What's the point of 3.5/Pathfinder when 5th edition DnD

>>51448459
Although 5th edition does have a lot of perks over 3.5/Pathfinder when it comes to the base rules structure, it doesn't have nearly as many options thus less speshul monster girl waifu races.

Although some argue that's a good thing.

>>51448459
3.pf satisfies a certain level of crunch and mechanical rules that 5e doesnt. In addition, 5es lore is very often fuckign terrible, destroying or neutering tons of lore from past editions.

The rules are also shit.

It's also incredibly fucking bland and boring.

>>51448553
I see your well thought out opinion and counter with the following:

3.PF's crunchy satisfaction comes from the idea that more options and biggers numbers means better gameplay. Which is far from the truth. Also, Said lore was is and will always be shit, so ejecting large portions of it to encourage GMs to fill in the blanks is a good thing.

So are 3.PF's what is your point?

So is 3.PF's what is your point?

OP asked why play 3.PF when 5E exists. The only thing 3.5E can do that 5E can't do is waifufag it up. And everything 5E does do has half or less paperwork.

>>51448459
There is no point. Sunk-cost fallacy and Stockholm syndrome rule 3.PF players from top to bottom.

File: logo-large[1].png (3KB, 284x115px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 284x115px

>>51448553
>3.pf satisfies a certain level of crunch and mechanical rules that 5e doesnt

Rules that don't accurately model reality in the slightest and exist only for the sake of pic related.

>5es lore is very often fuckign terrible, destroying or neutering tons of lore from past editions.

DnD lore is almost uniformly shit, any DM worth his salt throws it out and makes his own.

>The rules are also shit

Howso? If we're speaking anecdotally they're a lot better than any previous edition's. Although good old ADnD was fun all the way up through 4th.

>It's also incredibly fucking bland and boring

Could you explain this in more detail? I don't want to mischaracterize you by reflexively just calling you a dumb faggot because 3.5 was a snoozefest unless you were a Wizard, not just "any caster", but a Wizard specifically. The Fighter would Full Attack uselessly, the Cleric would spam heals, the Druid would shapeshift and Full Attack and maybe spam heals, and the Wizard would actually PLAY the game.

>>51448642

Are they really "more options" when the vast majority of them were complete and utter shit that you'd have to be ignorant to take, and then a small minority were unbelievably broken?

So, 3.5 question:

What's the tier list for Core only (PHB, DMG, MM)?

>>51448642
>>51448686
After having played 5e along with 2e, 3e, 4e, and Pf, and several other systems that aren't D&D, I found 5e to be just plain fucking boring, much more so than 2e.

And this was with a good group i've played 4e and Pf with. We all pretty much found it to be boring and simplistic in a way that just wasn't fun. We've since gone back to PF for our current campaign.

File: He is caught.jpg (349KB, 819x1024px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 819x1024px

>>51448504
>>51448642

Let's destroy their illusions right here and now. What are the most patrician monstergirl waifu races? We'll stat them and put an end to Pathfinder's evil.

>>51448686
>Rules that don't accurately model reality in the slightest

So science fiction games can't exist? Rules aren't meant to be a physics textbook, they're just the rules to a game.

Good of you to put a warning image on your post though.

>>51448727

Wizard >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Druid and Cleric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other caster classes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything else. It's the edition for people who were bullied by jocks.

>>51448755

Wanting more rules when they aren't better rules is literally autism. Stay spastic, sperg.

>>51448763
What's the most fun class to complement a wizard that is not another wizard?

>>51448737
>it was boring because it was boring

You want to know how we know you're full of shit? Because you think going back to PF, using presumably classes that are ALSO in 5e if you could switch back, would do anything for the options you seem to view as the difference between a "boring" game and an "interesting" one. The only meaningful difference is that the Fighter would contribute.

So yeah, you're full of shit.

>>51448816

If you like casting Heal, a Cleric. 3.5 is bad and there's no point in playing it. 4e was an improvement, and 5e was a big improvement.

So... really what it comes down to is favoritism. You play 3.5 because you like 3.5, and it's better because of [reasons you thought up to justify your opinion]

Same goes for 5e. Don't believe me? There's studies that show that most humans form opinions then come up with reasons to justify that opinion rather than the other way around.

Humans are wonderfully flawed and brilliantly stupid. That's about the only reason why we have edition arguments. Or just about any other arguments where we're discussing whether one subjective opinion is over the other.

File: 1429824750420.jpg (328KB, 1060x1590px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 1060x1590px

>>51448870
>le nothing is better moderate position maymay that totally excuses you from any and all critical thought

If I play Fighters, and I notice that in 3.5 my role is irrelevant and in 5e my role matters, I can deduce that 5e is better for Fighters, and probably better all-around if nobody else's role is really impacted negatively.

>>51448642
To be honest, I appreciate the effort that 3.PF went through trying to give a mechanic for EVERY FUCKING THING that exists - if I don't want to do the math on how much of an effect something has, and build my world to account for everything the players think of (I had one player who wanted to bling out his hat - how many haberdashers are there in town?), then I can just pull a relevant bit from a rulebook and call it a day.

Or, I can sit down and plan out the economics of a fucking world to decide how the society should be organized, and then figure out how many people of what level should be based on a well-ordered society, how many you need to make a decent army (like, 8 dudes who are over leveled), and what happens in the opposite case, and use that to figure out how the Duchy of Westmorelan is recovering from the incursion of Beholders, and has begun raiding the orcish lands of Kent in an effort to get enough farm land to settle the random overleveled lordlings so there isn't a civil war in half a generation.

It's a question of what kinds of resources I want to have on hand, and what kinds of things I want to roll for.

>>51448906
Oh, if you want my personal opinion, 5e no question. People talk about lack of option, but the homebrew community for 5e is insane. On top of this, it's powerfully simple, encourages role over roll-playing, works in Theater of the mind, and is quickly becoming the most widely played RPG around.

But none of that will stop 3.pguysf from arguing that we're wrong, because how could they be wrong?

"We're us, not them. How could we be wrong? Otherwise why have we been arguing that we're right all the time, it's them that like the bad things."

File: de6.jpg (48KB, 680x364px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 680x364px

>>51448459
What is the point of 2nd edition when 4th exists?

It's that the older system still works for some folks and they'd rather use that ruleset than the new one.

Kinda like how people can play things that aren't D&D and still basically be doing the same thing.

>>51448944
You have Autism. That's fine, but don't pretend that 3.PF is an objectively better game because it caters to that.

>>51449266
You're being a cunt.

OP is clearly referencing the fact that you can still walk into a gamestore, pull out 5E and try to get a pickup and have trilby wearing lumps of moldy ham sneer at you for not playing with them and their GURPS level of supplements for PF.

>>51448727
I think the most respected and longest standing 3.5 tier list is the one JaronK came up with on BrilliantGameologists in 2008 and is roughly as follows:
>Tier 1: Does absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often can end encounters with a single mechanical ability and little creativity. Breaks the game without even trying to do so.
>Examples: Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer, Erudite (Spell to Power Variant)

>Tier 2: Has the same raw power as Tier 1 but is less flexible or more limited. They can still casually smash campaigns if played properly but there will be situations that they don't have a silver bullet for whatever problem the party faces.
>Examples: Sorcerer, Favored Soul, Psion, Binder (with access to online vestiges), Eurdite (No Spell to Power)

>Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well without being useless in other areas or capable of doing all things well, but not as well as classes that deeply specialize in it. They can pull off some outrageously OP things but it requires intent and narrow-minded purpose to do so.
>Examples: Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Crusader, Bard, Swordsage, Binder (without access to the summon monster vestige), Wildshape Varient Ranger, Duskblade, Factotum, Warblade, Psychic Warrior

>Tier 4: Capable of doing one thing well, but useless when that one thing isn't needed, or capable of doing many things but not being particularly good at any of them.
>Examples: Rogue, Barbarian, Warlock, Warmage, Scout, Ranger, Hexblade, Adept, Spellthief, Marshal, Fighter (Zhentarium Variant)

>Tier 5: Capable of doing only one thing, and not all that well. Characters in this tier will often feel like one trick ponies if they do well, or just feel like they have no tricks at all if they build the class poorly.
>Examples: Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Rokugan Ninja, Soulknife, Expert, OA Samurai, Paladin, Knight, CW Samurai (with Imperious Command available)

>>51449483
>Tier 6: Not even capable of shining in their own area of expertise. Totally worthless without the most extreme powergaming.
>Examples: CW Samurai (without Imperious Command available), Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner

>>51448459
Factional signaling. 3.PF is the edition of weebs, furries, and munchkins, and they stay there. They're served by a huge amount of resources for every fetish they could want. The people who care more about the game itself play 5e, which has what you need done well and little guidelines for varying as needed, which you can also use your brain for. There's a nice divide between the mindsets, and I don't see what good would come of doing away with it.

>>51448553
Literally everything you said was devoid of actual meaning. Good job!

>>51448459
The core difference (though there aren't many honestly) is that the GAME of 5e is in the playing it, while the GAME of 3.PF is in building your character; the playing is really more of a social activity in which you show off your builds. Think of it like the difference between drafting vs constructed in any ccg. They are, however, largely the same game, and that was not an accident.

>>51449483

So I've been interested in Soulknives for a while. Why are they tier five? Because >only really able to attack?

>>51449483

Why do people think wizards are so great in 3.5?
The entire class is nullified by a single item, which often causes them to accidentally kill themselves, and their magic is pretty much useless against high level monsters.
Sure they have lots of utility, but in over a decade of using 3.PF nobody has ever managed to make a wizard that outshines the party or breaks encounters.

>>51449726
Because they can:
>Do absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often can end encounters with a single mechanical ability and little creativity. Breaks the game without even trying to do so.

>The entire class is nullified by a single item, which often causes them to accidentally kill themselves
"Fuck this player in particular" items don't come up in actual play, and if you need to nullify someone's class in order to balance it, it's not fucking balanced.

>their magic is pretty much useless against high level monsters.
I'm not sure how you're playing to arrive at this conclusion. It could be that your DM was rebalancing encounters specificallyto fuck magic over, which is probably wise of him. But your play experience isn't typical.

>Sure they have lots of utility, but in over a decade of using 3.PF nobody has ever managed to make a wizard that outshines the party or breaks encounters.
Either they weren't trying, or they were very dumb. More likely both.

