ITT reasons we hate DnD

>>52363225
>ITT: all D&D is 3.5

>>52363240
You're welcome to hate other editions. I actually liked how 5e handled AC.

>>52363225
>DnD 5e is great
>Skills got neutered and there's no craft aside from some freeformy shit

haha wut

>>52363225
I hate d&d because people ruin /tg/ by posting spergy bitchfests about it all the time.

The actual game is functional enough.

>>52363296
>DnD 5e is great
Who are you quoting?

>>52363225
I,hate when some players refuse to acknowledge the inherent class imbalance, and then get belligerent when a sorcerer takes out 12/18 mooks with one well- placed blast and a monk only takes out 1.

>>52363225
ehhh I mostly just hate it because i'm burnt out on it.

>>52363225
Fuck you, faggot. You could at least complain about mail having higher max dex than rigid armor, but noooooooooooo.

>>52363225

My biggest gripe with D&D is keeping track of everything is just obnoxious. Especially as a spellcaster. Keeping track of how many spells you can know, which spells you know, which spells you want to use that day, and the particulars of how they work and what they do is a giant pain.

Also I don't really like classes. While I like the concept of niche archetypes and occupations translating into a character build, the way most editions of D&D handle it make it needlessly rigid. Makes homebrewing a setting way harder.

>>52363296
Skills in 3.5 were horrendous. Overly complicated with very little depth gained by its complexity; ripe for abuse and blatantly unbalanced; scaled horribly, especially in the late game.

But rather than go on about that, I'll just say this: you realize you're supposed to neuter your pets, right? That's not a bad thing.

>>52363225
It makes something as awesome as superhuman strength the most fucking boring thing in the world.Throwing boulders? Thunderclaps that blow away your enemies or turn their eardrums to mush? Slamming the ground so hard with your weapon that it tears a chasm into the earth? Nah, swing axe, eat up damage, and maybe get some sort of minor thing that still won't be as good as anything a caster can do if not irrelevant in general.

A few people complain about "the animu physics" but when you have things like casters around and the otherworldly monsters, why even try to be realistic anymore? Make up your fucking mind, DnD. Either be realistic or be, ya know that one thing games are supposed to be? Ah, that's right, FUN.

>>52363225

It's because DnD can't into terms.

They use 'longsword' to mean arming sword, while trying to make us believe bastard sword is another term entirely.

They use 'half-plate' for plate-and-chain, while implying all full plate is early renaissance articulated plate.

File: mystery of the druids.jpg (34KB, 600x696px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x696px

>>52363225

>>52363225
Half is much much cheaper

>>52363225
>>52369934
Rename it Munitions Plate?

What the hell "Half Plate" is supposed to mean anyway? Plate armor without greaves?

>>52370082
It means you're naked from the waist down

>>52370093
Then you should have more DEX bonus, not less.

>>52363430

My personal pet peeve is that the never-ending arguments about "balance" are all non-transitive. 3.PF infected the whole fandom with some weird obsession with this nonsense based on whiteboxing and tier lists and we just cannot get over it.

Yesterday I seriously had someone bitching that vanilla PHB Beast Master Ranger was "too good" for 5e because of how easily it handles certain types of buffing/debuffing too early and with no magic and that Wizard didn't do enough damage.

And you know what, they aren't wrong. BM is really good at handing out prone and restrained conditions, making reaction attacks, and flanking. WIzard isn't great at pure damage #'s over time the way Martials/Warlocks can. But they were wrong to bitch because it's okay for different classes to do different things and I honestly fucking think that if we didn't have that inertial bullshit dragging us back people would grasp that earlier.

5e is a good system but it needs a fucking exorcism.

>>52364334

I think skills have been made glorious. The old system was a giant, glitchy mess that got in its own way when it wasn't being used to make Assassins who could hide in other people's assholes and I hated it.

Compared to that the new skill system is amazing. Now it's a dial that goes from "I'm basically coasting on my natural abilities and other life experiences" can be grown into "I have actually bothered to get better at this" and some people have had the opportunity to devote world-class levels of effort to get amazingly good at certain things.

The old one was "precise," but not usable. The new one sacrifices precision but gains usability. "You're reasonably good at adventury things just like your attributes suggest, what 3 things would you like to be very good at it?" adds to the game in a way that "ride" and "use rope" just flat out didn't.

>we

>>52371893
Same game tests are not whiteroom, you fucking idiot.

>>52366934

I think the problem is that they don't mean anything. 5e in particular is big on "Full-Plate" means a package of stats on a chart that could actually be any type of armor needed for the setting. It's the community that sort of developed these lazy, inaccurate ideas for what that "means."

>>52366934
>bastard sword is somehow an "exotic" weapon
Always triggers me.

>>52372085

Fuck off, mouthbreather. "Why sparky hands man no do lots of dice like shooty man?" is still a whiteroom (controlling for all variables) and whitebox (testing for desired outcomes when the entire mechanism is exposed) question even if it was provoked by an over-the-board situation.

>>52366934
These are weak-ass things to complain about.

Wizards hurl fireballs at dragons as paladins heal wounds by laying their hands on half-elves with the magical powers of lute playing.

>b-b-but the weapons and armor aren't historically accurate!

Lame.

>>52372067
Being an Exemplar who can kill half your village, kick everyone's dogs, and generally make himself hated and then turn all the survivors into fervent supporters willing to sacrifice their lives for him by climbing into mayor's butt with an outlandishly high Escape Artist roll working as Diplomacy check is the height of roleplaying.

>>52372224
Nice job commenting on something you don't actually know anything about, I guess.

>>52372292

>"I have no argument and I must post"

>>52372597
You're yelling about damage when the topic of discussion is a SGT. It's pretty obvious that you don't know anything about them.

>>52366934
at least 5e fixed most of this by simplifying out the armory list and telling you to refluff shit if you really wanted a katana

>>52363225
because PROPER full plate armor rests on itself in a way that helps hold it's own weight to the point that removing pieces hinders more than it helps.

>>52372669
>at least 5e fixed most of this by simplifying out the armory list and telling you to refluff shit if you really wanted a katana

That is a good solution. When your system has a list of 30+ weapons but only half a dozen are actually any good (and a few more from splatbooks that nobody except for That Guy will bother with), you have failed at designing a game.

>>52370093
>>52370101
No, it's fine since you need to be more careful with your genitals swinging around. Limits your movements.

>Half-plate 600 gp 50 lb

>Full Plate 1500 gp 50 lb

Just buy 2 half plates and enjoy full protection at 300 gp discount

>>52363296
I like 5e for the most part but I would like some more concrete stuff on item crafting because otherwise a lot of people lose motivation without that kind of direction.
I'm hoping to fix it to some degree in my game where there'll be blueprints for magic items so the players will know what they have to do to make something, and will have to follow through on the initiative to want and make it. Otherwise they'll have to get it off someone else who already has it.

>>52372641

No, moron. You're yelling about SGT as if it's the only valid (or valid to begin with) way to approach testing instead of a transparent effort to keep dragging whiteroom/whitebox into primacy.

D&D is a team game where teams face challenges as a team. Running individual characters through individual challenges tells you absolutely nothing but mouth-breathing spergs like you cannot get over it because no one will play with you in real life so some imaginary danger room is all you get.

Meanwhile, the rest of us are actually up here in the modern era playing real games with real friends and we'd like it people would stop shitting up community resources with "but BM is undervalued because of its difficulty in handling a phase spider solo at level 5."

Cunt. Thanks for living up to everything I was bitching about. I can always count on /tg/ for that.

>>52373150
>Running individual characters through individual challenges tells you absolutely nothing
You mean it tells you most of what you need to know and it's all on you if you're too stupid to understand how that knowledge adapts into a team setting. It's not like skill and combat competence in a single player scenario vanish into the aether the second they're put into a 4 man party.

