddamn game of 4e because there's so many of these shitwits and the people that drink their koolaid.

>>50489103
>5e is trash because of 4e's ideas.
That they literally only gave to the fighter?

>>50488689
the alexandrian gave 4e a much more thorough, well deserved ass tearing.

File: 1456717392097.gif (849KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

849KB, 300x300px

>>50488689
Okay

I disagree with your assessment.

>>50488689
> The session-long fights
If you're shit at running them and your players are shit at playing them and suffer horrific decision paralysis/don't plan their turns in advance.

> Lack of roleplaying mechanics
If you need mechanics to roleplay then you had already failed before the game started

> Shitty utility powers
Meh. Somewhat valid, they could have put more effort into them. As is, they feel really tacked-on.

> Insane focus on combat
Intentional design decision, see point 2

> Zero mechanical diversity among classes
In that they all follow the same basic advancement layout. This isn't a bad thing - I'd rather have a lack of mechanical diversity that attempts to conserve balance than quadratic wizards fucking over the martials because of this 'Well, they need to feel different!' combined with poor balance decisions

> Martials are literally casters
And casters are literally martials. This is basically a non-statement, and an entirely subjective non-statement at that. See also point 5.

> Creative actions punished by system
Yeah, this has always been a bugbear of mine. I houserule it away, but that doesn't make it any less of a valid complaint. That said, it's not as though other editions of D&D do it a lot better.

> Hit point bloat
A mistake that has been acknowledged time and time again, the HP math was reworked later in 4e's lifespan and was a lot better afterwards.

> Skill are an all-or-none business
Kinda? That's more a DM thing, though I admit the DMG doesn't do itself any favours with it's iffy math.

> Can heal / regain energy just by thinking
Wot? I feel like you're referring to the myth that healing surges can be used at-will, which isn't the case and stems from a vastly erroneous understanding of the game.

> Creature types are literally defined by their combat roles because that's all they are
As opposed to what? There are still creature types and subtypes on the monster sheets.This isn't an argument unless you can provide a counterpoint.

>>50488689
continuing >>50498843

>it’s certainly the anti-3.5 in its refusal of interesting and mechanically-diverse character options
It traded an unbalanced and nigh-unbalancable clusterfuck of branching options for a laser focused system with extremely tight design parameters.

Whether you like that system or not doesn't come into the equation, since it used a totally different architecture and thus is a poor choice to compare to any other iteration of D&D. This may have been a mistake, certainly, because let's be honest: 4e was NOT D&D. It discarded almost every tradition that had been previously established and introduced an entirely new paradigm. Does this make it a bad game? No! Does this make it falsely advertised? Kinda!

People started on 4e because, clearly, they wanted D&D. 4e didn't give them D&D, it gave them this new system that didn't even resemble D&D beyond the settings and races and such. Of course a lot of people were upset, and their anger was valid.

>The combat is dreadful, it's a complete slog. As I played, I noticed that fighter and ranger maneuvers were really just spells, but the game had written "exploits" instead to pretend there wasn't magic involved.

First off, personal anecdotes don't contribute to proper debate, fuck outta here with that shit. Secondly, this has already been addressed in multiple previous points. Thirdly, it's an entirely subjective viewpoint and basically comes down to fluff. Many people don't mind that the martials are doing clearly supernatural things, many even actively enjoy it. You don't, and that's okay too, but don't claim to attack the system in an objective light when your argument is based on a purely subjective issue.

Most of your argument essentially stems from the fact that the classes are all built around the same framework and that they aren't 'different' enough. You may have an actual argument in there, but unfortunately it is lost as you completely miss the point of the system, over and over.

>>50489261
funnily enough, the people in my group more vocal against switching to 4th were the martials, because "muh x4 criticals".
Our 3.X was never the magic shitshow people fear, tough.

>>50489358
what is UMD

>>50499132
Something that requires skill points the martial doesn't have enough of.

>>50498567
The Alexandrian sucks 3.5 cock so hard it could hardly gurgle "disassociative mechanics!" when it came up for a breather.

>>50489607
Reserve feats >>>>>>>> 5E cantrips.
XP costs are a trojan horse mechanic that can be used to jump ahead of the XP curve completely by the rules.
Fighters could never compensate for a Wizard's versatility.

Lindy is generally pretty critical of D&D; his opinions on each edition have generally been pretty ass and more indicative of him being unable to understand abstraction.

>>50499166
Is rogue a martial? If yes, you fail.
Other than that, there are way to get it like with paragon level, there was even a Faerun feat IIRC.
There are custom magical items to pump skills stats.
Really, is 3.5. You will find a way.

>>50499192
the alexandrian is generally right on 4th edition and insulting him without bringing any counter argument will just make you look like a sore loser.