>>51449753

>"Fuck this player in particular" items don't come up in actual play, and if you need to nullify someone's class in order to balance it, it's not fucking balanced.
A ring of spell turning isn't that, and it's not the only example either.

>I'm not sure how you're playing to arrive at this conclusion. It could be that your DM was rebalancing encounters specificallyto fuck magic over, which is probably wise of him. But your play experience isn't typical.
A level 20 wizard will have 9th level spells with a saving throw of about 25.
Most CR 20 monsters can beat that with extremely low rolls.
And many more will be immune to various spells, have spell resistance, and other things.

>Either they weren't trying, or they were very dumb. More likely both.
No, you're the retard who goes along with the groupthink.

>>51448743
Well, the big three are sneks, birbs and cats. Fish are optional. Slimes should probably be in there somewhere, dragons are already a thing. Lizards are just dragon-lite. Wolves and foxes. Plants of some variety.

Everything else is more obscure.

>>51449492
>Tier 7: Not capable of shining in any area of expertise. Class actively works against the character.
>Only known example: Trunamer (After nerfs)

>>51448854
4e was a completely different direction and shouldn't really be called D&D. This is the main reason the 3.X vs 4e grogwars even started, how 3.X took root as a refuge of the neckbearded. They changed the paradigm too much.

3.X should, by all rights, have been made irrelevant by 5e, but since so many people have effectively crucified themselves on it and now refuse to get off that particular cross, all that has really happened is a third side has joined the pointless conflict.

>>51448763
He said core 3.5 not Pathfinder. Druid and Cleric are right there with Wizard.

>>51449726
>spells for every practical scenario
>extremely easy access to spells
>spells to bypass the developer-intended means of resisting magic (MR, natural saves) by not allowing a save at all
>spells for controlling the battlefield
>spells for summoning creatures that are martially powerful or are spellcasters themselves
>spells for buffing someone to insane power levels
>spells for debuffing someone into a cripple
>spells for miscellaneous out of combat purposes (languages, travel)
>save or die spells
>spells that don't allow for any input on the part of the enemy
>magic item creation
>the effectiveness of the class is entirely dependant on only one(!) stat, which is easily buffed by fairly common magic items (which can be made by the wizard)

And it really isn't just a high-level trend, either. The troubles begin with level 1, since it has spells such as Sleep, which, with some luck, can literally end an entire encounter on its own, or at the very least considerably reduce the number of enemies.

>>51450011

Stopped reading at the point where you showed you have almost no familiarity with the system.
Read the rules before posting next time.

File: battle-of-wits.jpg (75KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 312x445px

>>51449753
The difference is how it forces the DM to build encounters. Without special consideration of their powers a tier 1 class will dominate a game by trivializing almost every encounter with a mechanical ability or two, not even creatively. Combat encounters end with all the relevant enemies totally unable to participate. Social encounters end with charms and dominations. Various quest and campaign problems that would take lesser characters days, weeks, or even months of questing are simply bypassed with a couple choice spells.

A well played Tier 1 character is an immense challenge for a DM just to keep them awake. Situations have to be specially designed to void most or all of the character's powers specifically and even then they may have other powers that let them bypass even tailor-made obstacles.

Tier 2 characters are just as powerful, but more predictable, particularly because the powers they have access to can generally be written down on a sheet of paper and not just summarized as "everything in this stack of books as tall as me".

Tier 3 characters have some cool things they can do but don't generally reach the earth-shattering levels of Tier 1 and 2. These are just what you might call "really good D&D classes" instead of "super heroes in a fantasy game". Sometimes they'll pull a clever trick which circumvents the general way the game is played but for the most part they play the game as intended and resolve problems in a predictable fashion.

Tier 4 characters start to present the opposite problem to the DM. He has to be careful not to make encounters where these characters can't contribute, period.

Tier 5 characters are almost as difficult for DMs to keep happy as Tier 1 characters. He has to specially build encounters that play directly to these character's strengths for them to have a good time.

Tier 6 characters are considered unplayable. They don't do what the game expects them to be able to do.

Tier 7 doesn't work at all.

Why play 5e when B/X already exist?

>>51450035
What part of the rules did he ignore?

File: 1438728078207.jpg (36KB, 481x315px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 481x315px

>>51450035
You're being too obvious like that. You should have gone for the "limited spells per day" meme first, then used that.

But good effort, have your consolation (you).

>>51450079

I'm not going to give the person I replied to that knowledge, because it will enable him to shitpost more effectively in the future.

>>51449817
>saving throw of about 25.

Dude, I had a saving throw of 25 at level 10.

Point buy. Max INT to 20. Advance character to old age. +2INT. ABI+1 every 4 levels. Headband of Intellect +6 ASAP. Standing on INT of 30 currently. +2DC for greater spell focus.
DC27 for a 5th level spell. DC25 x2 for a 3rd level spell with persistent spell metamagic added to it.

Always be able to target all three saves, and include many spells with no save at all, or has effects even on a successful save. Also carry lots of means to reduce enemy saves, like intimidation=>shaken== -2Will, or tanglefoot bag severely reduces reflex.

Finally, most of my magic revolved around scrying and teleportation for tactical insertion. Once used minor creation to duplicate a black lotus regeant (plant matter) and then rolled crafting checks with the rogue to make 50 gallons of DCyoujustfuckingdieson poison which we teleported into the enemy water supply AND air dropped with teleportation and flight and a bag of holding.

There was a save for the poison, but a ring of spell turning wouldn't save you against any of it.

And that's just the beginning of how we broke our DM.

>>51450104
So you're saying that you have nothing to back up your statement?

>>51450094

>make longwinded post showing you clearly have no familiarity with the system
>then say that i'm the one trolling

That's pretty rich.

>>51450120

Back up my statement to whom?
I already know that he has no idea what he's talking about, and I wanted him to know that I know.
What, am I supposed to prove that to him or something?
I don't care to, nor am I making an argument.

>>51450146
>(statement)
>>You're wrong!
>Why?
>>I'm too smart so not telling you :^)
>So you don't know and are making shit up?
>>Nope. I'm just right and I'm just informing you that you're wrong.

>>51450109

>Dude, I had a saving throw of 25 at level 10.
>Point buy. Max INT to 20.

Stopped reading here.
If you're not going to follow the actual rules of the game, there's no point arguing about the rules.

File: bingo.png (615KB, 750x900px) Image search: [Google]

615KB, 750x900px

This sums it up.

>>51450175

>implying you have some kind of right to know how I know you're talking out your ass
lol
There's nothing you can say or do to get me to tell you.

>>51450180
>Point buy to put 18 in INT
>Use racial modifiers to boost to 20.

File: IMG_2557.jpg (80KB, 493x437px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 493x437px

>>51450204
This is some next level bait. Here's a nigger rooster.

File: gigglemesh.png (93KB, 260x397px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 260x397px

>3.pfeaboos don't even try to defend themselves anymore
They've finally run out of excuses for why their system is shit.

>>51450210

Too late to save yourself.
You fucked up, and tipped your hand.
Still not going to bother reading the rest of your post, even though there were probably plenty more errors.
Don't bitch about the rules when you're not playing by the rules.

>>51448504
>3.pf
>playing anything that isn't human
Have fun being shit compared to the humies!

File: 1482931370242.jpg (283KB, 983x911px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 983x911px

Is this true?

>>51450248
Stop baiting.

>>51450256
Stop filtering generals for a bit and you'll find out.
Yes.

>>51450256
Absolutely. The PF playerbase has had years to stew into degeneracy and fetishism.

>>51448459
played 5e.came to the conclusion that (while playable) its the inferior alternative to pf.

i play pf for high powered fantasy. for low and mid powered fantasy i go for gurps.

im going to assume 5e is being touted as an alternative dor pf here, not as an alternative for gurps and 1e.

so here goes. 5e shortcomings:
>character framework gives too few active class features (interesting things you can choose to do on your turn) for everybody, not just a some neglected classes (martials).
>skill math is way too swingy. theres not enough difference between skilled and unskilled, and the odds of failure on tasks as your skill increases are too high for fairly simple tasks.
>no potential for "degrees of skill". just trained or no.
>not enough feat slots, again insufficient customization.
>no granularity of bonuses at all. advantage or not, thats it (+3.8 on average, iirc).
>monster math is on such a different scale than player math, with monstwra having not only tons more hp but also lower damage, such that when pvp breaks out its very rocket tag on all counts.
>the game has very few character options outside dms guild, and dms guild has no reviews or quality control and isnt physical books you can skim so you never have any idea if youre buying garbage.
>no d20pfsrd equivalent means if they ever do put out more options, theyll be scattered like during 3.5. a huge pita to build with.
>only 1 bestiary. you have to build/adapt most creatures from scratch. no large library of prebuilt enemies.
>small number of adventures.
>terrible vague guidelines for magic items for new characters when someone builds a higher level character.

those are the reasons i prefer pf to 5e.pf has issues, but i currently prefer its issues to 5es issues.

File: 1484474408016.png (86KB, 333x336px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 333x336px

Quote from Pathfinder General:

>>51437301
>I was going to apply with a shota kitsune vigilante shapeshifting/genderbending into a titty monster girl. The girl would be his masked persona. After all, disguising as different gender is something like -2 penalty and kitsune have Realistic Likeness which allows for actual gender cahnge.

This is the Pathfinder community in a nutshell.

>>51448713
yes. even when you cut out the dregs and build to a small tier range, pf still has more flexibility than 5e, due in large part to the number of archetypes and classes.

>>51450256
It's because there's one faggots who keeps making OPs for pfg, and everyone hates him but can't do anything because he keeps making them early.

There was a short time recently when he want around, and they actually had reasonable OPs without anime art. However it seems the anon making good OPs vanished, probably to go to school

Also, you occasionally have a month of Dueling Generals for a while, where weeb OP makes his general, then another anon tells him to duck off and makes a nonweeb one as well

>>51448459
3.5 has myriad of splats, you can include even the most obscure shit without the need to homebrew.

Besides - the best magical realms come from impromptu freeform RP.

>>51449922
in 3.5 druid and cleric are better than wizard.
>>51449863
what. no spidergirls?

>>51448743
>>51449863
Don't forget a Minotaur/Holstaur race!
Gotta touch that cow.

Because some people like it when picking a specific class in a system gives you a clear cut advantage over absolutely everything.