>>52363225
>Large weapon lists when you really just need Knife, Sword, Axe, Hammer, Spear, Bow, and Crossbow. Perhaps pistols and rifles if your setting allows it.
>Large armour lists when you really just need Light, Medium, and Heavy armour.
>Spellcasters having nearly as many, or being nearly as good at, skills and skill checks as martial characters.
>Two or three dozen martial tactical options, three hundred spells for casters.
>Casters being effective damage dealers without having to spend resources (i.e. useful cantrips or weapon attacks that keep up with warriors).
>No rules for teamwork and combination attacks, or combining spells or abilities together in interesting ways - not even on-the-fly improv guidelines for any of that.
>Any edition where magic items can be crafted and are calculated into monster math and Wealth by Level is required to function, instead of magic items being rare, powerful, and priceless artifacts of a bygone era.
>Binary success/failure results for many checks instead of sometimes getting partial successes (you got most of what you wanted) and partial failures (you failed but it didn't screw you over in a bad way).
>Taking more than 20 pages to explain how to make a character and play, listing all the cool options, and explaining stuff like equipment and combat.
>Not including adventure modules or any kind of setting in the book, thus making it incredibly hard for newbies to start their own games right out of the box.
>Using six kinds of dice (or more) when you could probably get by on just a d20 and a few d6.
>Very little support for things like character relationships, favours, reputation, extended social contests, investigations, and other rules you'd need for Roleplay-heavy campaigns
>Very little support for things like exposure damage & protective clothing, founding & improving settlements, managing organizations and armies, building roads, exploiting natural resources, and other rules you'd need for Exploration-heavy campaigns.

>>52373489
>>Large weapon lists when you really just need Knife, Sword, Axe, Hammer, Spear, Bow, and Crossbow. Perhaps pistols and rifles if your setting allows it.
>>Large armour lists when you really just need Light, Medium, and Heavy armour.
what's wrong with having different weapons?

>>52372145
Only if you wield it 1-handed

>>52373579
There's no real logic behind damage dice assigned to weapons in same category. Why does morning star do 1d8 damage while mace does 1d6? They're essentially same implement.

Damage type potentially matters, weapon size/ application certainly does (1 hand small / 1 hand large / 1 hand versatile / 2 hand / 2 hand reach / ranged) but anything beyond that is fluff that should be determined by the player.

If you want a katana, that's a 1 hand versatile Slashing weapon. Deals same damage as 1 hand large weapon, more if you wield it in 2 hands. Same as longsword or any other similarly sized slashing implement.

>>52373633
>Why does morning star do 1d8 damage while mace does 1d6?
Because a morning star is spiky.

>>52371893
Except that the core Beast Master ranger is the shittiest option you can take (barring a few feats)? If your DM doesn't let you use one of the variant ranger builds from UA, he hates you.

>>52373633
I somewhat agree but there are weapons with special rules, or fitness, or throwing or light. So katana would be longsword with fitness, but then it can't be same weapon, more like scimitar, but scimitar are not versatile

>>52366934
>They use 'longsword' to mean arming sword, while trying to make us believe bastard sword is another term entirely.

>They use 'half-plate' for plate-and-chain

They're all neologisms, historically speaking, and that nomenclature wouldn't have been used at the time. So it's not like they're historically inaccurate. I agree that it would be better if they conformed to the terminology used by the people who study historical weapons, but it's worth pointing out that that terminology has been evolving even in contemporary times, making it a bit difficult to be both "correct" and consistent over long periods of time. Also, "arming sword" is a clumsy term and a lot less intuitive than "longsword" (especially in a system where the main point of contrast is a short-sword), a fact which I have to believe is at least partially responsible for the retention of the latter term. Same thing for "transitional armor" vs. "plate mail", or "plate-and-chain" vs. "half-plate".

>>52373718
If you stick with D&D's approach (Simple/Martial/Exotic weapons) and intend to have a variety of weapon maneuvers (for whatever reason), you could always go for a modular approach.

Simple weapon: die based on weapon type, 1 special quality.
Martial weapon: die based on weapon type, 2 special qualities.
Exotic weapon: 3 special qualities. Maybe 4?

If weapon has a long wooden shaft, it can have reach. If weapon has large hooks or similar implements, it can have a bonus to Disarm/ Trip. If weapon is particularly small, it's a bonus to hide.

Throwing would be any 'small 1 handed' weapon by default, or a special quality for anything bigger for melee weapons, or free for ranged-only throwing weapons.

So dagger is small 1 handed, meaning it can benefit from dexterity, can be thrown. It's simple, so it has 1 special rule - easy to hide.

>>52373856
This....Sounds better than what D&D, since you can make weapon you like

File: Savage Armoury.pdf (596KB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

596KB, 1x1px

>>52373856
I rather like what the fan-made Savage Armoury did for Savage Worlds, allowing you to construct weapons essentially via point-buy, based on their capabilities.

>>52373856
That's pretty much what Legend did.

>>52373671

Having seen it in action: your meme-based bitching is full of shit. If you have good frontline DPR a well run BM will turn them into great DPR. It's a shame that everyone's highly-tuned and oh so relevant simulations never seem to take that into account.

>>52374301

*started to do and then shitted it up

>>52374380
No, that's literally what it did, it just didn't have the simple/martial/exotic divide because it's retarded.

>>52363240
>ITT: deendeefags cherrypick rules from various editions
bonus points for referencing E6 or any homebrew rules

>>52363225
>HP bloat reduces tension
>no rolling for parry reduces tension
>classes and skills are purely hurr durr adventurer types
>meteor strike-type spells are lulz, narratively speaking
in short: too much gamism, not enough simulationism

>>52374668
Can you clarify your last two points for me? I've read them a few times and have no idea what you're getting at.

I liked 5e, fights go smoothly and it finally felt balanced. Also the freedom of more leniency in the alignment system bullshit

>>52363279
this too

>>52374925
In short: Everything abstract triggers the autismo.

>d&d 3 and all editions forward (to a lesser extent 5)
>skills

How 3.5, pf, and 4 handled skills kills me. It makes players shit off their brain and look at their skill list, just going down it, "can I roll this skill? What about this skill? What about this skill?" They don't even say why they wanna roll the skill, or even what they are doing. It's just become a game of going down the list and waiting for approval.

Palladium may be a God damn mess but I appreciate that skills weren't rolled unless the situation was under a time limit or stress was a factor

File: image.jpg (99KB, 1000x500px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1000x500px

>>52373150
Oh my fucking god this.
Ever since mystic came out two weeks ago all my table has been talking about is how impossibly good they are, specifically because Nomadic Mind.
That shit is fucking useless beyond languages in a party with a rogue, or a bard, a role that almost no party goes without.

>>52371893
Yes, THANK you
The idea that the game needs to be perfectly 'balanced' is cancer. Different people should be able to accomplish different things, but noooo, everyone neds to be able to do exactly the same amount of damage, otherwise the system is busted.

And all this obssession with balance ultimately led to the Challenge Rating system, a busted pile of shit that should never have existed.

Of course, the greatest irony of all is that you got two 5ggots completely missing your point and telling you off about how imbalanced things are.

>>52376296
Dude, you understad that not even 4e characters did the same damage? Hell, one of the roles is exactly about doing MORE damage than everyone else.

You are arguing against either retards or a strawman.

>>52374925
>>52374964
>all classes are focused exclusively on combat. Some can do other things, but combat is the only thing ALL classes can do
>high level wizards a shit
Not sure what's so difficult to decrypt about that

>>52376337
Without looking, I predict that 5eg will be arguing about one or all of the following:
1) Mystic is too strong
2) wizard>sorcerer
3) "durrrr how do we unfuck bladelock?"
It's not a problem with the game, it's a problem with the fanbase

>>52376438
Those are definitely problems with the game. They are just nothing to get too upset about.

You need to realize that faults simply lead to much more discussion than when everything is working as intended. So any discussion (even about a healthy game) will be dominated by that.

>>52376438
Is Mystic even that strong? Looking over it, it seems to be outrageously versatile, but lacking the raw power of any of the casting classes. Nothing it has will hit with the weight of a 9th level spell.

Though I guess since 99.9% of campaigns start and end between levels 1 and 6, that doesn't really matter..
My circle loves higher level play, though.

I like the background system in 5e, but I hate that you roll for certain aspects of your backstory and personality. Those things should be chosen by the player, not luck.

>HPs increasing with lvl
>vancian magic
>overpowered magic
>kitchen sink fantasy shit. Moreover, D&D is ultimate SOURCE of this shit that almost destroyed the fantasy genre as a whole
>levels
>classes
>way too crunchy
>tacticool miniature wargame
>combat oriented
>alignments
>spawned forgotten realms, dragonlance and golarion
>feed for theorycrafting and powerbuilding scum
>various fluff-wise character concepts can have wildly different power and usefulness despite fitting the genre and setting equally well
>dungeon crawl
>focus on magical gear and christmas-tree effect

summarizing shortly
>gamism
and
>bastardization of fantasy genre

>>52376685
>fuck mechanics and shit

File: 1375541779888.gif (89KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 600x450px

>>52376685
>fuck games
>games should not be games
>fuck

>>52376695
>>52376725
Ar least when playing my "hurr durr these are not games" i have fun with cooperatively telling a story with my friends while rolling dice once a while for fun and thrill instead of falling asleep between my turns while bunch of autists around play with minis and discus some silly concepts/crunch numbers

also
>hurr fuck mechanics
lite, pleasant mechanics with narrow focus that enhance the storrytelling but never get even close to overshadowing it are still mechanics

>>52376835
Apples to oranges, man. If you want narrative based systems, don't look to D&D, a system fundamentally designed around killing orcs and taking their stuff.