>D&D 4th edition was released almost ten years ago and isn't even being produced anymore
>we're still having edition wars about it

Fucking really? Well, at least the edition wars over 5e were comparatively tame.

Honestly I just like playing 4e because of static defenses as opposed to Saves. Feels a lot cleaner as a GM.

>>50499236
Lindybeige Simulationism should be it's own special kind of simulationist.
One shudders to imagine a game with 'common-sense rules' painstakingly crafted by lloyd.

>>50488689

>OP creates a 190 reply shitshow with a stale /tv/ copypasta.

Good job, but you need to work "dullest franchise in history" in there.

>>50499262
post video fgt

swordmage was fun and bled into fifth edition and I like healing surges

running encounters has been more fun in 4e than any other edition. I found it easy to design encounters, but campaigns had to be kinda rail roaded

>>50499475
Welcome to post-June '16 /tg/, where newfags ultimately took over and janitors quit.

>>50499316
I can see why you'd prefer them, but I honestly prefer saving throws. I find that it better captures the feel of resisting something for your life.

>>50499336
I recall he was pretty favorably inclined towards Runequest. We could use that as a basis.

>>50499610
why cant we have both?

>>50488689

While all of the guy's complaints are legitimate, I just can't respect him because he played a rogue pretending to be a wizard.

>>50499262
The Alexandrian is a butthurt 3aboo who uses eloquent words to cry about spell descriptions not taking up two paragraphs anymore, that other 3aboos butthurt about 4e reference because they think long words must mean he is right, and his view happens to align with theirs.

The core of his complaints could interesting discussion starters, but they almost always devolve into displays of circular logic where he creates self serving definitions for things to prove himself right.

The man used the "well you can totally RP in chess, that doesn't make it an RPG, just like 4e!" as an actual argument. How the fuck is it possible to take him seriously after that? He runs on insane troll logic and a thesaurus, feeding off of the praise and page traffic of people who would rather not think or argue for themselves.

>>50498567
>Alexandrian
>opinion that matters

Pick one

>>50499686
I'm pretty sure 4e did.

>>50499758
>>50500094

the butthurt here is almost palpable, 4rries

>>50500920
Not an argument.

>>50499758
>>50499262
>>50499192
the Alexandrian did a good job explaining why 4e feels like a boardgames with its dissociative mechanics and explains the perspective of how 4e is built entirely out of the most viscerally hated parts of 3.x, for many players.

it gives me something to point to as the /start/ of an explanation of why 4e doesn't appeal to me (I'd then go to how much work it would take identifying everything that would need refluffing and how much homebrew would be involved to make it handle most of the classic d&d settings that doesn't fall flat, and the point out the reasons I don't like the AEDU framework at all, nor the way the numbers are designed for PCs vs monsters and why.

>>50501035
Pretty much this. They built an edition based, basically, on what people do not want.
Just look at most of the arguments.
"I prefer 3.X..."
"b-but caster supremacy!"
Is for people that had PTSD from 3.X played with shitheads.

>>50501161
Only it outsold Pathfinder for the whole of its run.

So clearly people did want it.

>>50501203
If it was such a success, someone shold explain me why
1) each year they fired the lead
2) next edition, they went back to much of older mechanics and aesthetic.

Anon, pls.

>>50501251
And yet, this still doesn't change the fact.

Year for year, blow by blow, it outsold Pathfinder every single time.

So clearly, people did want it. Why are you trying to deny objective fact?

>>50501161
Yep.

>why don't you like 4e
>>muh irrational and arbitrary x/time period limits on everything.
>3e has it too.
>>but less of it. and yes, that's the most annoying part of 3e

add that to disliking the default fluff for nearly everything in 4e, disliking several of the core player races, wanting a game more viable for 1v1 pvp if it breaks out, and disliking many of the other core mechanics, and it just doesn't appeal to me.

At one point I considered 4e for a fft campaign, now I've come to the conclusion that when I want to run that I'd rather homebrew something from scratch.

>>50501297
"Fact" that you are stating without backing it up.

>>50501300
>Calling 3.PF viable for PVP
>Laughingbitches.gif

>>50501203
>but people did want it
sure, "people" did.

you know who explicitly didn't want it? existing d&d players.

thats why pf did so well. they gave the d&d players new content, rather than a new game that wasn't d&d.

>>50501035
>>50501161

It explains that a.) grogs can not handle clearly laid out rules and design intent. The shit he complains about had been in D&D since its inception, but it was masked by flowery descriptions that mixed rules with natural language, and b.) many people have drawn an arbitrary a line in the sand saying "exactly this much and this type of abstraction is acceptable, anything more or less is not a roleplaying game".