File: cancer.png (720KB, 3082x1550px) Image search: [Google]

720KB, 3082x1550px

>>51450336

File: 1484045442760.png (768KB, 733x1000px) Image search: [Google]

768KB, 733x1000px

>>51450367
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/subject/Pathfinder/

Are you sure about that?

>>51450336
only the weird /tg/ pathfinder community.

if you want something more standard look at the gitp pathfinder community or the enworld one.

>>51450367
i think im the anon you mean who made regular ops.

im not on tg regularly these days. work and life stuff getting in the way.

>>51450418
Considering a good 30% of just that first page wasnt kitsune fetish trash, and I know for a fact I made sone nonanime OPs a few times (usually with the rename of "TRUE Pathfinder General", yeah Im pretty sure.

>>51449726
>The entire class is nullified by a single item, which often causes them to accidentally kill themselves

What?

>>51448459
Dude you are honestly just contrariant as shit. You thread sucks.

>>51450109

>I minmaxed a character, sacrificed 9 points of physical attributes for +2 Int, somehow had a major wondrous item worth almost my entire max net worth according to the DMG, despite the fact that I mainly relied on a spell that costs 1,000 gold to use every time, then literally cheated by using a spell to make tons of an extremely expensive poison in a way that the rules don't allow for. (minor creation does not allow you to manufacture poison)

>therefore, casters are OP

Alright, thanks for sharing.

>>51450248
>waaaaah I don't know how point buy works

>>51450523
>sacrificed 9 points of physical attributes for +2 Int

Well, yes, that is how wizards work. That is the STEREOTYPICAL wizard: a wizened old man with a mastery of all kinds of weird lore (max Int), but who would get blown over by a strong gust of wind (low physical stats) and who is absentminded (low Wis). It's not "minmaxing", it's just playing to type.

>>51450527

Max attribute allowed with point buy is 18, and no core races give bonus Int.
What am I missing here?

>>51450557

Right, he was just minmaxing for "roleplaying" purposes.
lol

I hate 3.5/PF because of all the splat and bullshit 3pp everyone insists on forcing in their games.

I haven't played an actual pathfinder game in years and since it seems it'll never happen unless I gm myself I may as well resign to 5th edition.

>>51450560
>and no core races give bonus Int.
>Elf doesnt exist
3/10 baiting, see me after class

>>51448553
>In addition, 5es lore is very often fuckign terrible, destroying or neutering tons of lore from past editions.
Could you elaborate? Looking through the rulebook, it seems to support taking on elements from practically all the older settings. How does that destroy lore?

Why would you feel the need to preserve the lore of a game where the entire point is to create your own stories and worlds?

>>51450560
>doesn't know that gnomes exist
>and are in the core book

>>51450591

Elf in 3.5 is +2 dex -2 con

>>51450577
Ding ding ding, Stormwind Fallacy strikes again!

>>51450599

Gnomes are +2 Constitution, -2 Strength.

>>51450618
Oh, I thought we were talking 5e.

In 3.5e's case, grey elves have +2 Int. They're in MM rather than PHB, but are are LA +0 and I think it's reasonable to call them 'core'.

>>51450648
There's also the Sun Elves in Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book, Lesser Tiefling from Player's Guide to Faerun, Fire Elves from Unearthed Arcana, Silvanesti and Tinker Gnomes from Dragonlance.

>>51450673
Don't humans get +2 to any one stat?

>>51450332
granted, i could make 5e into a better d&d than pathfinder using houserules , but it would take some real doing.

>>pvp support
>scale monster damage up to be on par with pc damage.
>scale up pc hp based on the difference that makes.

>>character framework
>give additional feat slots which cannot be exchanged for asis.
>add an additional active abilities universal subsystem of some kind that people get in order to diversify the amount of character distinction possible. alternately rewrite every class with this goal in mind.

>>skill math
>heavily rework skill scaling and all skill dcs.

>>degrees of skill
>either bring back some kind of skillpoints or have 3-5 levels of skill proficiency which still scale by level

>>no granularity of bonuses.
>replace or rewrite advantage mechanics for at least 3-5 degrees of advantage and disadvantage.

>>dms guild mystery meat
>basically unsolvable unless people start reviewing it en mass.

>>only 1 bestiary, small number of adventures
>see dms guild.

in the meantime? I'd rather play Pathfinder, but will play 5e if my friends really really want to.

>>51449670
Pretty much, a class intended on creating their own weapons and doesn't even have full BAB.

Psychic Warriors could pretty much fulfill their niche but they actually have powers to make up for thier average BAB. Soulbolts are slightly better but still suffer from the same problems in general.

>>51450692
Not in 3.5.

>>51450517
this anon clearly didnt keep multiple spellbooks and had his only copy taken away from him.

>>51449726
They rely on theoretical arguments that assume half the bullshit Wizards can pull off in theory would even be allowed by a DM.

Like making your own plane so you can speed up time and effectively always have spells prepared or whatever.

>>51449670
Psychic Warrior makes a better soulknife than soulknife once you add the soulbound weapon alternate class feature:

http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20070214a

>>51450706
What about pathfinder?

>>51450560
>>51450605
Core involves Monster Manual which lets you roll a Gray Elf who has +2 Int.

>>51450523
Even if you roll 3d6 or 4d6 or do some retardedly low point buy, a Wizard only needs a single stat to do anything - Intelligence.

It just has to be 11-12 for all he cares if you're starting at level 1. He'll somehow get there, to the top, maybe.

You also get guaranteed spells every so often, and as such, even at level 1, you can pull your weight ridiculously.

A group of Level 1 characters might have trouble against a Level 3 enemy archer Fighter that is positioned atop a hill and is hard to reach. A Wizard is capable of snuffing him out with a Sleep spell. That same level 1 spell is capable of taking down CR6 encounters like a pair of Ogres.

As the game goes on, the Wizard receives more and more utility and is capable of surpassing everyone else in their roles. The sheer amount of scrolls and wands you can carry to supplement your spellslots is ginormous.

You only depend on a single attribute when other classes require good rolls. A Paladin or Monk need all 6 stats, virtually, and have to make amends. A Fighter needs at least 2-3 strong stats. A Wizard can just easily put his highest stat into Intelligence and they are set.

Even at level 1, you are likely to possess an "I win" button for 2 to 3 encounters. And when that runs out, you can still use a Crossbow.

Even shit like "stealing the Wizard's spellbook" can be easily circumferenced by simple spells like Alarm or Rope Trick.

Whichever playstyle you choose, you are, with time, capable into turning into, or summoning yourself a Fighter or dealing with locks and traps just like a Rogue would - Knock, Summon Monster (I) and let the critters facecheck traps, whatever.

>>51450590
If you try to play Core D&D 3.5 only, it doesn't work much either. Latter books introduce a whole lot of classes that are just much better than most of core.

Unarmed Swordsages are much better than Monks, Warblades are the best core martial melee class, Totemist Barbarians are much better than core, etc. The numerous feats and variants like Dungeoncrasher Fighter can somehow elevate shit classes and give them more options and niches,

>>51450742
the line of conversation youre following is about 3.5

File: 1367109010977.jpg (93KB, 312x313px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 312x313px

>>51450109

You didn't break your DM; he did that to himself.

You're outside of reasonable character gen, character wealth, Your signature gimmick doesn't work (Black Lotus leaves are plant matter, Black lotus extract is a poison), and even if it did, your enemy's water supply would return to normal in less than a day.

That's not even getting into your utter misunderstanding of scale believing you have enough contact poison to crop dust an army without a distribution system.

It sounds to me like your DM let you walk all over him, and you're pretending that's impressive.

>>51450597
>Why would you feel the need to preserve the lore of a game where the entire point is to create your own stories and worlds?
lots of people play d&d and want to make new stories in existing worlds. quality lore is useful for that. it was one of the biggest things people hated about 4e. 5e fixed some of 4es lore fuckups but not all of them.

>>51450703
soulknife isnt so bad in pathfinder.

>>51450860
>5e fixed some of 4es lore fuckups but not all of them.
3.5-player here. What did 4e fuck up exactly? I only ever played homebrew settings.

>>51450791
Ogres are only CR 3 each, how are two of them CR 6?

Also aren't a lot of creatures immune to sleep, namely undead, dragons, oozes, constructs, vermin, and elves?

Also it takes an entire round to cast that, so why wouldn't that level 3 archer just one shot you/interrupt your casting? Since the others are having trouble?

I do agree that at some point at higher levels, not having a spell list really sucks. But martial/caster disparity certainty doesn't start at level 1.

>>51448459
Why do 5th edition players constantly shout that their system is the best and all others are interior? If that were true would it not be self evident?

>>51450332

Aren't a few of those problems the result of it being a relatively newer system, namely lack of bestiary and adventure content? Or is the problem that new content is being released too slowly compared to the PF stuff?

>>51450336
>>51450256

I have no idea what the fuck is wrong with the /tg/ PF community. The few times I visit non-4chan communities they seem pretty reasonable and on par with the other /tg/ groups, so somehow /tg/'s general for PF siphoned up most of the cancer into a highly concentrated dose.

>>51450560
>humans in PF can add +2 to ANY attribute
>gnomes
>elves

>>51450523
>(minor creation does not allow you to manufacture poison)
citation needed

I guess you could rule 0 it. Perhaps you *should* rule 0 it because casters are OP. But that proves my point. Minor creation makes plant matter. You cannot use it as a spell component. That's all it says on paizo.

>>51450815
It works a lot better than adding everything and the kitchen sink. That's for sure.

>>51450373
>what. no spidergirls?
There are enough arachnophobes to lower spidergirls a tier.

>>51450918
>Starters
>completely different cosmology, arbitrary changes to what various creatures have for abilities AND what creature types they are, AND how they fit into the multiverse (like succubi as devils and being on the other side in the blood war)

And then they also nuked the forgotten realms, butchering scores of gods, blowing up nations and continents, and dropping new landmasses on top of them.

4e forgotten realms was a flop. almost universally reviled by anyone who liked the setting, and of the people who didn't like the setting, they got very few new fans by trashing it.