>>52376634
They are chosen by the player.
The tables are just there to be suggestions.

>>52371893
>5e is a good system but it needs a fucking exorcism.
The whole fucking PnP players needs it.

>play 5e
>so, maul does 2d6
>and so does greatsword
>Except greataxe. That does 1d12.
Every fucking time.
At this point I think it's just the D&D designers memeing the greataxe.

>>52364116
>keeping track of everything is just obnoxious
Yep. Encumbrance, Random situational +1/+2 modifiers you'll forget about, in-combat buff durations being short enough that you have to keep track of them but not long enough to matter, stacking/non-stacking of bonuses, how many charges your magic items have left...it just goes on and on.

File: Official rules light hat.png (329KB, 757x446px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 757x446px

>>52364116
>>52379303
>having issues "keeping track of everything" in D&D
You dropped these sirs.

D&D is largely holdovers from the 70's which it won't abandon in fear of jeopardizing it's identity. Of course it is mediocre. What it has going for it is is a large player base, content pool, and production values of official content. You can't deny those.

>>52379167
There are certain situations where a d12 is preferable, like with the half-orc and barbarian critical features.

>>52374376
No, he's right. It's a huge pile of shit, even in games were people intentionally don't optimize at all. It's pretty worthless.

>>52370082
No, everything in DnD is mislabelled and retarded.

Half-Plate is an older, clunkier and less effective version of plate. An earlier form of rigid defense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_armour

Also, studded leather is actually Brigandine. The woefully-inept author of the sourcebooks probably looked at some old armor and thought "oh, this thing is leather armor with rivets", not realizing that the rivets were actually attaching steel plates to the armor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigandine

Don't get me started on the weapons.

>>52379735
How can people care about D&D's historical accuracy?
Is there even any reason to think that half-plate refers to any real-world thing?

File: dnd weapons lol.jpg (7KB, 435x202px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 435x202px

>>52379799
Even since I was a kid, when I read some of the descriptions of some of the shit, they just made no sense.

"How does adding metal studs to leather add any defense?"
"Why is a medium-sized sword a martial weapon; a very large-sized sword a martial weapon; but a moderately-large sword an exotic weapon?"
"What the fuck is with these bizarre and retarded weapons?"

Dnd is just really dumb and badly researched and it ruins immersion.

>>52379933
A bastard sword is (not really but sorta) a martial weapon, you just learn to wield it in an exotic way. It's still really dumb.

Not defending the retarded weapons, glad they're mostly gone in 5e.

I've only played 5e so I'm not sure if its better explained in other editions but...
I hate that there's no clear rules on how stealth actually works.

>>52380070
To make a stealth check to hide from someone, you need to be heavily obscured from them, unless the DM decides they are sufficiently distracted. Some features allow you to attempt to hide while lightly obscured.
To remain hidden, you must remain in areas that are obscured from the person you're sneaking around.
Your stealth roll needs to beat an effective DC of the target's passive perception to not be noticed.
If your are in stealth at the start of a combat, you can surprise people unaware of you, making it so that they can't act in the first round.

>>52380070
>I hate that there's no clear rules on how stealth actually works.

... what?

You roll a stealth check (while not being onserved by anyone, or at least being in full cover). Those that don't roll better perception checks (or, if they aren't looking for you, have lower passive perception) than your stealth check don't know where you are.

>>52376971
that's all well and good, but what about all of the other people out there that will continue to have badwrongfun while liking something that I don't like?!

>>52364334
You think 3.x skills are bad? Take a look at 2e NWPs. They make 3.x look like a masterpiece in comparison.

>>52372641
>>52372085

Autistic Gaming Den faggot please go.

>>52380017
But muh dire flails!

>>52380216
>2e NWPs
What is that?

>>52380589
non-weapon proficiencies

>>52380741
Tell me more.

Does it beat "This game has 100+ skills! btw like, 70% of those are literally "Whatever the DM says""?

>>52380216
I disagree, you only had a few and the rest of your skill was left up to role-playing and critical thinking.

>>52380876
https://archive.4plebs.org/dl/tg/image/1472/29/1472299031415.pdf

What's that? Is the fact that this is 284 pages a turnoff for you?

>>52381005
>284 pages
>only

I'm not even hard yet anon.

>>52374376
BM ranger is one of the worst options in the game.

You can only choose a beast that's CR 1/4 or lower, you have to expend an action to command it to attack people, you can't share spells until 15th level, and you can't have it take multiple attacks until either 11th level or if you decide to expend both your attack options.

For comparison, a Battlemaster can use one of his superiority dice to trip foes, add to his AC, push, frighten, etc. and they will generally receive four superiority dice starting out, which will improve as time goes on.

>>52373150
How exactly does one's ability to overcome an individual challenge disappear when put into a 4 man group?

Like, if my character can lift and throw 200 lb. boulders at the enemy, he can still do that regardless of whether he's alone or if he's being flanked by a wizard, cleric, and rogue.

>>52376685
>hating on dungeon crawls

Fucking plebian. Dungeon crawls are cool.

>>52381988
Dungeon crawls were only fun when the system was practically freeform like in OD&D. Once you start to introduce numbers and said numbers are the only way that you will ever succeed or fail, you fuck up the pace of the game because people are conditioned to count rather than to act.

Like in 1e or 2e, a Fighter just naturally could fight on a rain slicked roof against an assassin at night and it wouldn't make a difference since a) turns lasted a minute to account for long and complicated actions and b) the game just assumed that PC's were too heroic to let rain fuck them over.

Then in 3.PF onwards, a Fighter in the same scenario would have to consider a) penalties for difficult terrain, b) penalties caused by dim lighting, and c) penalties caused by wearing his heavy armor.

To say nothing on the fact that wizard pops up in a few moments thanks to his initiative and haste and casts hold person, which ends the encounter immediately.

>>52382176
Both 1e and 2e have modifiers for low light, off-balance defenders and high-ground attackers. 2e has weapon-type vs armor-type modifiers. Also neither 1e nor 2e are oD&D. You are confusing AD&D with OSR, I think. And in OSR, any adventure module ever calls for either penalties or attribute checks in dramatic conditions such as "on a rooftop in the rain."

These things just aren't that complex to calculate, and it doesn't negatively impact the game. And they've always been part of it.

>>52382176
Also:
>the game just assumed that PC's were too heroic to let rain fuck them over.
This is laughably wrong. It was 3.xpf that introduced treating players as superheroes. You have it backwards.

>>52382745
It's different when the GM is the one having to keep track of all these circumstantial modifiers and when the player is expected to keep track of all these circumstantial modifiers though.
>>52382788
In older editions, PC's were considered heroic like Conan, Hercules, or Perseus. It also helped that older editions scaled down encounters so that being able to survive three rounds against a CR 17 creature was impressive, rather than just being a consequence of HP bloat and neutered damage output.

Also, 3.PF introduced the idea that martials were bottom bitches who could only perform any task as well as the most outstanding human IRL while mages were the superheroes who killed gods in one turn and summoned a horde of succubi to suck his dick while he downed a potion to become immune to level drain.

>>52382862
>It's different when the GM is the one having to keep track of all these circumstantial modifiers and when the player is expected to keep track of all these circumstantial modifiers though.
Because it's less of an interruption when just one person has to account for them? Also: I don't know where you get the impression that the DM is responsible for accounting for modifiers to the players' attack rolls, but you definitely didn't get that impression from the player's handbooks that they are listed in.

>In older editions, PC's were considered heroic like Conan, Hercules, or Perseus.
Not the tiniest bit accurate, in any way. Level 1 players are assumed, in every edition of D&D before 3.xpf, to be able to die to a well-aimed kitchen knife.

>>52363225
>Balance

>>52382938
>Because it's less of an interruption when just one person has to account for them?
Yes, because when one guy is expected to dole out modifiers for an encounter, it means that one of two things will happen. Either they plan around these situations so that play will be as easy as "okay, so based on these modifiers, everyone's going to get a +2 overall based on circumstance" or the DM will cut the bullshit and ignore it so he can focus on the actual fight itself.
>you definitely didn't get that impression from the player's handbooks that they are listed in.
It's there as reference material in case the player felt as though the DM fucked them over, it's the same reason why monsters are given stats and a CR even though players won't need to reference them often.
>Level 1 players are assumed, in every edition of D&D before 3.xpf, to be able to die to a well-aimed kitchen knife.
You say that as if a level 1 character can't die to a kitchen knife in every edition anyways.