His arguments are schizophrenic, you can tell that he is trying really hard to deride gamism because he is an elitist faggot who considers it to be not "true" roleplaying, but still continues playing D&D for some reason.


>>50501300

>>but less of it. and yes, that's the most annoying part of 3e

Essentials classes. They were made for your whiney ass. Of course, not that they help, since it's not like you actually care about your complaint being obsolete, you just want to complain.

>>50501352
Outside of all of those that did, given it outsold 3.5, and Pathfinder for its whole run.

>>50501337
more so than 4e. at least the pcs and monsters are built on the same number scale.

works out quite well in a campaign with limited tiers. well enough that there's actually a 3pp book with the minor changes required to make it into a fun skirmish wargame.

>>50501396
Yeah, PVP ending in a single action is so much better then what 4e could do, I'm sure.

>>50501418
Some people prefer like that. Basic was even worse in that regard, and I started there.

>>50501396
>at least the pcs and monsters are built on the same number scale.

They aren't. Monsters in both editions have more HP.

I'd even go ahead and say that 4e characters have better relative values than 3.5 ones.

>>50501379
[citation needed]

File: 0vm22PRG1spsojg.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>American daytime hours
>This thread goes from page 8 to +30 new posts

>>50501379
it primarily sold to a different demographic of people. not saying it didn't sell. saying it's not d&d.

>>50501358
>too much abstraction
I would prefer less abstraction than 3e. it's at the upper bound.

i actually liked the clearly laid out rules of 4e and their self contained stat blocks.

>essentials classes
If i hate the premise of Aedu and the 1/encounter premise, essentials classes do not fix what I dislike.

>>50501455
Are you being intentionally retarded? I hope so.
HP in 3.X do not go away the way they do in 4th.

This thread is ridiculous. One 4rry is arguing that monsters in 3.X have still many HP, the other complains about rocket tag.

>>50501484
>saying it's not d&d.
Yes, and that's your unique retardation, given it was sold MOSTLY TO D&D PLAYERS.

In fact, you've said that a few times. Prove it, fucker. Show me it wasn't told to D&D players.

>>50501484
>If i hate the premise of Aedu and the 1/encounter premise, essentials classes do not fix what I dislike.

Yes.

That's exactly what they do. Essentials martial classes have 1 encounter power. That's less than a 5e fighter. That's less than some 3.5 rogues/fighters. They can have more, optionally, if you spend feats or select powers like that, but you can build/play them with only that one. And no dailies either. So if AEDU is your problem, there, fix. There's also a wizard variant that only has dailies and I think one encounter.

>One 4rry is arguing that monsters in 3.X have still many HP, the other complains about rocket tag.

Yes. Monsters have more HP than players and PvP is rocket tag in 3.5. How the fuck is this contradictory?

>>50501584
what causes such rocket tag?

>>50501622
Player health scales slower than monster health, so assuming martials that kept their damage up, it is very likely they'll one round anyone they can catch.

By the same token, casters have many, many spells that eliminate someone with one failed save.

Basically, the only way to survive PvP in 3.5 (assuming basic competency from both sides) is to never be hit, because if you are, you'll either be dead or wish you were dead.

That is putting the class imbalances aside. Like, 3.5 tiers are often derided as non-important because "it's a team game!" but in PvP they come out in full force, especially at higher levels.

>>50501733
Meanwhile, while 4e characters also have health that scales slower than monsters, there are a lot fewer instant win buttons and a lot fewer instagib attack combinations one can pull off without support from another party member (at least until epic, but by then you also have ways to shred those effects). I think player defenses are also slightly higher than monster defenses, so there'll be more misses, but don't quote me on that.

>>50501733
Those are not universal. most bosses are built like pcs, at the least. there are bestiaries of NPC stat blocks, and most of my pf campaigns have used that kind of adversary going back to 2009. they work out well (urban games)

>>50501733
so you see that to be 'tagged' the HP are just one of the many components...

I see step by step, we can make it anon...
I believe in you...

>>50501837
>>50501733
It's complicated. In 3.5, players and monsters had basically the same correlation between base attack bonus, base saves, and HD. Levels in PC classes added to CR at a one-to-one ratio, while NPC classes and monster HD increased a monster's CR more slowly. This was kind of silly - a level in warrior or an extra HD in Magical Beast was treated as only half as good as a level in fighter, even though half the time the effects were exactly the same, and the rest of the time a level in fighter was only slightly better.

File: order-of-the-stick-2.gif (96KB, 698x471px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 698x471px

>>50501837
You'll note that those bosses are also absolutely demolished in a single turn if they don't outlevel the party by like 3-5 levels, or have massive amounts of layered defenses. In a PvP you usually have about equal level and resources.

>>50501846
Yes.

That's what rocket tag means. If you are tagged, you die. You have ways to not get tagged, but it's basically pic related.