5e retcons some of the countries and gods back with little explanation, but theres still a 100 year time gap and tons of interesting but abandoned plot threads from before the 4e timejump.

all the realms fans basically wanted a reset back to 1375 but instead we got 148x, with some 4e stuff ignored and other stuff still there as garbage (for instance halruaa is still blown up)

>>51450975
>>(minor creation does not allow you to manufacture poison)
Technically you could make poison if you had the proper skill to do so, but it would only last an hour for a level four spell slot. That is an awful investment. As you need the item to make the poison and the skill, could be good on a rogue or assassin, but still a waste of a level 4 slot in my opinion.
>You must succeed on an appropriate Craft skill check to make a complex item.

>>51450959
the problem is not newness. 5e has far less published since its been out than either 3.0, 3.5, or PF had in the same time. WotC now has a policy of *not* publishing more character options.

and yeah, /tg/ pf community is fucking weird compared to everywhere else. they generally have a good handle on the rules and a better than average handle on the game design for the system though.

>>51449054
>encourages role over roll-playing

guarantee you this is why people prefer Pathfinder - because they have autism and don't know how to roleplay

>>51451071
>WotC now has a policy of *not* publishing more character options.
So that's why they keep putting out UA.

>>51450975
what people are missing is you describing pathfinder rules in answer to a question specifically about 3.5, without specifying, and they didnt know why your information was so incorrect. while similar they are not the same game.

>>51451073
I know people that role play very well and prefer pathfinder because it has more options, has good crunch, and feels more supported. The ability or lack there of has nothing to do with system.

>>51448459
I'm finding I have a lot more fun building a character in pathfinder, but not really playing it.

>>51451052

The big problem is the exact wording of Minor Creation.

You can create "A" item.

RAW; You just spent a 4th level spell slot for a dose of Black Lotus Extract... if you have black lotus leaves spent as material components.

>>51450983
for 3.5? debatable. you get much better options by going psionics and tob only and banning core classes.

for pf? not at all. in pf your best bet is to include all paizo sources plus all dsp and green ronin sources and then restrict class choices to 2-3 adjacent tiers.

>>51451113
Yeah it is a bad usage of a spell unless you are on the fly poisoning someone and can't risk being caught with the finished product or it would take too long to make, but the way that other anon was trying to use it was dumb.

>>51448459
The different between 3.PF and 5e is thus:

3.PFers want to minmax and "play" the game

While 5ers want to tell a story while playing the game

>>51451086
ua is all largely untested beta material. its also still way slower in publication than all the other editions.

>>51450697
>>>pvp support

PVP is fucking cancer

>>51450854
It was Kingmaker. The module gives you access to a treasury. Our DM added extra consequences, loyalty checks, and political favor pulling when you dip into the treasury. The expense was filed as part of a military espionage operations i.e. the PC strike team. Despite extracanonical obstacles, acquiring sufficient funds and investments to get crafting materials which we personally crafted was quite doable.

If you read my post, we turned the leaves into extract via mundane craft checks. The fact that it would only last a day was a feature, not a bug. Allowed us to use this on military targets without environmental contamination. The territory we thus conquered was in good fertile condition afterwards. Distribution was not difficult. The Druid could shapechange into a small dragon (or something like it- I never got a mechanical breakdown but it was some suboptimal archetype he wanted to play) and was used for air drops- but barrel dropping was only used *after* we had poisoned their mess hall tents and cooking pots, water barrels, grain stores, and the armor of any of the officers we could identify. Funny thing about invisibility- it lasts quite a while unless you attack.

And we only did this mass poisoning once, frankly. Most of our tactics revolved around extremely detailed planned surgical strikes and espionage action. We'd spend 2-3 sessions budgeting how we used each hour in a 2 week prep period doing various rounds of divination to acquire intel on enemy unit count, fortifications, etc. Frankly, we had a grand time as a party.

What got broken wasn't minor creation. It was our excessive abuse of scry and teleport. "Information Control" became a central military doctrine to our Kingdom, and we frequently utilized "no survivors, no messengers" in field skirmishes so we could confound enemy information channels. Most of our targets died in their sleep. Any difficult sentry would be hit with a hold person followed by the rogue cutting their throat.

>>51451185
>caring about the game mechanics makes you bad at rp.
okay there hipster mgee. youre right. lets just burn the books and freeform roleplay since the game doesnt matter!

>>51449726
>in over a decade of using 3.PF
>>51451097
lurk moar

>>51451185
Oh, look, it's the Stormwind Fallacy again!

>>51451038
D&D cosmology is fucking retarded, to begin it. So changing to something with minimal internal consistency is a plus.

And FR is buttfucked every Thursday, don't pretend 4e make its worser, somehow. In reality, i think its make its much better with killing all the per character of the Setting.

Fuck Drizzt, and fuck Elmister, in the ass with a chainsaw.

>>51451111
>has good crunch
>Pathfinder
You know idiots.

>>51451213
>opinions
some of us like our morally grey political games with pcs that have only partially aligned goals and partially conflicting ones, with occasional pvp as a possibility

>>51451052
Not 1 hour anon. 1 hour/level.

>>51451113
>The volume of the item created cannot exceed 1 cubic foot per caster level

Sure, I just make a large volume of leaves. If you really want to fuss about plurality, they're all attached to the same stem.

Its really strange you're all trying to argue that Wizards aren't broken. Like, its ok, you can still play them anon. My group had a lot of fun with tactical strike all-caster party + rogue. But they are broken as fuck. This was settled a decade ago back when we were still arguing about why 4th was shit.

>>51448459
I do not like that 5e wants the game to be magic item starved. I'm not saying there should be epic things available in stores but after a few level ups it'd be nice if you could buy better healing potions since 2d4 +2 really doesn't help out that much after 5th level.

I wish there was an official feat for a form of combat reflexes so you can have more than one reaction. Shield and defensive duelist use your one reaction and they only work for one attack. Once you start fighting monsters with multiple attacks those things become useless. You could homebrew a feat in for that but several DM's hate allowing you to use anything that isn't official a lot of the time.

I hate how stupid somethings about attacks of opportunity are in 5e. Some things are restricted to 5ft while others allow for full reach if you have a polearm while others don't. I particularly hate that moving around you doesn't incur an attack of opportunity. Some insufferable players still think they're being funny instead of dragging out combat for a lame joke when they walk right up to a character and proceed to walk in circles run in circles using both their entire movement and use the dash action.

I wish they would have kept more of the mundane item descriptions they had for D&D next that they didn't include in the PHB. Most new players don't know you can use pitons for wall scaling and bolting doors. Books had an interesting mechanic to help you pass on certain knowledge checks based on the book's contents.

I don't hate 5e but it isn't my favorite edition. The one good thing about it is you can convert older monsters to 5e with little problem.

>>51451282
So you like not making friends at the table?

>>51448944

Two haberdashers. There, I didn't need any rules for that. There are two. They hate each other because of a philosophical difference on what makes a fashionable hat, and because of the political climate and each favoring the native hats of one of the kingdom's border countries, their arguments get heated, each accusing the other of being a traitor trying to spread a foreign culture.

Took me five seconds.

>>51451255
>>51449726
>Why do people think wizards are so great in 3.5?
>in 3.5
>3.5
the question is about 3.5 not pf.

>in over a decade of using 3.PF....
a separate anecdote about 3.pf, both 3.5 and pf. in its own paragraph and everything.

>lurk moar
learn to read. or kill yourself. whichever.

>>51451359
PF is just 3.butthurt edition

>>51451343
Adults are capable of separating in-game and out-of-game. This is how Paranoia and Vampire managed to be successful.

The only reason I'd buy pathfinder over 5e is if I was poor.

Pathfinder has one core book.
5e has three books.

>>51449266

We need a meme for smug non-replies that chastise everyone else for having opinions.

>>51451392
>it depends on the setting :)

>>51451371
Uh, don't get me wrong. I think WoD is a far better system than DnD will ever be no matter how many editions they shit out. But Vampire is fucking FULL of drama. Just absolute assloads of IRL interpersonal teenage bullshit and PvP in particular triggers a lot of this.

Again, I prefer morally gray games and respect PvP as something that should exist. But I do make it clear to my GM/fellow players I *prefer* games where we're all on the same side. Even nearing my 30's, playing a Vampire game with other adults I've known for a decade tested our friendship a bit. It became really clear what they want out of the gaming experience is different from what I want. For one guy at least, it seemed like it was his outlet for sociopathy.

>>51450959
>Aren't a few of those problems the result of it being a relatively newer system

Nigga it has been out for three years. That excuse is long past the time of being acceptable compared to previous editions.

>>51451274
you dont like the d&d settings and dont want to use them fine. but you may as well be arguing that because you dont like trucks other people shouldnt be allowed to buy them.

>dont pretend 4e made fr worse
it did. everyone who liked gaming in that setting didn't buy it.

>i dont like the fr mary sues!
funny how theyre the part of fr that survived the whole clusterfuck entirely unscathed. because the novel fans really like them.

its the people who liked the *setting* who 4e ruined forgotten realms for.

the people i know who play forhotten realms in 5e converteverything theyre going to use from books published before 2008, because everything since has been shit.

>>51451339
So... you don't like 5e because it's got a lower power level than 3.pf?
Whatever. Different strokes for different folks.

>>51451339
>I do not like that 5e wants the game to be magic item starved.
I think you and I have very different ideas about what that means. There are magic item in 5e, and rules for crafting them, for buying them, and for awarding them as the DM sees fit. The default loot system says to give magic items for higher level encounters, and the enemies in the PHB take that into account with resistances to non-magical items. The difference is that being a magic user doesn't automatically give you the ability to pump money and spells into the magic item algorithm, and have whatever magic item you want come out the other side. A player doesn't have a list of the magic items available in their handbook, with market prices right next to them, to suggest they can go right into the magic item shop and buy a Holy Avenger with their loot. It's controlled, and puts the power in the hands of the DM, whose priority is having the game continue to make sense and e balanced, rather than wizard players who want to break the campaign.

>>51451216

If you were turning leaves into extract, how did you handle the timescale?

I could see using fabricate scrolls to store up the necessary charges, but you're looking at exorbitant lead times for any industrial amount of poison.

>>51451328
I'm not arguing that Wizards aren't broken. That's self evident. I'm pointing out that Minor Creation doesn't work that way.

Making leaves for the poison doesn't really help either, because unless you're already at the level necessary for directly casting save or die spells, the crafting time for the individual dose of extract is more than a day.