>>52383075
I really think you may not have ever played any TSR editions. Because it's pretty clear that you have no idea what you are talking about. If it's in the PhB, players are responsible for it. If it's in the DMG, DMs are responsible for it.It has always been very cut and dry. And monster stats aren't given in player handbooks (and don't have a CR in any TSR edition). And players can't be killed by a single blow from a kitchen knife in any WOTC edition, but can be in every TSR edition. TSR editions assumed that PCs would die because they were not superheroes.

Honestly, guy. Not sure why you decided to wade into this conversation if you simply have no idea what you're talking about.

>>52363225
>Rules bloat
I'd honestly rather have 50 pages of rules that boil down to "mother-may-I?" than have 400 pages of rules that force our game to a halt as we wait 3-5 minutes for the DM to look up a circumstantial rule that will never be referenced again outside of this rare occurrence.
>Alignment
Yes friend, boiling down your entire character's hopes, dreams, and motivations to a block in a 3x3 grid is SURELY going to help you roleplay better.
>HP bloat
Oh man, combat sure is exciting now that I know that most creatures will either never kill me or will just insta-gib me the moment they succeed on an attack roll.
>Shit physical stats
At 20 STR, I should be able to lift a dude and toss him into another dude as an attack action, not only get marginally more damage than the dude with 16 STR.
>Social encounters
Yeah, I love rolling dice just to say hello to a random peasant without them spouting racist remarks just because I picked the wrong race.

>>52383196
Alignment is a measure of your actions, mate. You're not meant to roleplay it.

>>52383139
What are you talking about here?

There's tons of bullshit in the PHB that players aren't expected to know about and aren't responsible over. Like do you expect every player to be responsible over every single minion that you gain as a result of being a sufficiently leveled character?

Also, it's trivially easy to kill most characters at level 1 in any edition because of how criticals work. Not to mention you have saves vs. massive damage to deal with and other bullshit that makes early levels deadly to deal with.

That's just the nature of level 1 characters, it doesn't mean that PC's aren't heroic characters by default.

>>52383250
Yeah and martials are supposed to be equal to mages due to having the same number of levels. It should be a primer that D&D is inconsistent as fuck when it comes to how most of its shit is supposed to work.

>>52383318
That has nothing to do with what I said. Nothing.

>>52383296
>Like do you expect every player to be responsible over every single minion that you gain as a result of being a sufficiently leveled character?
No.

That is why the rules for managing followers are in the DMG, rather than the PHB.

>Also, it's trivially easy to kill most characters at level 1 in any edition because of how criticals work.
You seem to have reversed your position from "lol TSR editions treat players as mythical heroes" to "nu uh no edition does that."

I'd disagree about WOTC editions, but I'm glad you realized it's true of TSR editions.

>>52383328
You're referencing how "it's supposed to work" using a system that is NOTORIOUS for not knowing how its own rules and conventions are supposed to work.

In essence, alignments are for shit roleplayers who want to be able to excuse their murderhoboism as "roleplaying" while being able to fall back on it once their actions fuck over the rest of the party, either because they're chaotic stupid and set a barn on fire or because they're lawful stupid and prevented everyone else in the party from doing anything that would be considered "non-good."

There's a reason why alignments got phased out quietly in 5e and it's because their presence runs counter to a good campaign.

>>52383418
>That is why the rules for managing followers are in the DMG, rather than the PHB.
The PHB still references the fact that you'll receive X followers after Y levels though, so if that's the case then that means that followers are something that the player is supposed to handle if we're assuming that your logic is correct and everything referenced in the PHB is the player's responsibility.
>You seem to have reversed your position from "lol TSR editions treat players as mythical heroes" to "nu uh no edition does that."
No, I'm just saying that just because level 1 characters can die to a stiff breeze, it doesn't mean that the characters themselves aren't supposed to be heroic by default.

It's like saying that Conan isn't actually heroic because at one point in his life he was a child. The whole point of the game is seeing how these characters become heroic figures, not just start everyone off at top level and have them fight Gods at session 0 as a tutorial boss or some shit.

>>52383578
Yes: rolling for followers is the player's responsibility. Hence that part of the rules are in the PHB. Managing them are the DM's responsibility. Hence those rules are in the DMG.

Guy, it has become incredibly clear that you haven't the vaguest idea what you're talking about.

>>52383603
>Yes: rolling for followers is the player's responsibility. Hence that part of the rules are in the PHB. Managing them are the DM's responsibility. Hence those rules are in the DMG.
So you're saying that not every rule in the PHB is going to be the player's responsibiliy?
>Guy, it has become incredibly clear that you haven't the vaguest idea what you're talking about.
Or you just realized how poor your argument is and are trying to distract from the points being made. Don't think I didn't notice how you failed to reference my point in the second half of my last post.

You're not only wrong, but also intellectually dishonest.

>>52383671
>So you're saying that not every rule in the PHB is going to be the player's responsibiliy?
The rules for managing followers aren't mentioned in the PHB.

>>52383671
>Don't think I didn't notice how you failed to reference my point in the second half of my last post.
Also: I ignored that part because it is just random stuff you said. It has no basis in the games. Go ahead and try to find a source if you want to pretend you can defend that bullshit, though.

>>52383708
The rules GIVING players followers is though. So we're just going to receive a rule in the PHB that gives you a perk but not give you the ability to that perk on your own?

Also, what about traps? They're mentioned in the DMG too but there's nothing stopping you from making traps during game? Also what about magic items when they're listed in the DMG even when the game gives some classes the ability to create them?
>>52383819
>I ignored that part because it is just random stuff you said.
Just because it proves that you're full of shit doesn't mean that it's random anon, it just means that you need to learn how to pay attention.

>>52383889
Your comments have stopped making sense. You have now relied on "but I said something without any basis, therefore I win!"

I think you need a nap.

File: dm does all the math.png (18KB, 398x182px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 398x182px

>>52382938
>Because it's less of an interruption when just one person has to account for them? Also: I don't know where you get the impression that the DM is responsible for accounting for modifiers to the players' attack rolls, but you definitely didn't get that impression from the player's handbooks that they are listed in.

I never read 3.5's PHB, but d20 Modern Core Rulebook says exactly that.

>>52384031
Let me boil it down since you're having trouble keeping up.

You said
>If it's in the PhB, players are responsible for it.
to which I said
>There's tons of bullshit in the PHB that players aren't expected to know about and aren't responsible over.
to which you responded with
>That is why the rules for managing followers are in the DMG, rather than the PHB.
So based on this exchange, you're admitting that you're full of shit by admitting that there are some elements in the PHB that are listed for the players to know, but is still under the responsibility of the DM whenever they come into play.

Also, you went from "level 1 characters can't die to a single blow in WotC edition" to "I just ignored that part because it was completely random stuff you said."

I dunno man, I think you're overdue for the nap.

File: facts_kungfu_bingqi.jpg (30KB, 386x1074px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 386x1074px

>>52379933
>"What the fuck is with these bizarre and retarded weapons?"

What, you've never seen a kung fu movie?
Silly, impractical weapons have real historical basis
Namely that a particular princess grew up reading too many wuxia novels and flashy weapons really impressed her in imperial tournaments

>>52379167
Greataxe is meant to work with barbarian, especially half-orc barb so d12 is better than 2d6.

>>52376634
I was under teh impression that the tables were there for those who like to randomize characters, and the player was supposed to pick (or come upw ith) any background traits he wanted.
I don't think it states anywhere that 'you must roll the table, you can't pick the one you want'

Since I can't find a good thread to plug this, I might as well..

I had an idea on how to fix casters, other than 'change games entirely' and without crippling them. The answer lies in having to spend several rounds casting a spell instead of just blasting things to the ground instantly.

http://pastebin.com/G0anjb9c

>>52384259
to be fair, weapons like that, especially kung-fu weapons are almost the exact opposite of "exotic". Most are "weaponized" versions of farming equipment which the original martial arts were designed to allow the use of as weapons in the first place.

>>52384562
>http://pastebin.com/G0anjb9c
it's pretty easy to fixer the caster discrepancy in DnD

step 1: remove the 5-foot step, all it does is allow casters to never have to cast in melee unless they are literally surrounded. Also makes being in melee with a martial actually dangerous.

step 2: remove the concentration check or at least triple to quadruble the DC, in 5+ years of playing DnD/PF I never once saw a concentration check fail

Step 3: remove the Fighter class and apply it's feat progression to every other martial class. Alternatively give martials a class ability that automatically provides them the benefits of any 1st tier feat if they meet it's qualifications. Anything to reduce the absurd feat tax that prevents martials from doing more than being marginally ok at 1 of the dozens of combat options by level 10.