File: 1472094352653.png (351KB, 610x342px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 610x342px

>>50501733
>Like, 3.5 tiers are often derided as non-important because "it's a team game!"
That's just a meme right? I mean, people don't actually use that excuse do they?

... Right?

>>50501989
That's a somewhat common belief, I think.
I've also seen people that are ok with the the huge tier disparity because it just means they can "do more" in the system - ie, play as super demigods (any casters), or maybe this campaign is about shitty plebs (fighters, etc)

Just reading this thread it's easy to see that the people who like 4e just don't like d&d.

>>50502393
dnd is pretty shit tho

>>50502393
I'd actually argue that people who don't like 4e don't like D&D.

Funny thing, opinions.

>>50502423
>opinions

>>50502478
So you like other editions?

4e is the biggest departure for the series so if you like it it's unlikely you will like older editions and vice versa.

File: smile is gone.jpg (47KB, 500x256px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 500x256px

The "4e is bad" meme spread like a fucking wildfire because the 3eaboos wouldn't shut up about how different and therefore bad the new edition was. It threw neutral people off from wanting to even give the damn thing a try, because there was always at least one person in every fucking group who's heard that the latest edition of D&D isn't good and so they should play the previous one. Most of these people never even looked at 4e, and the rest of the group just follows along because that one loudmouth must clearly know what he's talking about since he's being so loud about it, right? It's actual proof that anybody who legitimately enjoys any iteration of D&D before 4e is an indoctrinated sheep.

>>50502639
>It's actual proof that anybody who legitimately enjoys any iteration of D&D before 4e is an indoctrinated sheep.

0/10

Be more subtle.

>>50502506
I like 4e the best by far, but I played and enjoyed AD&D, OSR clones, 3.PF and 5e as well.

I would say that 4e went back to the roots of D&D being a team effort, after 3.5 was more of a team of individuals. 5e has shades of 3.5 in that regard, but it's still miles better.

>>50502703
>I would say that 4e went back to the roots of D&D

Now this is decent bait.

Guaranteed to get a few replies.

>>50501035
If people want to point out things they don't like about 4e that are legitimate facts, they're free to.

It's people screaming about how the system is shit because of a meme they heard that gets annoying.

>>50502737
In theme, it's OD&D. It's a team of characters overcoming challenges, putting their unique talents together working as a unit.

In design and presentation, it's a huge departure, since it's the first edition where they have actually designed with intent instead of blindly taking and transplanting legacy mechanics and content into a huge kitchensink system without considering the consequences.

Also, the electronic support is nice, but 5e will probably have it beat there in a while.

>>50502674
There is no legitimate reason to play the older editions anymore. 4e achieved everything the previous editions have been trying to achieve for decades, and it has done it in a completely unobscured, well thought-out, and straightforward fashion. People who dislike it reiterate the same fake meme-complaints over and over, and the people that hear about those complaints, at the time, and many still to this day, didn't bother to check it for themselves. They literally believe in something because they were told to believe in something. It got so bad that Wizards had to roll back some of the progress made during 4e for the sake of their sales, all so that the 3eaboos would shut the fuck up and stop spreading lies.

>>50502879
Mate, I know you are upset and there's truth in what you say, but you are making us look bad.

There's plenty of reasons to play older editions; if for nothing else, nostalgia. You also can't deny that, say, BECMI was rather mechanically simple, and 4e doesn't capture that old-school feel.

Playing 3.5 over it is fucking trash tho.

>>50502842
Even when you point out facts like combat being sluggish and classes being homogenised the 4rries will just make up excuses. It's like they're incapable of seeing any flaws in their precious game.

>>50502850
Every edition of d&d features a team of PCs overcoming challenges as a team. In fact pretty much every RPG in existence does that. Just because wizards put a label on class roles like "striker" and "controller" doesn't mean it's innovative. They're just using lingo for the WoW generation to pick up on.

>>50502879
I told you to be more subtle.

>>50502909
>Every edition of d&d features a team of PCs overcoming challenges as a team.

In 3.5, you are not a team, in the classical sense. You are the Justice League, or, actually, a WoW raid group. All heroes who can do everything by themselves, but team up for some reason or other. The amount of shit you can bypass with easily accessible magic in 3.5 is ridiculous. You really don't need a team, you can just play all generalist, and you will be better for it.

5e has shades of this, I had my familiar scout more than my AT Rogue. I don't even want to think about what I could accomplish as a wizard or druid.

>>50502639
>It's actual proof that anybody who was born past 1990 and legitimately enjoys any iteration of D&D before 4e is an indoctrinated sheep.
Here, FTFY.

Some people are literally too young to know any other edition than 3.X as their "first"

File: 1465664098181.jpg (36KB, 511x509px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 511x509px

>>50502930
You got schooled, son.