>>51451475
But that's LOGICAL and REASONABLE! Those two things can't belong in D&D and white room theorycrafting.

>>51451343
i like not every campaign to be 100% coop. variety is nice. and i choose responsible adults to game with. and everyone knows going into a campaign if it's going to be all coop or not.

>>51451505
>But that's LOGICAL and REASONABLE! Those two things can't belong in D&D and white room theorycrafting.
Truly, this is a terrifying new era for D&D.

>>51451509
>Adult
>No capital letters, punctuation is non-existent, sentence structure is poor, and vocabulary is limited.
I sincerely doubt you're an adult.

>>51451363
irrelevant to the post youre responding to, but pathfinder is 3.supported-classes edition and 3.organized-digital-rules edition

>>51451456
Yeah, back in the 80s B/X had already been replaced by then.

>>51451475
That is entirely DM dependent. I have been in some games where shitty DMs Where you get little to no magic items. Several DMs I've played with don't give you the needed downtime to craft or brew items and instead have the party in a near constant state of adventure aside from long and short rests.

It'd be so much nicer if I could just go to a towns shop and buy better healing potions without having to rely on a DM to give them to the party.

>>51451556
Well maybe the potions are fine as-is and you're just gaining a tolerance for them?

File: ghost_pirate__by_kjus-dao41ki.jpg (214KB, 1024x1446px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 1024x1446px

CALL UPON ME, YE MORTALS. I'LL GIVE THAT ACCURSED BARBADOS SLIM THE CURSIN' OF HIS LIFE!

... So I'm actually wanting to test out Deathless Ghost in a game. I'm thinking of allowing it in my own game, but not without seeing how it works first.

>>51451491
>the crafting time for the individual dose of extract is more than a day
But its not anon. The roll tells you how many X are crafted in a week. Take a 40 hour work week. The spell lasts 10 hours. We will allow 2 hours for delivery. 8 hour workday. Divide check by 5. That's how many doses are manufactured in one day. There are three of us doing this (the third was using fabricate actually, which helped manufacture it in mass). You saw how broken my INT was, and stacking craft DCs is essential for magic item crafting and access. So we were adding +25 or more per roll. 10 ranks, 10 INT, 5 miscellaneous bonuses.

As far as I'm concerned, if you're going to play Pathfinder, PLAY pathfinder. If you want a game about roleplaying and not minmaxing, play World of Darkness (which I do. Much more often than I play DnD).

>>51451531
phone posting. the amount of effort it takes to type everything properly on a phone is not worth the payoff.

either i tap onscreen buttons without proper capitalization, or i use swype functionality and my phone randomly substitutes random nonsense words into my text which make the sentence unintelligible.

made this switch after too many people complained they couldnt understand me when my phone substituted words, and getting angey every time i had to fix a word several timesbefore it stopped changing it to something else.

its better than t9, but worse than when i have a phone with a real keyboard.

>>51451531
>underage detected
You know how adults can eat ice cream for breakfast if they feel like it? yeah, that's why we dont' punctuate or capitalize shit we type on 4chan either.

Don't worry, you'll move out of your mom's when you're old enough and then you won't have to type by her rules anymore.

>>51450927

>Also aren't a lot of creatures immune to sleep[...]?

It really does come down to what the DM uses for enemy composition, doesn't it?

>Also it takes an entire round to cast that

Doesn't a full round cast just mean you have to use both your move and standard, and the spell still takes effect at the end of your turn? Or is that a change between 3.5 and PF that I don't recall properly?

>>51451071

> 5e has far less published since its been out than either 3.0, 3.5, or PF had in the same time.

Okay, I figured it was rate of content and not absolute quantity of content.

>>51451456

>3 years

Jesus has it really been that long?

>>51451571
After 10th level a lot of the enemies do so much damage even the barbarian who has resistance can have trouble tanking damage for the party if they don't have a decent healer. Using your action to give the tank 2d4 + 2 HP when the enemy deal over 50 or 60 damage each round isn't very helpful.

It's fine for low level games but they're almost useless in later level.

>>51451556
>It'd be so much nicer if I could just go to a towns shop and buy better healing potions
It's fully within a DM's power to make better potions available for sale, as the DMG says, "Magic items are the DM's purview, so you decide how they fall into the party's possession." The most important thing is consistency. If a DM decides to not have magic items in their campaign, they should run the game accordingly, and not have enemies with magic item resistance, and most likely have extra societal barriers for magic users, given the campaign's low-magic feel.

>>51451623
>>3 years
>Jesus has it really been that long?

Yes it has. It's fucking infuriating that they have so few books besides full scale adventures.

>>51451630
Yeah healing in combat is almost always a wrong option. The cleric should spend his action shutting down enemy DPS, either by control spells or buffing someone who can kill it. With regards to using potions, you're almost always better off throwing more dakka at the foe.

Heal out of combat. Healing in combat is converting enemy damage into enemy stun locking your turns.

>>51451640
>It's fully within a DM's power to make better potions available for sale, as the DMG says, "Magic items are the DM's purview, so you decide how they fall into the party's possession."

Like I said before. It's completely DM dependent. If you have a shit DM that hoards his potions like this guy. You have to pigeon hole the cleric into being full healer. If they were already available in the mundane items list you wouldn't have to rely on the DM making them available and just have enough gold to buy them.

>>51451602
>Play World of Darkness
Nope. Never again.

That's an awful ruleset with a mediocre setting for gaming (owod).
Or, a mediocre ruleset with a shitty setting for gaming (nwod).
And it's not like you can get just rules without the setting. You'd have to implement tons of houserules to replace all the discarded splats with something unified that can build whatever you need, or accept that it's only good for all-human settings.

No thanks, I'll pass.

>>51451641
This, I know they are avoiding the absurd amounts of splatbooks from 3.5 but I would prefer something over nothing.

>>51451652
With that being said there are a lot of times when you have to heal in battle or else you get TPKed.

>>51451658
Agreed, it is a system reliant on a good DM, because of the amount of power it puts in their hands.

File: potion seller.jpg (5KB, 230x220px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 230x220px

>>51451658
Fuck forgot image

>>51448681
This.

>>51451652
Correct

>>51451705
Another reason someone could prefer Pathfinder.
5e with a mediocre GM and experienced players can easily be a clusterfuck, whereas in PF with a mediocre GM and experienced players, the players can keep the game going with their own knowledge of the game's rules because it has more thorough guidelines and rules.

>>51451652
>>51451726
>>51451733
Yaw'll niggas never been in a campaign where the DM believes he has to beat the players for him to have fun or boost his ego.

>>51448854
If your 3.5 Cleric or Druid is casting any kind of cure spell in combat, then they are objectively shit at 3.5. It's so far and away better to have them CODZilla it up while the extra bodies (fighters, rangers, paladins) use wands or potions to stay alive it's not even a real choice.

>>51451762
I don't understand how that's supposed to related to healing in combat being suboptimal.

File: cave.png (676KB, 693x720px) Image search: [Google]

676KB, 693x720px

>>51448459
3.pf is a very insular community. The people who are willing to try new things left for greener pastures.
It's also where *a lot* of people got into RP. For many of those people it's not just their groundwork for understanding RP, but also their "idealized form" of an RPG.

>>51451783
>opinions

Citation needed.

I got into RPGs with 2e AD&D videogames, then Vampire revised.

Played 3.0 for a few years.

Spent 2008-Now trying out a new system every 6 months, and playing multiple campaigns at the same time.

Played a 4e campaign, was unimpressed. Played a 5e campaign, it was like d&d balanced around the more boring parts of 3.x, which are now even more boring than before.

Pathfinder and Shadowrun are two games we keep coming back to (deapite their problems), as I amass a growing list of systems I either hated, or see as an inferior version of some other game and skip on those grounds.

Other non d&d games I enjoyed include Edge of the Empire, Rolemaster (except for levelup which is a bitch), Unisystem, GURPS, Runequest 6, Call of Cthulhu, and oneshots of Maid.

>>51451775
Enemies are balanced against the party, often dealing massive damage compared to player output, so every encounter is deadly or worse. It's not rocks fall you die but if you honestly try to continue the battle without healing you and your entire party get TPKed.

File: oh wait, you're serious.gif (1MB, 288x198px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 288x198px

>>51451758
>Agreed, it is a system reliant on a good DM
>Another reason someone could prefer Pathfinder.
Nigga, the default magic item system put in the DMG of 5e is fine and requires a specifically over-ambitious and bad DM to fuck it up, while the default magic item crafting and selling in Pathfinder's central book the players are reliant on is absolutely broken as is, and requires a proactive and talented DM to keep players in check at all.

>>51452052
That comment was regarding more than the magic items. Though the guidelines for "how much should pcs have in magic items if the campaign is atarting at level 8" or "how much magic gear should a replacement pc at various levels have" are rather shit, there's also vague enough DC guidelines that DCs will vary wildly from GM to GM and if you have a mediocre or shitty GM, from check to check.

>>51448459
>Can't you just magical realm in the new edition?

Does the new edition allow me to manipulate my body so I can use it as a full on weapon? Shooting bones out of my finger tips? Enchant said bone shots with fire, ice, lightning? Can I grow gills? Can I create a benign cyst on my party members and I that lets us communicate telepathically? Can I grow extra arms? Can I freely change my face, scar tissue, and voice to get bonuses to disguise? Can I regenerate at an accelerated rate? Can I become a walking embodiment of adaptation?

If no, I'll stick to 3.5/PF. 5th edition might be a functional, even fun system for those who use it, but if it doesn't let me accomplish the character ideas I want then I'll use another system. Simple as that. Besides it's not like a new system or edition coming out invalidates the others. They still exist, they still have books, they can still be run.

On top of the fact, personal experience here, I've yet to meet a single DM (out of 12) capable of creating their own classes/subclasses/archetypes/specialization that let me create the kinds of characters I like in a relatively balanced fashion. A DM might be good at storytelling, world building, etc etc but that rarely means they have a good sense of building something based in mechanics like a class. If you have, excellent, I've not been so lucky.

>>51451909
I recall saying more than once "Why do I have to justify every little thing in the rules? There's no roleplaying in this alleged ROLE. PLAYING. GAME." during 3e's lifespan, death throes, and post-mortem autobiography.

>>51452108
The rules are thorough to protect players from shitty GMs.

>>51452108
What does "you have to make up the rules to fill in gaps, a lot" have to do with roleplaying?