>>52384906
Back when I used to play 3.PF, I had an idea where a Fighter automatically gained the benefits of every combat feat in the game, so long as they met the prerequisites to buy it normally.

Never got to use it though so I don't know if it would actually fix them or make things worse.

>>52384980
I can't see how making a melee character capable of gibbing anything that comes in melee distance would make the game worse

>>52384906
5e already solved teh 5 foot step
also concentration DCs are fine

casters may be too strong but these things are fine

>>52385168
Concentration is too low for what it's supposed to do and can be trivially beaten with minimal investment

>>52366934
I tend to suspend disbelief when playing my Table-Top RPGs but one thing that will never cease to annoy me is how shitty padded armor (gambeson) gets stated. A gambeson is WAY more protective than leather armor, it's stupidly more effective. Leather armor should be the +1 and gambeson should be like +3 to +4 at least. I don't even care from a historical accuracy standpoint. It's about physics, most of the rules (aside from magic and monsters) follows some semblance of physics as we know them, obviously skewed to make things easier but still an emulation of our own physics. Unless they are making their leather armor out of some mystical beast that doesn't exist in our world (which some leather armors are but that means regular leather is probably just that, regular leather) then it isn't worth the cost of making it. Leather is very difficult to repair once damaged, and is very easily damaged by cuts and isn't any more resistant to piercing than a gambeson. I honestly can't understand what idiot came up with the notion that leather armor is better than a gambeson, anyone with a brain and any life experience should be able to figure out how vastly inferior leather is.

>>52364116
You can always go back to play-doh if numbers bother you that much.

>>52386529
Get over yourself, there's a reason why 5e added the (dis)advantage system to replace the need to keep track of half a dozen circumstantial modifiers for each roll.

>>52386583
>My biggest gripe with D&D
And apparently even that is too hard.

>>52386598
Last I checked, this thread was gripes for D&D as a whole. Face it, you lost, get over yourself and move on with your life.

>>52386136
I don't understand your concentration check point, casters are masters of their craft same as martial classes. If you want to impose harsher concentration checks on casters for casting (something they do often) then you should make your martial classes make checks when outnumbered in melee to be able to attack, because someone outnumbered 4 to 1 realistically would be instantly killed if they tried to attack. They can't defend from all sides AND attack without opening themselves up to at least 1 person, a check doesn't even accurately solve this problem but it would be something, and I think a necessary addition if you are trying to impose harsh rules on casters defending themselves.. I think it better to just let the fighter run into the fray and fuck 4 guys up at once and let the casters have a relatively easy time casting in melee.

>>52386794
The difference is that martial classes like the Fighter are designed to be masters of combat, which is WHY they can run into a group of people and come out on top in spite of the reasons you just mentioned.

With mages though, casting spells are supposed to be high risk/high reward since they required so much concentration to use while also having effects that fundamentally shift the tides of combat to their favor.

If mages can just always successfully cast reality warping spells with minimal investment, regardless of whether or not they get hit or not, and magic is just as easy as having good mental stats, then why the fuck doesn't every PC class have access to some form of magic?

I mean, when you think about it, a martial with access to spells like enlarge person, bull's strength, mirror image, or polymorph would be pretty fucking powerful and it can't be THAT difficult to learn considering D&D has everything from power points to spell slots to ki to grant magic.

>>52376296
Balance is a good thing to have, all other things being equal. Games can be good without being balanced, but that sort of game isn't for everyone.

Obsession with anything, balance or not, is usually bad, but I wouldn't say any edition of D&D has gone that far.

Also the idea behind the CR system is good, so DMs can quickly eyeball enemies they're not familiar with and know what approximate power level they're at. The actual CR system us a piece of shit because 3e is an unbalanced mess.

That said, with a group of reasonable people who build characters to about the same power level 3.X can still be fun. It just takes extra work to make sure everything goes the way it should, and that's a hassle.

>>52386922
Fighters are designed to be masters of 1 type or a few types of combat not all types of combat. Plus I don't care if you are the best damned fighter ever being outnumbered (unless you are SPECIFICALLY trained to fighting while outnumbered) is a huge detriment to a persons ability to attack/defend. And besides casters get fucked by so many things. Low HP (should be low, I know some iterations have fucked this up), shit saves aside from will (poison can completely shut them down in one round and they generally have less than a 40% chance of success on their fort saves), and are generally the first target for any ranged enemiesl. I'm not trying to say casters don't out power martial classes, but they are supposed to, it's magic. But they have to struggle to survive (or at least should) to make it to that point. Higher concentration checks would make this struggle even harder, and in a completely unfun and seemingly unfair way. With poison the character can make a perception check to notice the vials on the enemies hips or the poison dripping from their weapons, this is something that they can always do to protect themselves. concentration checks in melee can only be avoided by not getting into melee, which isn't always possible in a world of teleporting monsters and invisibility. Just like having to make checks as a martial character when outnumbered would not be fun making ridiculously high DC concentration checks is not fun. If one character is outshining the others then the GMs monsters should be able to recognize that and try to kill that person before anyone else, especially if that person is some guy wearing robes, increased concentration checks is not necessary to knock them down a peg.

>>52387168
To expand upon those points. I think an increasing DC on concentration checks based on number of enemies would be fine. Just not a giant increase out of nowhere.

File: 1387086264865.jpg (48KB, 392x500px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 392x500px

>>52387168
Nigga, I ain't reading a wall of text just so I can tell you how wrong you are.

The fact of the matter is, by the logic of game, Martials can wade into a crowd of people and come out fine because short of rolling a critical, their AC can be so high that they'll just never get hit by anything that's roughly around their level because that's how AC works.

Concentration, as a mechanic, is meant to be there to punish mages who allowed themselves to get caught in melee range. It's whole reason for existence is to cause a mage to lose a spell that they're channeling if they attempt to cast a spell around something that can reliably hit them. However, since concentration checks are so low, they might as well not even exist, which makes you question why they're even there in the first place.
>>52387254
Concentration checks are supposed to make it difficult for a mage to wade into melee while casting spells. If you don't like it, don't get into melee range in the first place.

File: I WANT TO PROTECT THAT SMILE.png (166KB, 265x379px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 265x379px

>making my own ruleset that forces casters to make a skill check based on what type of magic they're using
>there are over 15 types
>it also costs mana to cast
>failing to cast a spell can make horrible shit happen
>martials get fucked up weeaboo fightan magic shit
AHAHAHAHA TRY AND STOP ME

File: 57-dumbarse_(61).jpg (56KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 800x450px

>>52387625
We need more Drakengard reaction pictures in this world.
Here is my humble contribution

>>52387860
Thank you. I'll be sure to use it.

>>52387294
>However, since concentration checks are so low, they might as well not even exist, which makes you question why they're even there in the first place.
they're not that low though.......
i agree the base minimum concentration DC should be higher, but it's fucking 10.
that's 50% success. Yes i agree it's too high, but you act like it's a non-factor.

Personally I would raise it to 15, and then remove the rule for 50% of damage DC. Simple and clean

>>52363430
This is from a that-guy thread.

>>52363225
ezpz. full plate is fully aware that youre gonna be a turtle so youre ready for it, but half plate is plate-fluid and sometimes its a platemail and other times its a robe. of course you have to stop going so fast otherwise it'll bitch about you on tumblr and twitter.

>>52363430
Why would you want a monk to be as strong as a wizard

Go away blizzard

>>52387933
It's fucking 10, vs. a stat that most casters will invest in anyways just so they don't die from a stiff breeze.

Let me put it this way right, in 5e, a character who has a 16 in CON with prof. bonus would have a +5 for their concentration check, which means that they'd have a 75% chance of succeeding by default and that's as a 1st level character. Don't even get me started if they have advantage on the roll as well.

It's a non-factor because in most situations, they'll never actually lose concentration if they invest into it casually.

Also, under your houserule, you'd only make it easier for mages to pass their concentration check, so leave the errata to the professionals who understand the game m'kay?

File: I3A0IU3.jpg (153KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1920x1200px

>>52371893

I fucking hate the concept of "balance" in tabletop RPGs. This is a *role playing game*, not World of Warcraft. Everyone in D&D is super obsessed with "balance" in combat.

Who gives whether or not XYZ character does more damage per round than another?! They're clearly combat focused! Who cares if a wizard or bard isn't as great at combat? That's not what they're there for!