>>50496116
>worse yet constantly point to 3es failings in comparison but never ever describe why 4e is a good RPG system on it's own.
This

File: discussionStarter.jpg (48KB, 609x531px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 609x531px

>>50488689
>posting lindybeige on /tg/

I have nothing against the guy myself, but posting lindybeige on here isn't what you want to do if you want to have a serious discussion about the flaws in D&D 4e. Case in point:
>>50488813
>>50488825

I know, I know
>implying anyone on /tg/ wants to have a serious discussion about D&D and wouldn't rather just shitpost memes.

>>50502993
Well, I also haven't heard why 3e is a good system., only that it's so much better than that shitty 4e or 5e... actually, I have never heard a description more verbose than about a sentence why any of the D&Ds are good in general, only in relation to each-other, now that I thin about it.

>>50502506
I've personally played every edition of D&D, plus Pathfinder.

I personally finds 2e, 4e, and 5e to be the best of them. 2E feels like a straight improvement on AD&D to me with how they cleaned things up. The rules for out of combat activities are simple and straightforward, and,the balance is nice and everyone can contribute.

4E I like, again for letting everyone contribute, but also for having nice tactical combat. Fighters actually being able to say 'No, you have to deal with me first', rather than just hoping the monsters don't run past them is nice.

5E I like because it blends the older methods of 2e with some of the more modern touches of 4e. While it does include stuff from 3.5, it basically tosses out all the worst aspects of it. Caster supremacy in 5e is limited to a handful of easily banned spells. Spells are no longer the garuntee of power they were in 3.5.

3.5 and Pathfinder simply have too much content, and most of it isn't even worth using. It requires a lot of effort to sift through and get what you want, for the DM to make sure nobody is going to be useless or accidentally break everything, and even if you get past all that and limit options to a balanced core, it still isn't a very fun game. Skills are still clunky, combat is neither as quick and simple as 2e nor as robust and engaging as 4e. And at the point when you remove everything bad and try to replace it, you're basically re making the system from scratch.

>>50502639
Try this
>Poland
>Never big on D&D at all, literally conquered by WFRP ever since it showed up in the tail end of 80s
>Polish distributor for D&D tries anyway
>ADD barely sales
>3.X doesn't sell at all
>4e rolls in with big (all things considered) marketing campaign
>Suddenly everyone and their dog knows 4e is shit and the worst thing ever
>Nobody even played D&D around and if so, then it was ADD xero
>But they've read in the net 4e is bad
>D&D gets fully cancelled in Poland ever since 4e complete failure
>They were unable to sell 500 books, which was the amount required for the printing to turn profit

This is the type of damage we are talking about.

>>50502993
Yep. It's like Godwin's law in these threads.

As soon as you point out a flaw in 4e the 4rries start sperging out about 3.5 for some reason. It's like 3.5 has traumatised them and left such a scar on their psyche that they're unable to have a sensible discussion without mentioning it every 2 minutes.

>>50503044
3.X is giving D&D bad name ever since... you are surprised some people were left traumatised by it?

>>50503072
Such a bad name that people are still playing one of its iterations.

I will never understand this butthurt. Look at this sperg here:
>>50502959

All this nonsense. You are a team if you coordinate attacks and tactics, this is valid in any edition and beyond the game. Wait for the ranger to shoot and then cast a fog with a prepared action is something you can do in 3.X or whatever edition.

These look like people sexually molested by a 3.X wizard. Is fucking unbelievable.

>>50503072
How did it give d&d a bad name?

Most people I know were introduced to the hobby via 3.5 and plenty of them play it or PF to this day.

Your argument is literally >stop liking what I don't like

>>50503132
See, playing doesn't mean it's good. I know for experience. I was running games using Witcher TTRPG for 11 years straight.
Not because it's a particulary good system (at times is clunky as fuck and certain parts are outright broken) or fun setting (too grim for fun play, too light for actually grimdark) or whatever else.

But it was the only game I was able to find players for, since that was the only setting everyone was familiar with and didn't have to learn anything more about it. Plus the rules are so simple most of the people learned them after first 5 minutes of explaining.

But it didn't made the game good by itself.

And I'm glad I've finally got a group to play different stuff with.

>>50503132
>Such a bad name that people are still playing one of its iterations.
Because they assume that all games are as much of a pain in the dick to learn as 3.x, so they Sunk Cost Fallacy to avoid learning anything new.

It has actively created a vast swath of people with such charming mindsets as 'you need codified rules to be able to do roleplay shit' and 'of course the wizard should be better, all a fighter does is wave a stick around'.

It may be fun to play, but it is bad in ways that transcend mere mechanical shortfalls.