>>51448459
If I wanted to play a D&D different than 3.5, I'd play 4e.

...or B/X.

...or AD&D First Edition.

...or fuck it, the original three little books.

5e provides nothing those other editions don't already provide.

>>51452379
...you know what, fuck it. Imma play Runequest.

>>51452392
>Lindybeige detected

File: 110% Magical Realm.png (116KB, 500x463px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 500x463px

>>51448504
>Although some argue that's a good thing.

Yeah, this is the majority of 5e players. Keep the weeaboos and waifufags in their containment game and out of ours please.

>>51451603
If you can't type like a fucking human, don't bother.

>>51448459
Shh let them be. We don't want them shitting up 5e.

>>51451602

You misunderstand me.

I'm not talking about making the poison. Minor creation can make black lotus leaves, which can be processed into poison.

This poison is perfectly useable, until CL hours later, when it disappears.

You aren't telling me your GM let you dupe Black Lotus leaves, then process them into poison and keep the poison after the spell expired?

>>51452735
No. We used the poison before it expired. As I said, 1minute of duping, 8 hours of crafting, 2 hours of deployment operations. Massive CON damage transpires mere rounds after contact.

>>51452718
Eh. Phone posting sucks in general. Unless it gets as easy as using a keyboard, I'm just going to let it slide so long as its intelligible.

>>51452015
Enemies do massive damage compared to any healing that could be done. When you spend your turn healing someone that's a turn your character is not defeating an enemy, extending the lifespan the said enemies that much more to continue dealing the hurt. If you have the the choice between taking 11 damage and hitting back for 5 or taking 11 damage and healing 10 of it, you swing for 5 because otherwise you are going to lose later rather than win sooner.

>>51448459
I can magical realm and waifu anything, but here's a thought.

Why SHOULD I play 5e? None of this 'this tg community this' or 'toxic behavior that'. Why should I play 5e over 3.5 and PF? Sell it to me, because I am genuinely curious and nothing I've seen of the system myself has really caught my eye.

>>51448459
Prestige Classes, duh. Dunno why there's 183 replies over this. Prestige Classes.

>>51448459
She looks like she needs a hug

>>51453153
Tight enough to make it hurt.

>>51452776

Something about the math bugs me, but with an appropriate pipeline, I concede it could be quite possible.

>>51452193
Literally everything.

>>51452957
As someone who has played both, here are the selling points of 5e as I see them:

>Less of a learning curve if you want to get someone new playing the game.
>If you lack a gaming group it may be easier to find a local 5e group.
>its easier to build monsters for.
>closer balance between its crappiest classes and it's strongest classes.

>>51453200
How? What does having more rigid rules have to do with role-playing? These things are not related.

>>51453200
>>>51452193
>Literally everything.
Funny. I thought roleplaying was when I played my character, not when I handwaived the rules for how physics and magic work in the world because they're not spelled out in the book. Good to know I had those reversed.

>>51452193
For a more elaborate response, I'd say that it's not so much about roleplaying as it is about keeping your head active. For example, let's say I'm a wizard and there is a hostile NPC in some water. So I ask the DM if I can freeze the water with Frostbite. Assuming he says yes, we would then have to determine that the NPC is restricted and must make an athletics check of DM-interpreted difficulty to escape. Another example might be a Barbarian making a perception check to notice a weak point on an opponent's armor and gaining advantage on their attack role by targeting it. These are really lightweight and simple, but I would imagine this makes up most decent combat in 5e.

Memorizing an absurd amount of rules and then sifting through a book to find details about every situation is part of what makes FATAL so terrible. At the same time, it's not like needlessly vague or absent rules are good things either, which Dungeon World and World of Darkness can be used as examples of in places. Constantly referencing texts or just memorizing things for particular situations is damn mind-numbing.

Basically, the amount of rules should only be proportional to how much the players can interpret for unique situations according to their inherent purposes. More rules isn't necessarily a good thing when it takes that away from players. As a good system would be a framework for players and their GM to improvise a story together as opposed to go down a railroaded pre-written campaign, the same could be done on a mechanical level. It's the biggest advantage pnp has over video games.

>>51453491
>too many rules
I mean sure, grappling is overcomplicated, and unconventional uses of abilities require gm rulings. I'd prefer if there were some blanket rules about how elemental effects interact with the environment though, and that's something that d&d has always lacked.

But I'll take dc benchmarks with many examples, over vague dc categories that will lead to inconsistent and bad gm rulings, every day of the week.

Id rather have overcomplicated rules to missing core mechanics.

>>51453235
"Did you hear that the Duke whisper whisper..."
"DM I went all over the place spreading a rumor that the Duke is a woman beater and a rapist, why is NOBODY even talking about it?"
"UMMMMMMMM YOU DONT HAVE THE FEAT FOR THAT UMMMM UMMMMM UMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM"

This is your brain on 3.butthurt edition

>>51448459
I can't get a +40 on a skill check in 5e

...can I?

I tried getting into 5ed but the fact that rangers pretty much got fucked the hell over, warlocks had their EE turned into a catrip, and a lot of classes have "you're kind of meaningless until level 3" written all over their page, and you need UAs to have any fun made me really not care much for the system

Still playing a Seeker Warlock in a 5ed game tho

>>51453719
Skill proficiency is binary now. either you have it or you don't. Your skill modifier is Stat Bonus + Proficiency bonus, which is a number that increases by character level at a static rate, starting at +2, ending at +6.

Rogues and bards get an ability that lets them double their proficiency bonus in any skill.

The max you can usually get in a stat is 20, which is the soft limit, but there's a hard limit(through use of magic items) of 30. So, normally the highest you could go at level 20 is Roll +12 + 5, so +17, or a max roll of 37. However, with the hard cap, this could go up to Roll + 12 + 10, for an absolute total of 44. Plus magic items, which could probably bump you up to 50-ish.

>>51453876
Most DM's have made the switch to the lates Ranger UA, which makes it balanced, fun, and really feel like a good ranger. It's especially powerful in exploration or navigation campaigns, such as seafaring, but it's still relevant as a combatant.

>>51453960
I learned about the UAs later after I was trying to build a ranger an arena game. The fact that this piece of shit was allowed into the phb is shocking

>>51450557
No. You don't get the age adjustments to stats for new characters.

>>51448459
What's the point of 5th Edition when Pathfinder exists?

File: 1475282387693.jpg (191KB, 640x633px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 640x633px

>>51454234
What's the point of living this existential crisis shitposting on /tg/ when suicide exists?

>>51454006
You do in pathfinder unless the dm houserules otherwise

>>51454316
>I don't know how the rules work

According to the game mechanics all new player characters start at young (adult) age.

Older age categories are present to illustrate the effects of aging and they are not intended to be an option for new pcs. There are no options for randomly generating characters of older age so its illogical to assume that you may choose what you may not normally generate from a dice roll.

Choosing your age is an alternative to dice rolling and the dice rolling is strict in what age category a newly created character starts, so you may choose what you might normally get from a dice roll strictly speaking because it doesn't matter that much really.

>>51454490
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/alignment-description/description#TOC-Age

Nowhere is that stated, or implied. In fact it says otherwise.

>>51454490
>>51454506
>You can choose or randomly generate your character's age. If you choose it, it must be at least the minimum age for the character's race and class. Alternatively, roll the dice indicated for your class onTable: Random Starting Agesand add the result to the minimum age of adulthood for your race to determine how old your character is.

I dunno to me,
>You can choose or randomly generate your character's age
Means
>You can choose or randomly generate your character's age

Nothing in there restricts it to a particular age category. If i want to make a venerable wizard, i can. Ill die the first time i get hit because my hp are so low, but i can do it if i want to.

>>51454506
>>51454589
>Consult your GM before making a character that does not conform to these statistics.

Also the GM has to roll a maximum age which he doesn't tell you about. You could very well have one year to live.

>>51454506
The rules also don't say you can't just choose your hit points, either.

>>51454610
Yeah, i know about the maximum age.

That's one interpretation of it, I suppose.

I read that as: if you want really out there things like a human who does not conform to these statistics (such as age categories) but ages like an elf instead (for whatever reason), consult your gm.

>>51454647
But unlike hp, the rules explicitly say you can choose your age, and
>>51454610 can be interpreted in more than one way.

>>51449726
in my last campaign a druid player basicaly soloed the second to last boss. Around level 18 and the boss had 30d6 AoE attacks acted 3 times per round and was in a Silence zone where most spells couldn't be cast.

And the druid player was severly nerfed by the DM.

>>51448459
We don't want to shit up the good edition, because that'd scare away the newbies.

>>51448459

maybe a noob question, but sauce on the animu in OP's pic pls

>>51455189
Overlord
Girl you see is not a main character, that honor goes to a lich. She is supposedly a Hero Killer that underestimates her enemy, the main character in a full plate disguise, and gets their shit pushed in

>>51455247
Liches give the best hugs

>>51452957
played 1 campaign in 3.5 and one in 5 with different groups
Pros of 5e
>Easier to make characters, I didn't spedn two days full of discussion on which order I have to take those 4 prestige class to be more optimizied, which vestiges to evoke and whihc feats combos are best. And was anyway left with the rest of the party disapointed in my weak character.

>Stuff scales slower. And magical items are rarer. You didn0t get an amazing magic sword at the end of the dungeon and 7 sessions latter sold it cause you can get a better one at the market. Also in 3.5 we constatly forgot which magic items we had with us cause they were just too many.

>death mechanics is better. the -10 pf gets useless pretty fast. Granted at that point you have someone with ressurection but It still annoys me.

>>51449670
Really, of you ever want to Soulknife, use the third party Pathfinder variant.

>>51448459
Some of us like our games to last beyond 20th level. Some of us like games that have other aspects than the bounded accuracy will allow for, like mythic, occult, horror, and technology.

But mostly, some people are smart enough to be beyond the idea that "fair" play is the only play that matters. Stories can be made just fine without the specter of 'EVERYTHING MUST BALANCE" and "YOU ARE HAVING BADWRONGFUN".

The lack of options 5e has is really what makes me prefer Pathfinder above 5e. I made one fighter. Great. That character was pretty fun. I tried making a second Fighter... and found that it ended up pretty much the same as the first one, because most other options were worse or non-existant. Many of the classes have ability trees where one is passable to good while the other two are either bad or cannot compare. (Rogue gets, what. Assassin? The other two are just downright bad). With sorcerers, I hope you want to be a Fire Mage, because there's a mediocre amount of spells of the different elements, making the other sorcerer draconic colours downright bad by comparison to fire.