Remember in AD&D1 where encounters were stressful and you had a good probability of your character not surviving, meaning it was a better bet to avoid fighting all together, or, if caught, fleeing was always the better choice.

I hear this kind of shit about Eclipse Phase (and scifi games in general) all the time! "Oh, the combat is so unbalanced!" Well, so sorry you decided to pick a fight with a Fury morph soldier with Neurachem 2 who was hopped up on copious amounts of MRDR combat drug. Not my fault she was able to draw her firearm and slot 3 party members in the face before you were even able to squeeze your trigger (surprise, you missed too). Maybe you shouldn't make lethal threats to the fucking neogenic combat cyborg, you fucking twat.

Every fucking time!

Picture related: NPC fury morph after PC encounter.

>>52388082
>Why would you want a monk to be as strong as a wizard
Because if it's a class, and all classes run off the same progression, then they should all be equal in power.

File: succ.png (291KB, 441x360px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 441x360px

>>52388157

See >>52388149. Different classes do DIFFERENT FUCKING THINGS. Some are better at specific scenarios than others.

Monks aren't as powerful: but they can never be disarmed.

Again, this isn't fucking WoW. This is a ROLE PLAYING GAME. WHERE YOU PLAY A CHARACTER, NOT AN MMO!

>>52388157
this is a blight

>>52388218
>Monks aren't as powerful: but they can never be disarmed.
BIG MOTHERFUCKING DEAL! When was the last time you were in a campaign where anyone actually got disarmed by anything? Go on, I'll wait.
>>52388234
No, it's a basic assumption with how classes are supposed to work. Like tell me slick, if literally any other martial can be a better monk just by getting the unarmed proficiency feat (or its equivalent) then WHAT'S THE FUCKING POINT OF EVERY PLAYING A GODDAMNED MONK?!?

I want to play a character but I also don't want to get stuck as dead weight for the rest of the game because my character is either too weak to deal with threats, too boring to make any meaningful decisions with, or both.

File: 1488740114040m.jpg (90KB, 724x1024px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 724x1024px

>>52388149
This is exaclty right, and it even gets to the core problem of D&D: everything is about combat. The entire game is about combat. Combat is the reason for your character's existence. So if one class is worse at fighting than all the other classes, THEN IT'S UNDERPOWERED REEEEEEEEEEE.

This obssession with combat is the reason why everyone shits on the BMR. it gets abilities no one else does, and has unmatched versatility? Pffff, who gives a fuck, it needs to do more numbers!

People like >>52388157 are the cancer killing RPGs

>>52388282
Equality is an impossible and pointless goal, and any attempt to get there results in homogenization, rendering the various classes pointless in the first place.

You can definitely make a strong case for certain classes being too weak and maybe in need of some changes, but please don't use the goal of making all the classes equal as a justification or it won't be taken seriously.

>I want to play a character but I also don't want to get stuck as dead weight for the rest of the game because my character is either too weak to deal with threats, too boring to make any meaningful decisions with, or both.
This is a far better argument for making monks stronger than the things you were saying before like "inherent class imbalance", which immediately raises a lot of red flags for people who have seen what can happen to games when that mentality drives game development.

>>52388365
The only reason why D&D is still imbalanced is because they still hang on to legacy mechanics that stopped being useful once WotC took over as the developers. Think about it, is there really any particular reason why Fighters don't get the martial equivalent to spells when there's already martial magic in the form of Ki?
>>52388376
>Equality is an impossible and pointless goal, and any attempt to get there results in homogenization, rendering the various classes pointless in the first place.
So either remove levels entirely or have each class progress at different rates. It makes no sense to keep class/level mechanics when the game runs in a way that run counter to your expectations.

>>52388282
>last time you got disarmed?
When I was going toe to toe against two fighters on a bridge as a knight while my party was making a hasty retreat. Wizard had been struck with a poisoned arrow and was basically incapacitated. I wound up throwing one of the opponets off the bridge into the water below, then I got fucking kicked off the bridge myself. Not to be outdone I WALKED OUT OF THE WATER FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE RIVER onto the shore, walked back up the hill onto the bridge and proceeded to go toe to toe with the other guy having recovered my weapon from the water below. I beat his fucking ass.

>>52388365
A huge part of this problem stems from XP primarily being rewarded for killing enemies.

The unrealistic XP for gold looted system at least rewarded you for accomplishing the task by whatever means you managed through roleplay and whatever options your character has.
The way a lot of people play nowadays (and the way most official modules play) the majority of your XP comes from killing things, regardless of what you're accomplishing by killing them.
I think if more people rewarded XP for completing adventures and not for killing enemies this mentality would not be so prevalent.
>>52388446
whose expectations?

>>52388493
Cool, so you can recall ONE moment where someone in your campaign actually got disarmed. Note that you weren't playing a Monk, which is probably why you didn't get your ass kicked in the first place.

>>52388518
If your primary concern is kicking ass in fights, why are you playing a monk?

File: FN-FAL.jpg (66KB, 2000x465px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 2000x465px

>>52388365
No they're not. Dnd is a combat oriented system so the power levels measure combat ability because there's FUCK ALL ELSE to do. Therefore what's the point of them?
Like if monks could do a whole lot of other monk type shit that might make up for it but as far as I know they don't. (I've only played a bit of PF). But even then as >>52388516 said, you've got the whole "XP only from enemies" unless the GM figures out some way to reasonably hand it out for other things. But then, DnD is a combat oriented system.

Contrast this with other systems where you can put character points, feats or whatever into traits that let you do other things.
I'm a GM, I'm running a modern day alternate history Private Military Contractor campaign with 3 players. 2 of the characters are combat oriented, one's a decently versatile character who has a focus on door kicking with shotgun in hand, the second is a stealthy infiltrator type who can also snipe. Like Snake.
The third? can shoot a pistol ok but is mainly a face man and hacker, with some other useful skills like explosives. All have an important role to play and nobody feels like they're underpowered because a) non combat things MATTER and b) they can get rewarded for them.

But in DnD you're not, so the numbers you do in combat matter.

>>52388518
Well actually that was to save space considering there's a character limit. It got so bad with the DM (who is a powergamer) that I wound up having to get adamantium crafted into a chain just so I could keep my fucking weapon on me at all times. And no, I have played monk.

Your mileage may vary with classes - it depends on what the composition of the rest of the group is. If you're so concerned with power discrepency between classes just raise that issue up with the other players first - thats what a same page tool is. Maybe your DM can boost monks? Maybe the wizards can be chill support guys who aren't too concerned with using world ending spells all the time when there's perfectly good muscle that can do the work for them? Failing that, try playing games where the level cap is 6th, that seems to be a sweet spot from my personal experience. As a DM try to punish five-minute-workdays if your wizard is spurt and doneing all the time.

Of course, 99% chance you're just shitposting and trying to stir up shit because you've got nothing else to do.

>>52388585
(continued)
Their power levels measure lots of things, so while the 2 combat oriented ones would smash the third in a fight, that's to be expected because they've got more traits and levels in combat oriented things. The levels there just measure stuff you can do of nearly anything, rather than JUST COMBAT stuff which is what DnD/PF's levels (supposedly) do.

>>52388585
Sounds like you've never played a complex game with a good DM, or you're a shit DM who can't figure out how to make dungeoneering interesting with anything other than encounter after encounter instead of having complex skillchecks and multiple solutions to problems.

I didn't read your entire post either because fuck you.

>>52388585
I think the DnD system has plenty for non-combat situations, it's just they often get overlooked by some GMs, and XP mainly for kills drives this.
I was reading through the rules for B/X D&D (1981).
The standard rules were you didn't get to actually redeem your XP for the loot you found (and the relatively small amount you got for killing things) until you completed an adventure and returned home.

Now if you were to use such an XP system in 5e, whose system covers non-combat situation significantly more than old school DnD which was mostly about dungeon crawling, I think that would have great results

>>52388670
I guess I've never played DnD/PF with a good GM. I've barely played, I mostly GM. So I guess you're kind of right on one front.

>>52363225
It created the most entitled players I've ever seen in my life. No reason is good enough. No matter what they argue until they get their way. I can't fucking stand it. It doesn't matter that I'm the DM and I'm taking time to run a game, never mind that I'm the one running the game, never mind the fact that I dictate the setting and world around them. They will fight to the bitter end about every fucking detail. God forbid I just let it go to avoid arguing, they demand so much more. I wanna run pathfinder because I'm invested and it's a cool game but the player base is the most toxic thing I've ever seen.