>>50503167
And I know a lot of people who were introduced to the hobby via WFRP and/or Vampire the Masquerade.

What difference does it make?
Or why you are even assuming I ever played D&D in the first place? My entire point is how without playing it, I'm turned off by all the constant edition wars, with everyone crying "3.X is shit" and "No, that was 4e!" or "5 is the worst combination of them all!".

That's how 3.X gives bad name. I don't even want to check D&D or compare editions, because all this ranting on /tg/ over years convinced me those are all badly designed games that are so flawed it's a waste of time and money to even try.

File: 1429709907253.jpg (6KB, 299x168px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 299x168px

>>50503044
>for some reason
Because when a new edition comes out, it's natural for people to compare it to its predecessor, and this attitude never stopped because the most vocal dissidents of 4e have always been 3.5/PF players.

If you look at the people who complain about 4e specifically and not just D&D in general, nine times out of ten it's someone who primarily plays and recommends 3.5/PF instead, and rarely if ever someone playing a different system entirely.

I started with 2e and skipped to 5e, threads like these only make me want to try 4e to find out what makes it so different.

>>50503206
>It has actively created a vast swath of people with such charming mindsets as 'you need codified rules to be able to do roleplay shit' and 'of course the wizard should be better, all a fighter does is wave a stick around'.
This

This is literally it. The very reason why 3.X is bad - it's playerbase, which due to different reasons defends design choices so flawed it's just mind-numbing.

I miss times when the only editon wars were between 0D&D and AD&D. It was so simple back then...

>>50503206
Why can't you just accept that people like things that you don't like? They're not wrong for having different tastes.

Not everyone wants to play a tabletop conversion of WoW.

>>50503027
The only good thing about 3.5 is it has a lot of content. Mind most of that content is shit but there sure is a lot of it.

File: 1479948069080.gif (460KB, 512x392px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 512x392px

>>50503241
>Why can't you just accept that people like things that you don't like?
>Now stop liking what I don't like
I love you virt but come on man, there's zero self-awareness in you sometimes.

>>50503185
>>50503206

Look all these convoluted explanation. "Sunk Cost Fallacy". Jesus Christ.

Or they just play and enjoy the game without 'sperging.

But that's too simple. It must be the most complicated explanation.

>>50503227
Nothing.

It's the same stuff as always, but cutting away 3/4 of rule-bloat from 3e and putting in own rule-bloat roughtly half of the original size.

File: ;3.jpg (85KB, 511x676px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 511x676px

>>50503241
The contradicting message of your post is just amazing.

>>50503240
But fighters shouldn't be as powerful as wizards.

>>50503282
Then one of those classes shouldn't be a PC option

>>50503264
Pretty decent bait.

I'm sure some poor soul will go and buy 4e expecting a more simple and streamlined game.

Boy is he in for a surprise when an average encounter takes over an hour to complete.

>>50503260
>Sunk Cost Fallacy
>Convoluted explaination
I guess you need that explained in simple words to graps the concept
Sunk Cost Fallacy is a type of behaviour, where against all logical reasons, a person continously invest resources into a clearly unprofitable activity, only because said activity ALREADY cost a lot and there is a lot of emotional attatchment to the investment.

It might be a shock for you, but this is how ALL editions in ALL games on the market work. It's always based on the exact same psychological mechanism - "I won't try new, because the one I'm already using cost me 200 bucks and three years to master".
That's why there are people still playing the extremely clunky WFRP 1e.

>>50503282
... because?

You see, no previous and no further edition of D&D had this problem. It wasn't a problem in 0D&D, it wasn't a problem in all of the itterations of AD&D, it's a non-issue in 4e and 5e also has no problems with it.
Only 3.X does.

Rings you a bell?

File: 1420165268945.gif (2MB, 382x277px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 382x277px

>>50503312
>when an average encounter takes over an hour to complete.
Either it takes you half an hour to say 'I use... [power name] on this enemy', or your average encounter is the siege of Helm's Deep.

>>50503241
>Every edition war thread in a nutshell

>>50503317
I know this is a word overused here but you have literally autism.

>>50503317
Not that guy but he's correct, you're a fucking retard.

Could it be that maybe they keep playing 3.5 because they enjoy it? Could it be that they have tried other editions but prefer 3.5? Could it be that people like things that you don't like?

>>50503312
Which part of "and replace it with own bloat" you didn't get? Because that's serious problem with reading comprehension.
But I guess that's just part of the conspiracy hating based 3.X

>>50503333
Are you denying that your average encounter in 4e takes significantly blogger than any other edition?

If you are, you're blatantly lying 4rry.