Of course, one can Homebrew in solutions, but so can you in any system. Homebrew the rules to be lighter, homebrew more options. But most groups I have seen scowls hard on homebrew by instinct.

If you want to make a powerful fighter, you are pretty much shoehorned into one build or you'll end up much worse than the other options. Same goes for a few of the other classes, too. And the Ranger got shot in the nuts, so that option fell out pretty hard.

I gotta give kudos to 5e for actually making Fighters actually -good- by comparison to other classes, though.

>>51448642
>And everything 5E does do has half or less paperwork.

That's because it does half as much, dumbfuck.

I do agree with you though, and this >>51448681 in that the 5e basic model is far more robust and that 5e has a lot of good structure. But it also throws out a ton of mechanics because they are "unfun" which is such a subjective buzzword it has no merit.

>>51448906
>If I play Fighters, and I notice that in 3.5 my role is irrelevant

Your Dungeon Master is terrible at designing encounters.

>>51458363
It does more.

>>51458386
What if it's the same DM for both games?

>>51449336
>OP is clearly referencing the fact that you can still walk into a gamestore, pull out 5E and try to get a pickup and have trilby wearing lumps of moldy ham sneer at you for not playing with them and their GURPS level of supplements for PF.

I don't think that was clear to anybody except you.

>>51450736
>Like making your own plane so you can speed up time and effectively always have spells prepared or whatever.

But if a player did that I wouldn't even complain about them being OP.

>>51458388
Like what?

>>51458526
Pick any one class. Look at how it works in 5e compared to 3.PF. Look at any one race, notice that it contains variants (and is therefore extensible to other settings etc). Look at the background mechanics, of which there aren't even an equivalent in 3.PF.

>>51458559
> 3.5
> loads of feats, even if most are shit you still have more options than 5e
> tons of alternate class features in the different splats
> can build three different kinds of fire mage and they will be different
> 5e
> pick from one of three archetypes
> you can get feats if you want to nerf your character, oh yeah and the feats are boring as shit

Racial variants are retarded, too. I want to play an elf, why does that suddenly need to be more complicated? Just say "you get +2 Dex as an elf, and pick +1 to Int or Wisdom" don't make me split up wood elves and sun elves in my worldbuilding you fucking faggot.

> Look at the background mechanics, of which there aren't even an equivalent in 3.PF.

Because there didn't need to be. People who cared about that just picked skills related to their background. And yes, people did do that quite a lot, I'm sorry if the games you were in were all sperglord powergamers who wanted nothing but COMBAT COMBAT COMBAT but I had fun playing a trapper ranger who fortified the party's woodland hideout with traps and traded his crafted bows with the nearby forest gnome tribes during downtime.

>>51458754
3.5 has more stuff, but each thing does less.

>can build three different kinds of fire mage and they will be different
Yeah, wizards can do more in 3.5. They're the exception to the general rule, though that's a problem for other reasons.

>oh yeah and the feats are boring as shit
They're generally better than 3.5 ones. Unless you're comparing to the 3.5 cream of the crop, feats are more interesting and mechanically stronger in 5e.

>don't make me split up wood elves and sun elves in my worldbuilding you fucking faggot.
I have a feeling you maybe don't know how settings work. Or roleplaying in general.

>>51458559
The only things that make 5e good are the proficiency putting all the class-related bonuses on one metric instead of having 3/4ths level for base attack and 1/2 level + 2 for saves and 1/3rd level for bad saves and all that other shit. It also cleaned out a lot of the unnecessary rules, and added Dex damage to bows.

In return it dumbed down the game, fetishized bounded accuracy to the point that a 20th level character can barely do more than a 1st level character skill-wise, and made it so a Strength 8 Dex 15 kobold does the same damage with a dagger as a Strength 15 Dex 8 human. With zero feats applied. Because everyone inherently knows how to substitute Dex for Strength.

5e created just as many problems as it fixed. I play both and both games suck, but at least 3.5 isn't boring.

>>51458830
You can build different kinds of fighter in 3.5, too, dumbass. It was just an example.

> feats are more interesting and mechanically stronger in 5e.

No, they really aren't. They are mostly "you get advantage on this" and "you don't get disadvantage on that." Oh, some of the feats are so boring they actually have to give you bonuses to ability scores because of how much they suck ass! Or they give you proficiency with new weapons, like that was ever any fun.

> I have a feeling you maybe don't know how settings work. Or roleplaying in general.

I do, since my roleplaying goes beyond which exact flavor of elf I am currently playing.

>>51448459
I still don't have to stop playign at level 21. Or level 24. Yeah, it takes a modicum of basic math skills to homebrew continuance, but the rules are outlined in the core book.

PF just has more options and more interesting possibilities. 5e does not. It's that simple.

>>51458841
>dumbed down the game
Pretty hard to get dumber than 3.PF to be honest. It simplified parts of the game, but that's not the same thing.

>20th level character can barely do more than a 1st level character skill-wise
Not actually true. 5e is built for lower fantasy than 3.PF ended up being (although this was probably an accident with 3.5, since only some classes have the higher power level) but this is vastly overstating the case.

>You can build different kinds of fighter in 3.5, too
Not very different. Definitely not more different than 5e. You have fighters that full attack, fighters that full attack or use a gimmick, and tome of battle fighters which play more or less like 4e.

>since my roleplaying goes beyond which exact flavor of elf I am currently playing.
Apparently it doesn't go even that far, though, since you have no concept of the notion that the numerical/mechanical aspects should be aligned to fluff, or that things can be changed.

>>51448642
>satisfaction comes from the idea that more options and biggers numbers means better gameplay.
not true for me at all. I enjoy making pathfinder characters and will sit and do it for hours, for an upcoming campaign I'll roll up 3-4 characters and see which one I like the best because making characters is fun to me.
I definitely don't get the same feeling from the rules in 5e. of course you can still make your character interesting and different by the non-rules things you include, but that's what I love about so many options in the rules. pathfinder rules give me inspiration for characters, something that rarely if ever could occur in 5e

>>51458841
>but at least 3.5 isn't boring.
This.

I DMed a E6 game and at level 6 even without additional feats it was more fun than I ever had with 5e at level 15. I have helped to create two characters so that they would work as players outlined in their concepts and 3 others were pretty experienced so they didn't need any help.

Things like warlord jumping on his enemy over 20 feet and cutting him in half or factotum scaring almost two dozens of bandits shitless. A little crazy stealth modifiers with the swift hunter and so on. Characters were heroes of their own story and could bend people around to their will. If said people were not say vampires or some other nasty monster - then things were becoming really interesting.

>>51459020
not that anon, but that just makes them different kind of games. you can still have a fun and interesting game without doing all that cool shit, it's just about a different mindset

>>51459038
So why do I need to get 5e if I can do same kinds of games in 3.5 by just giving players NPC classes ?

>>51459073
I don't know how the power shakes out, but 5e is probably somewhere in between those two right? and even if it's not it's simpler, if you can do the same thing with simpler rules isn't that better?

better of course I mean for that type of game

File: file.png (488KB, 470x600px) Image search: [Google]

488KB, 470x600px

>>51459073
Is that really the best you can do?

>>51459112
>better of course I mean for that type of game
And that is why PF won't die. There are in fact games it is good for, and not all the BADWRONGFUN screams in the world can change that.

Idiots like OP just can't understand that.

>>51459112
Thing is for 3.5 I have at least 5 bestiaries, unknown number of homebrews, insane number of adventures to steal ideas, NPCs and so on. And all this on the same mechanics which means that I can mix and match different power levels even in one game if I want to.

Hell, the CR 1-3 monsters alone enough to do a dozen adventures about dealing with them.

Why do I need to take a new system that also feels bland and boring even when character supposedly are in prime of their power?

>>51459161
ok so maybe you don't, but assuming equal knowledge of both it's probably easier to do in 5e.

you can run pretty much any type of game in any system, but certain systems lend themselves much better to certain types of games.

>>51459140
Frankly I didn't feel like 5e gives enough to consider using it on a regular basis.

If I'll need to chose between d20 systems I'll take Mutants and Masterminds.

>>51459206
Better. Would be better still if you added some detail that feels like it's supposed to be specific but is too vague to properly address, but "non-D&D systems are better" is at least a reasonable enough viewpoint to be credible.

>>51459204
It's easier to do low fantasy in 5e yes. Maybe you can even pull gritty fantasy in it though 3.5 can have pretty steep rocket tag that works on that theme.

But something more high-powered doesn't work very good.

>>51450591
It's been a while but I thought humans let you drop +2 in any stat?

>>51459270
that's my point, that they both have their place and some might consider one boring over the other, but other people will want what it brings to the table

>>51459232
The problem is I can't just put my finger on one detail in 5e and say "Here. This is the Big Problem". Because there is no such point.

"It just works" (c)

It really works. In most cases even as intended and actually much better balanced than 3.5. But it feels bland and uninspired.

>>51459307
Well it's not supposed to be a big inspiration. It's supposed to be a broadly useful fantasy system.

>>51450918
Power blandness, tactical boardgame, and being different from prior materials.

I enjoyed it a great deal personally but it a day dm who households quite a bigness me straightness PC nev teen mechanics.

File: 1483134427203.jpg (53KB, 500x541px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x541px

I only played 3.5 in the years when I played, so I'm not familiar with other systems.
Some friends want me to dm a campaign for them, and none of them have played before.
Should I switch to 5.0? I'm not familiar with it at all but is it more user friendly for my newfag friends?

5e is just 3.x but without anything that made 3.x fun.

>>51459390
Yep. For most new players it will be better.

>>51459390
it's definitely a lot easier to understand. I have a friend who avoided 3.5 and pathfinder like the plague who now runs 5e campaigns

>>51459390
4e and 5e are far better than 3e by the virtue of the fact that building a bad character takes active, willful, purposeful effort.

>>51459407
>>51459408
>>51459411
Well maybe I'll look into buying some new sourcebooks then. It's a shame, I've got all the books and splatbooks but I know 3e is super unintuitive and broken.