>>52388149
>They're clearly combat focused! Who cares if a wizard or bard isn't as great at combat?
You don't understand 3.pf complaints if you think wizard is bad at combat. The exact point is that fighters are only combat focused in those editions yet even then it is so much more effective to roll a wizard, cleric, or druid since they, by their very nature, circumvent everything that makes encounters difficult for martials. I know I would be fine if casters were inefficient in combat but fine in exploration/puzzles while martials shone in combat but simply cannot match the ability to do shit like fly. But this won't happen so I advocate to go for higher fantasy where wizards remain the same but martials get to be like the mythological heroes.
>>52388585
I mean, a more general way is just to assign XP to an encounter as a whole then give it to the party for however they choose to solve it if they actually do solve it. It doesn't fix XP for purely social encounters like attending a court but it helps curb murderhobos.

>>52388555
Which is my point. Why even have Monks as a class if they're outdone with by literally any martial with access to unarmed proficiencies?

>>52388810
You'd play a monk because you wanted to play a god damn monk. End of story.

>>52388858
I don't want to play a Monk if they suck ass and can't do anything worth while though even though I enjoy playing unarmed fighters in most campaigns.

>>52388948
Again, it depends on the rest of the players. Use a same-page tool/try to find a group that's happy doing a lower power game so everyone can contribute equally to combat/try to play a game where it's not 100% about combat then/quit shitposting.

>>52373150
Yes! A thousand times this.

>>52388991
Thing is, why should people have to nerf themselves just to make ME feel like less of a waste of space? It's even worse than being left in the dust because at least then I can say that I'm not impeding the group's ability to use their full power without hurting muh fee-fees.

>>52389014
You should quit being that guy and just go back to world of warcraft already. You're clearly less interested in a cooperative game to have fun and more about "WINNING" in a fucking make believe simulator of all things. Why don't you quit being a shitty narrowminded player who cant think outside of move and hit shit? Again, tabletop games aren't for you. Gb2destiny or something.

Your next line will be "I was only pretending to be retarded!"

>>52389091
So wanting to play my favorite class without being dead weight makes me "that guy?"

>>52372669
And yet it still manages to have stupid shit like having the Glaive (polearm) and Halberd having the exact same stats and the Trident being a harder to use, heavier, more expensive Spear. Why even include them?

>>52389116
Unless you're playing with the biggest bunch of munchkins on the planet, you won't be a 'dead weight'. You might be slightly below curve in terms of damage output and so on, but dead weight is overstating it massively.

>>52389190
>You might be slightly below curve in terms of damage output
Try doing half of what you actually should be doing.

>>52389091
>The logic behind it all was drawn from game balance as much as from anything else. Fighters have their strength, weapons, and armor to aid them in their competition. Magic-users must rely upon their spells, as they have virtually no weaponry or armor to protect them. Clerics combine some of the advantages of the other two classes. The new class, thieves, have the basic advantage of stealthful actions with some additions in order for them to successfully operate on a plane with other character types. If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D & D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly, or the referee is forced to change the game into a new framework which will accommodate what he has created by way of player-characters. It is the opinion of this writer that the most desirable game is one in which the various character types are able to compete with each other as relative equals
>able to compete with each other as relative equals
>compete... each other... equals

Faggot.

>>52389265
who are you quoting

>>52389116
>that guy who wont shut the fuck up and just play something else but instead whines nonstop about balance
>that guy who cant just have fun and a food time with friends
>that guy who goes on tibetan tapestry websites and shitposts because hes too much of a bitch to just ask if the dm can homebrew stuff to balance things then
Kys my man

>>52389306
Gary fucking Gygax.

>>52389317
>DM says no
What now?

I've never played a character in D&D since I was 10, been stuck DMing for almost 30 years. So my perspective is on that.

Honestly, and it's probably just my style, I want what they pick to be relevant. 3.X added a bunch of stuff, but a good chunk of it is really niche or simply not interesting enough to warrant attention to downright dumb. It's easy to make things in combat shine when a situation calls for a different approach, but trying to make some kind of spell or item with a really focused purpose in a social situation feels hamhanded and me basically saying "use X to pass this."

I skipped out on 4e to play Shadowrun for a good while and came back and did some 5e. It's easier to focus down and make things relevant, but it felt like a lot of stuff was just skewed to combat and things outside it not all that interesting. Though I only did a few games, so maybe I didn't get an Aha! moment and see some stuff that clicks.

Also I've just been in a long scifi/fantasy kick and D&D no matter the setting always feel high fantasy to me.

>>52389323
You mean that dead motherfucker who made that steaming pile of shit called 4e?
>i cant have fun unless im competing and winning!!
No wonder youre here shitposting. Nobody will have you at their table and i dont blame em

>>52388133
As far as 5E goes, casters shouldn't lose concentration easily, because concentration's cost is loaded into the fact that it's concentration, you only get one of it. It is a resource to be spent, you don't want to get hit and lose it.

Also
>a caster with 16 in CON and proficiency in CON saving throws
What the fuck kind of superwizard are you working with in your projection here? Do any casting classes even come with proficiency in CON saves?

>>52389234
Care to show your working on that?

>>52389344
Then you either suck it up and quit being a bitch or you move on. Ezpz.

>>52389344
Then the DM clearly isn't under the impression that you're behind the other party members in terms of usefulness.

Run your own game if you just want to wank off to monks, your DM clearly isn't interested.

>>52389190
I'm literally half as effective as the Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, or Paladin in terms of everything from dealing damage to taking hits to offering support. Even the rogue sees most uses than a Monk thanks to Rogues getting a shitload of skills and a sneak attack to deal extra damage.

>>52389446
So what you're telling me is that monk is a nice halfway house between dealing shitloads of damage, mobility and being a skillmonkey?

>>52389317
Nigga, why should the DM homebrew something that should work right out the box? Isn't that already proving my point?

>>52389446
YOU might be half as effective but thats mostly because youre a shit monk and a shit player with no creativity! Move n hit, amirite?

>inb4 prove it then!
Use your two braincells. I am not doing your homework, bitch.

>>52389465
Nigga why dont you just play something else then you literal autist. Besides if youre playing core only youre a fucking moron, kh wait youre already a moron... use splatbooks learn to make good builds or swallow bleach. Fuck you

>>52389368
>As far as 5E goes, casters shouldn't lose concentration easily, because concentration's cost is loaded into the fact that it's concentration, you only get one of it. It is a resource to be spent, you don't want to get hit and lose it.
Then don't let yourself get boxed into melee while trying to maintain your concentration spell.
>Do any casting classes even come with proficiency in CON saves?
In 5e, the sorcerer does.

>>52389463
No, I'm saying that Monks is "jack of all trades, master of none: the class."
>>52389477
If it's established that I'm shittier than every other class in the game, what can I do that another class couldn't do twice as well with half the investment?

You fags always screech about "MUH CREATIVITY" but you never have the guts to give an example because you know how full of shit you are.

>>52389369
>level 10 Fighter
>+20/+15
>2d6+12 with a basic loadout and the +3 weapon they're expected to have by that point, can Power Attack to shed excess accuracy for damage
>level 10 Monk
>+14/+14/+9
>1d10+7, less but more accurate if they use a monk weapon to get around how stupidly costed AoMFs are, can't PA worth shit because of low accuracy
>CR 10 average AC is 22

I think the problem should be pretty obvious.

>>52389503
Why the fuck should I if the classes themselves are supposed to be balanced? I should be able to play any class I want without having to go "mother-may-I?" just to be marginally more effective than a Druid's animal companion.

>>52389555
Oh yeah, bonus round

>level 10 Druid's unbuffed bear companion with no magic items at all
>+14/+14 1d8+9 claws, +9 2d6+5 bite

>>52389538
Thats because that shit is context sensitive you dipshit. You are in the game for the wrong reasons and you wont fucking work with others to try to get a better experience because youre a fucking pussy who can only talk shit on the internet and you most likely dont even play the game at all. Glad none of my players are gigantic faglords like you. And yes theres a fucking monk at my table and no he doesnt complain about "muh usefulness".youre retarded but im stupid for continuing to eat this shitty bait of yours. Goodnight you salty cuck.

>>52389265
you completely took him out of context you dishonest boy

he was defending the power of magic users in D&D with the argument that DMs weren't making enough challenges where the more niche classes are relevant

of course the guy who shoots fireballs is gonna seem superior if your campaign is just combat encoutner after combat encounter

>>52389622
Don't forget, the bear can also make a free grapple check if it manages to successfully hit with any of his claws or bite attacks.

>>52389630
No I didn't, he was specifically telling DMs to rein in casters.