File: 5f0c3e22.jpg (11KB, 261x191px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 261x191px

>>50503346
>Explaining to people a term they clearly don't understand is autism

>>50503372
*Longer

Autocorrect

>>50503351
I know enough people who stick with 3.5 because they read all those threads on /tg/ and RPG Codex and lost any interest to even try anything else than 3.5, while being busy homebrewing the shit of 3.5 rather than trying different game.
Not just different edition, but different game

Could it be? Or it's just an evil conspiracy?

>>50503374
We understand the term you idiot we're saying that it doesn't apply here.

You really are autistic aren't you.

>>50488689
then play GURPS you dingus and stop complaining about a shitty game

>>50503372
Not him, but they take just as much time as in any other edition.

If you really want quick combat, then I advice 0D&D. Anything after ADD, be it 3, 4 or 5, takes AGES in comparison, while AD&D doesn't really play well with people who are used to "newer" editions due to a lot of "counterintuitive" modifiers.

But hey, 3.X is superior to 4, bacause instead of taking 50 minutes a turn it takes only 40!

>>50503403
Yeah fuck those guys enjoying the game they play. They should be all bitter about it like you! Tell us more about caster supremacy sempai. I don't think they understand yet.

>>50503372
>Are you denying that your average encounter in 4e takes significantly blogger than any other edition?
That's a completely different claim from 'an average encounter takes an hour to complete'.

Naturally a round is going to be longer by a few seconds because non-casters now have options other than 'I swing my sword... again', but you're going to have to explain as to how that fucktuples the average encounter time from ten minutes to twenty eons.

>>50503408
But it does apply, you fucking moron. 3.X is infamous case of sunk cost fallacy, with people trying to "fix" it ever since, instead simply dropping for different game.

Any fucking moron would realise that after over a decade of trying a game is not worth trying if it's still broken. Unless they are working under the fallacy they've alredy spent so much time over it.

>>50503438
>Implying I ever even played D&D
That's golden.

Part of the reason why I consider D&D playerbase so bad - they instantly think that people questioning their beloved edition X or Y or whatever else must be those pesky players playing different edition...

... and not just people playing different games, poking fun out of their idiocy.

>>50503408
But it does apply.
My group kept playing 3.5 because our gm bought every 3.5 book and didn't wanna spend money on a new system.
Wasn't until I bought new stuff that he was willing to try anything not 3.5

>>50503438
is fucking unbelievable. It cannot be that people are more inspired by 3.X even if is more wild and when goes to shit, things go really bad.

No. It cannot be that they enjoy it, it must be something else. Jesus fucking christ, 4rries.

And we still are at stage 1. The argument for 4th is still 'is not 3rd'.

Is sad, more than anything else.

>>50503491
Out of curiosity - is 3.5 still suported? With new expansions and stuff like that?

Usually lack of support is the quickest way to kill a game or at least a specific edition, aside bunch of grognards

>>50503511
Pathfinder technically works as a 3.5 replacement/continuation.

>>50503502
Did I ever mentioned 4e in my comment?

Then why are you trying to pretend I've did so?

>>50503531
I'm not talking about Pathfinder, just 3.5 itself. So it's dead?

>>50503534
I addressed your bullishit in the first two sentences and the thread in general in the rest of the post.

As stated, literal autism.

File: 517.jpg (9KB, 248x233px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 248x233px

>>50503502
>Everyone questioning 3.X supremacy must be 4ed supporter
Brilliant

>>50503458
But martials are still just swinging their swords around in 4e. It's just that now they have 200 different ways to swing their swords with goofy video game names like "tide or iron"

Welcome to 4e where martials are just casters specialising in sword magic.

Also if you're complaining that all your fighter can do is swing his sword around you'd probably be better off not playing a fighter.

You're like the guy who goes to a Chinese restaurant and complains that there's too much rice on the menu.

>>50503550
Yeah, no official support.

>>50503558
Or, alternatively, you just rant about imaginary stuff out of pure paranoia and delusions. But hey, who am I to judge, if you are already wanking over 3.X?

>>50502850
>Also, the electronic support is nice, but 5e will probably have it beat there in a while.
They don't even sell 5e PDFs

>>50503575
Anon, I suggest to familiarise yourself with 0DD and ADD.
Then tell me about how "4e ruined everything" by giving martials options to have fun and revelance.

Because it's totally all 4ed fault and not a constant in entire line of Dungeons and Dragons EVER FUCKING SINCE, with 3.X being the real abberation here.

File: 1466215921256.png (55KB, 217x190px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 217x190px

>"the joke's on you, I never even played D&D!"
>literally admitting that you don't know what you're talking about
This is a new breed of retard.

>>50503567
it would be even worse. 4th is so irelevant that even a thread dedicated to 4th becomes 3rd ed shitposting.
Alternatively, that wizard was a serial rapist.

>>50503584
read the thread mr-a-wizard-raped-me.