The thing that kills me about 3.pf is the fact that they expect every character to have access to a set of at least 6 magic items that scale up with the threats for the math to work. Who the fuck would ever want to put up with that?

>>51459595
What would you rather?

>>51450519
>butthurt: the post

How far /tg/ has fallen.

>>51459467
Can I get pdfs of the 5e source books? Me and my party are broke as shit, so buying whole new books for 5 people isn't really feasible.

>>51450332

Bad grammar and autism are the hallmarks of a pathfagger.

>>51459020
You can do this and all other kinds of stuff in 5e as well. It's not in the rules because the design philosophy is that it's a dumb idea to have it in the rules. Rumormonger is the classic example, but there are many others, since any rule you add takes away freedom from the DM and the player.

File: 1385870506951.gif (1MB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 400x225px

>>51452822
>He thinks every DM balances his encounters properly.

Lol. Whatever you say babbo.

>>51459920
Basically, codifying certain actions in feats and abilities doesn't mean that you specialize in that action, it just means that nobody else can do that action at all anymore.

A character becomes this fine-tuned engine purpose-built for a handful of combat actions instead of a living person engaged in wild battle. The 3.5 feat system turns combat into a puzzle game where you have to plan your moves weeks ahead.

>>51459823
There's a MEGA link in the /5eg/ OP

File: consider the following.jpg (25KB, 569x428px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 569x428px

>>51448459
transferring between editions (save 3.0, 3.5, and pathfinder due to them being all under the same skeleton) is usually a pain in the arse math wise (unless martial, then still a pain but less math)

As for why play a edition when newer editions exist, it comes down to what people enjoy/how they came into the game.

Me personally I got in too DnD late in 3.5's life so when 4th came out i had felt spurned (not to harp on 4th hard, I will admit that 4th is a good introductory to a table top rpg with how simple running it is compared to other systems), and then pathfinder came out as 3.75 basically and I fell in love with it and it's one of the few systems i legitimately enjoy both playing and running.

Now if someone I knew invited me to play 5th, I'd join no problem. I'd never run it simply because I wouldn't have the same drive to put effort into it compared to other games I love. (OWoD, 3.5/PF, Shadowrun, and RIFTS)

File: 1474141738459.jpg (168KB, 1033x679px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1033x679px

>>51459986
Thanks homie.

>>51448553
>satisfies a certain level of crunch
You mean satisfies your autism for rolling dice, doing math, and arguing about rules

>5e lore is fuckign terrible
Which means nothing, one because what do *you* even mean by that and two, it's fucking DnD the lore is what you make it, eat shit.

>the rules are also shit
Says everyone who hasn't bothered to read the rule books.

>its al incredibly bland and boring
Says everyone hasn't bothered to read the rules books, use the UA, or use the SRD/OGL products.

Congrats, you're literally identical to everyone who talks shit on 5e. You're actually just a meme.

>>51459786
I'd rather have it done like 5e where specific magic items aren't a necessity to be competent.

>>51459270
But I've already got several low magic and gritty fantasy systems.

5e is a poor substitute for what I use Pathfinder for, and also poor substitute for what I use RQ6/GURPS/Unisystem/Conan for.

I have considered trying HERO as a possible Pathfinder replacement, but so far nothing else does a good job taking it's place.

>>51459276
Dude answered a question about 3.5 with a bunch of Pathfinder information without specifying, got several responses from 3.5 players saying his facts were wrong, conversation ended when it was clear he was talking about Pathfinder instead of 3.5.

>>51459354
Dude was asking what 4e fucked up about the *lore* but yes, it was also a very different sort of game.

>>51460092
Fair complaint. One of the worst parts of 3.x

>>51460028
Not that guy, but:

>It's D&D the lore is what you make it, eat shit.

Lots of people like playing published settings. 4e butchered a couple of them, one in particular - 5e did a half-assed job "fixing" the damage and offers nothing new of value for the setting.

Additionally, sometimes people get annoyed if your "lore fixes" require changing core mechanics. Like if you're playing 4e, and you say: "Nope, Eladrin are CG outsiders who serve the gods, and sun/moon elves can't teleport. Also elves are affected by magic as humanoids not fey. Player race unavailable. You can choose high elf instead, its as close as you're going to get.

>>51459920
At some point in 5E I need to throw enemies about 10 levels lower than characters for them to be able to feel somewhat cool while cutting through them all. And even then characters have a chance to die pretty fast due to bounded accuracy.

And if I want a more freeform game I can use WEG d6 that even has spell construction. And does low fantasy better than 5E with more unified mechanics and with basic rules that can be explained in 10 pages tops.

>>51459974
>The 3.5 feat system turns combat into a puzzle game where you have to plan your moves weeks ahead.
At least you don't need to do it like real fighters. Who plan their moves years before they may need to use them.

>>51460093
Yeah, actually Mongoose Conan d20 is a pretty nice system variant.

Why is half of this thread a single Pathfinderfag who doesn't capitalize or back up his points?

>>51451603
>>51451621

This is what happens when reddit comes here. 4chan is a website for literate people. Type properly or don't type at all. For the record, I'm typing this from my Android phone, and it is indeed worth the "payoff" to type properly out of respect for the other residents of this board. Type like a child, get dismissed like a child, those are the breaks.

>>51448459
Do I get to play a Warblade instead of a shitty knockoff? No? Fuck off.

>>51451603
>phone posting
Don't do this.

Also, phones should capitalize for you correctly anyway, since they're made for stupid people in the first place.

>>51461174
What is there to back up, it's an opinion thread.

He listed reasons he prefers Pathfinder.

It was a decent, albeit nonexhaustive list.

>>51451623
A full round cast time has literally always meant that it takes your entire turn and the effect happens at the beginning of your next turn. Even in 3.5

>>51448553
>It's also incredibly fucking bland and boring.
>So is 3.PF's what is your point?

I don't know, you end up with an interesting game-driven-world if you ban T1 and T2 classes, a world of crystal-clad psychics, practitioners of strange martial disciplines, etc.

>>51451038
>like succubi as devils
That was changed because it made fucking sense. Succubie are sneaky shapeshifters that seduce and manipulate their victims; they never really fit in with the Demons on team "Chaotic Evil, Destroy Fucking Everything!". Likewise the Erinyes, as beings of pure violent fury, didn't really have a place among the Devils with "Team Evil Lawyers". Each played against their faction's shtick, for no evident reason except "even among evil outsiders, bitches be crazy".

>>51448459
Truth be told, I think we just let the PF guys think their system is better so the OP's and content of /5eg/ don't become shitty degeneracy. Also Kitsune are the most Shit waifus.

>>51452172
Protecting yourself from shitty DMs is trivial. Play with someone else.
That's not even an RPG thing, it's common sense not to play with people who'd piss on the pie.

>>51465456
>The number of GMs in an area is not limited and you never have to settle for one who is anything less than perfect.
No kidding!

>>51451038
I liked it just because I think FR is a cancer on the Franchise, and needed to be destroyed.

>>51448459
5e has nowhere near the amount of options as 3.PF has
5e has nowhere near the amount of sinergies between abilities as 3.PF has

It's way more balanced and simplier though

>>51465795
So, you just wanted other people to not be able to buy things you don't buy yourself?

You realize only a cunt does that, right?

>Not playing Fantasy Craft

>>51466284
>not playing Legend
Do you not want to be Jackie Chan?

3PF specifically came about because of butthurt and its creators made a business out of butthurt.
Its players have made butthurt into their gaming culture.

>>51448459

Not enough content yet. It's Civ VI vs. Civ V: VI is the better game, but V has so much content packs and mods that there's more meat to keep you satisfied where you'll quickly exhaust all the options of VI if you play it seriously.

>>51448504
I really want to get into 5E but this is keeping me out. I mean, not the waifu options, just that I look at the spread in front of me and I wonder to myself how many games it'd take before I got bored. It really feels like every character within an archetype is going to be the same as every other, and in a lot of cases, the same as characters of different archetypes in the same class.

I appreciate the idea behind increasing feat impact and limiting them, tying them to classes instead of making it baseline, but the execution has me worried. I still haven't played a real game yet so maybe my concern is completely unfounded. I wish they'd release supplements at a faster rate so I could browse over them.

>>51469879
You know they release a few new class archetypes, races or spells every month? Sometimes a whole new class?

>>51469912
I'm interested, tell me more.

I'm vaguely aware of Unearthed Arcana existing but I've only looked into their printed supplements, and as far as I know those are a fairly uncommon release. Should Arcana be something I'm keeping up with? I thought they were just playtest rules not suited for a real game.

>>51469879
And you also realize all of the 5e classes work as intended and work well right out of the box?

Feats are optional, magic items are optional and the system still works well without them.

>>51470424
>and the system still works well without them.
Hell no it doesn't.

>>51470440
Explain yourself.

>>51470448
Several monsters scale out of your range to hit worth a shit if you aren't using magic weaponry, plus there's nonmagical weapon resistance on top of that. Damage does not keep up with HP scaling without powerful magic weapons even on the monsters that don't qualify for the above issues.

Fighter gets shafted without feats because stat boosts hit diminishing returns very quickly AND several combat styles become pointless without the feats to support them, even if we're moving away from Fighters. They're 'optional' in name only, the game suffers without them.

>>51470480
Bounded accuracy takes care of the scaling, this is how and why low level threats can still pose legitimate threats.
Depending on your play style, you'll be doing progressively scaling damage as you increase in levels; these are non issues.

Spells can take care of piercing magical damage resistances.

The feats for the fighter are the icing on the cake but they don't really require them, in fact the ASI gained is a better deal in all respects. Feats help but the characters can be run without them.

>>51470552
Literally everything you just said is wrong.

>>51470567
Is that all you have as a comeback? Disappointing as fuck.

>>51470567
You are literally mentally deficient.

>>51451339
>Some insufferable players still think they're being funny instead of dragging out combat for a lame joke when they walk right up to a character and proceed to walk in circles run in circles using both their entire movement and use the dash action.

I'm sorry, I'm just imagining someone going "I use 5ft of movement to step to the left, then I use 5ft of movement to step forward, then another 5ft forward, then 5ft to the right... Then I use the DASH action, and use 5ft of movement to step to the left..." etc. etc.

>>51471318
And then I shake it all about.

File: Those girls aren't gonna hug themselves.png (185KB, 544x604px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 544x604px

>>51455247
>>51455272