>>50503575
You are the guy who complains about imaginary issues, so what's worse here?

Oh, right, I forgot - you never played and D&D edition before 3.5 was released and marketed to the heavens, creating one of the most autistic and obnoxious playerbase ever seen in entire hobby.

Fucking Werewolf the Apocalypse playerbase wasn't that bad and they were really, really bad, believe me

>>50503602
I started with ad&d. I'm quite familiar with it. Ad&d didn't have the homogenised classes and shared resource system that ruined 4e.

I suggest you try it sometime.

>>50503622
>I never played any edition prior to 3.5: The Uninformed Post

>>50503631
Nice strawman, faggot.

>>50503642
It also didn't made it into extreme case of caster supremacy that is by far the most definitive element of 3.5 and PF.

>B-but casters should be stronger
They never were outside the 3.X

>>50499587
is your sphincter still sore from the creation of /qst/?

>>50503654
Since when reality and facts are strawman?

No prior edition was so hell-bent on caster supremacy. In fact, 0DD was biased toward martials and ADD balanced shit nicely.
Cue 3.0 and then 3.5 with their obsessive "but martials only wave swords around"

>>50503648
I am sorry but I played BECMI and ADnD 2nd extensively. I still consider BECMI the best for many things.

You are pathetic.

>>50503690
Anon, we are having /pol/ threads lasting for up to 16 hours with dozens of reports and no pruning and you act like /qst/ is the problem.

Another pebble to the mountain of newfags taking over.

This board is sinking for past half a year. I hope you will enjoy the shitlifting that will start after the new janitor will turn out to be incompetent.

>>50503575
4e:
>After each swing, you use your shield to shove your foe backward, and then you surge ahead!
>You lash out with the speed of a striking serpent, hitting your foe in a vulnerable area that hinders its movement!
>You punctuate your scything attacks with wicked jabs and small cutting blows that slip through your enemy’s defenses!
>All of these different attacks affect enemies differently from oneanother, and while a player has a nice selection to choose from there's never so many that anyone smarter than a mushroom will have trouble deciding which one to use in an encounter.

3.5:
>you swing your sword. If you hit do damage.

>>50503694
I started playing with AD&D in the late 90s. I have played other edtions prior to 3.5

3.5 isn't even my favourite edition. Why are we even talking about 3.5? Oh right, because 4rries can't stop mentioning it ad nauseam in every fucking thread.

File: 1215484.gif (81KB, 182x249px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 182x249px

>>50503701
>I played those games
>That's why 3.X is superior!
At least try harder

On the positive note, this thread hit bump limit

>>50503728
>I can't role play my attacks so I need the rules to do it for me

4rries really are pathetic.

>>50503736
I didn't played any other edition than AD&D

I don't even know how 4e looks like. Why are we even talking about 4e? Oh right, because 3.5 players can't contain themselves in the delusion D&D started with their edition

>>50503631
my group played since ADnD and considers 4th edition utter shit. See? I can play this game too

You are 50% anecdotes and 50% stuff pulled from your ass.

>>50503743
I wrote that I consider BECMI the best for many.
You have functional illiteracy.

File: 1421697479304.jpg (10KB, 256x302px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 256x302px

>>50503750
>if you're complaining that all your fighter can do is swing his sword around you'd probably be better off not playing a fighter.

>>50503763
We're talking about 4e because that's what the thread is about you mongoloid.

How many times do I have to tell you that I don't even play 3.5 nor do I think it's the best edition? It's miles better than 4e though that's for sure.

>>50503736
3.5 gives meaning to 4th. It exists as a non-3rd.

I came to realise it with this thread.

>>50503794
Yes that's true.

It would be like me rolling a wizard and complaining that I can't wear plate armour and go toe to toe with monsters.

Are you trying to be ironic or something?

>>50503728
This is true. Can we have a 5e greentext?

5e
>So, at level 1, you pretty much can just swing your sword to do damage
>but then at level 2, you get your better class abilities, and suddenly, depending on your particulars, you either become stupid accurate with your weapon, deal metric ass loads of damage, become an unassailable wall, etc. Really, it's different for all the different martial classes, and rangers and rogues and monks and fighters and paladins are all differently gifted.
>Around level 4 you can grab a feat, which is really more useful out-of-combat, but they have utilities.

>>50503822
4e provides mechanics for fighters to use their weapons in different and varied ways with mechanical benefits. If given a choice between a system that has mechanical support for the things in >>50503728 and one that has nothing more than 'roll to attack, now roll damage', why would I pick the latter?

After all, it says 'Lack of roleplaying mechanics' in the OP, but this is clearly a roleplaying mechanic.

>>50503824
Is that supposed to be serious or sarcastic?

>>50488689
You write exactly like Lindy speaks.

Please stop that immediately.