>>52389626
Sorry I'd rather play a game than play "mother may I" just to actually play the class I wanted to play.

>>52389645
>Magic is great. Magic is powerful. But it should be kept great and powerful in relation to its game environment. That means all the magic-users who have been coasting along with special dispensations from the dungeonmaster may soon have to get out there and root with the rest of the players or lie down and die.
He's saying DMs shouldn't be giving magic users special treatment. Notice nowhere does he say 'wow thiefs need to be stronger to compete' or 'magic needs to be weaker'. He's talking about DMing and not the game system, otherwise the systems he designed would obviously have been different.

>>52389690
Yeah but how does help monks exactly? Theyre still worthless and I dont want to do any optimization because everything should have been balanced and homoginized

>>52389514
>Then don't let yourself get boxed into melee while trying to maintain your concentration spell.
The point being made that even in melee, the concentration check is usually easy to make unless you're taking dangerous levels of damage (relevance starting at 22 and up).
But this isn't problematic design as they're not intended to lose concentration often. Concentration spells only become worth the spell slot they're casted in if they maintain over at least a few rounds. If concentration were easy to disrupt, you'd have nothing but instant-action and non-concentration spells used, ever.
Concentration doesn't need to be a further limiting factor, because it is inherently a limiting factor. (only one concentration at a time, usually low value building round by round)
>In 5e, the sorcerer does.
Fair, but sorcerers aren't exactly problematic considering they're tilted towards being fire element blaster casters.

No offense monk dude but you are a fucking idiot if you think throwing punches should be as powerful as throwing fireballs or cutting motherfuckers up with an excalibur. You want bruce lee and you get just that - an ordinary dude who can punch pretty good and get killed by chuck norris. Yiu literally cannot compete. System working as intended

>>52389877
That's not what a Monk is, though. They're overtly magical.

They just suck really hard and even if you gave them the fist wraps of god to compete with excalibur, they'd still suck.

>>52389877
Monks should get Martial Adept Initiator progression for free IMO. Book of Seven Swords doesn't exactly fix the caster/martial gap, but it definitely fixes the monk/martial gap.

>>52389891
Might as well play an unarmed Swordsage in that instance.

>>52389936
Yeah.

An unarmed swordsage is a better monk than a monk is. Just do that and call it a Monk and you're good.

>>52389943
No, because Im autistic and it has to say MONK on the class space.

>>52390018
Well, that's your problem. I gave you solutions, you didn't want them, so you have to come up with your own.

And that's not playing D&D, playing a different class, or giving your GM the weird request to homebrew a version of monk that is exactly a swordsage except named Monk.

>>52390033
Are people really this bad at detecting internet sarcasm?

Itt: monk cuck porn

>>52387625
Read up on anima to make casters wheep more.

>>52390237
What's that? I need to bring the suffering since every member of my group wants to be a caster in some aspect due to the modular nature of the system.

>>52390246
Anima beyond fantasy has 3 main features
Bad english translation
Very slow magic that has powerful effects but high cost
Bullshit murdergod martials that work on "murder" and "murder harder"

Said martials can:
Fly
See invisible
Teleport
Summon buddies a la naruto with faustian deals
Be goku
Parry spells

>>52390335
>parry spells
I'm sold.

>>52390335
You forgot "overly complicated d% system where you have to roll 20 million times for everything" as a feature.

>>52390345
All spells have to hit.
If you can touch energy you can parry spells.
From deathray to fireball!

>>52390414
>butthurt caster
How is rolling for attack or defense once a million times?

Play the game before you talk senpai

File: 1457291841913.jpg (80KB, 480x600px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 480x600px

>>52376685
>>52376388
>>52388585
>Dnd is a combat oriented system
Aren't all systems combat-centric? For just about every mainstream game I can think of the chapter on combat will be the longest. What is a non combat-oriented system that people actually play? Is "non-combat oriented" a codeword for "rules-light"?

>>52390530
*Aren't all the popular systems combat-centric?

>>52390530
>>52390545
Depends on what you consider combat. Games are mostly conflict oriented because conflict is what drives story/narrative forward. Even things like Golden Sky Stories have conflict in them, it's just not violent.

You can run a Fate game without a single weapon ever being drawn (no, I'm not talking about kung-fu brawlers) because it handles all sorts of conflict in a similar manner.

>>52363296
>there's no craft

10/10
10/10
100/100
Best game
Best game

>>52373633
>Why does morning star do 1d8 damage while mace does 1d6?

>Why does a spiky metal weight do more damage on a long haft than on a short one?

shit anon i dunno

>>52390530
>Is "non-combat oriented" a codeword for "rules-light"?

That can't be. B/X is pretty damn light and it's about as combat oriented as a game can get.

I think it's just codeword for redditfun tier Critical Role ebin freeform RP""""G""""" kinds of games. Games for people who don't like games as I like to call them.

>>52390530
I know it's a bait image anon, but it still triggers me bad. 20/20 would get angry again fuck you fuckhead

>>52373489
>Very little support for things like character relationships, favours, reputation, extended social contests, investigations, and other rules you'd need for Roleplay-heavy campaigns
>I can't roleplay without rules telling me how to roleplay.

Hey autism, most of us are perfectly capable of role-playing by ourselves.

In fact, pretty much 95% of all relationship building role-playing have been pure conversation. And even if we thought of additional rules and rolls, nothing would actually have made sense. Adding rolls to these situations would never have added anything of value. It could only have detracted, or done nothing at all at best.

What do you want here? Fire Emblem rules? Ask your DM for this. As long as he isn't as autistic as you, he will likely give you a few benefits to appropriate situations.

>>52372641
>>52372085
>>52371893
As a total newfag to tabletop, the fuck are "whiteboxing", "whiteroom", and "SGT"?

>>52390659
"Whitebox"/"Whiteroom" is when you take an option and test it in a vacuum. Got its name from characters fighting in an infinite, white room as a test.

SGT is "Same Game Test". Testing characters/classes by having them go through the same set of varied challenges.

File: 1469314672522.png (669KB, 750x900px) Image search: [Google]

669KB, 750x900px

>>52390653
I think part of the problem is that so much of the time when people shit on DnD they forget to name any alternatives.

>>52390696
>Theorycrafting
>Schrodinger's Wizard
What do these mean?

>>52390703
"Theorycrafting" is basically when you say "Okay, that looks nice, but doesn't work in ACTUAL PLAY (because I said so)".

"Schroedinger's wizard" is invoked when the argument goes something like this:

>"Wizards are fine because they can't do X"
>"But there's a spell that does X..."
>"Oh and wizards have all spells known and prepared always, right? They just happen to have the correct spell prepared at the time. Schroedinger's wizard, you can't know what spell it has prepared until you need it."

>>52390659
"bullshit people say to discount math as mattering"
"bullshit people say to discount math as mattering"
Actually highly useful tool for figuring out a class' capabilities.

>>52388282

We've had a campaign where, due to story point, everyone was disarmed. Cue smiling monk player.

>>52363225
i like DnD

>>52391412
You mean crying Monk player as they had all of their magic items taken away from them.

File: Sarmatian_Warriors_01.jpg (201KB, 800x1108px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 800x1108px

Attention idiots:

I played a fighter in D&D. The magic users, on paper, were better fighters than me. They could wear armor, use weapons, consistently cause more damage than me. I had a druid player brag that they could wipe out the entire party by herself. She wasn't wrong, she actually could.

However, I was still the most effective player in the game. Why?

Because I was smarter than all of them.

I grew up playing AD&D. I grew up playing Cyberpunk 2020. I practiced asymmetric warfare.

Oh, there's an enemy encampment who has captured whatever maguffin. Screw "sneaking" in and relying on skills rolls. Set the surrounding forest on fire. Send fire arrows into the camp to set it ablaze. Then sneak in during the confusion and panic: they'll be more concerned about the fire and less concerned about the player who is frantically running about.

I play mujahideen. D&D 3.x and greater makes players munchkins and teaches them bad habits.

Fight smarter, not harder. You twats.

Balance is for the tactically challenged and mentally retarded.

>>52391537
And having a fighter that wasn't shittier than the magic user would have stopped you in doing this how...?

>>52391537
>Set forest on fire
>druid does nothing
I see a conflict of interests here.

And also shitthatneverhappened.txt.

File: rus_warrior_by_vendelrus.jpg (2MB, 1086x2031px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1086x2031px

>>52391552

It wouldn't have! That's the point!

>>52391553

They called it the Lyn Method. The Lyn Method consisted of:

Starting fires, be they in town, enemy encampments, forests, or wherever.

Poison. Poison all the things. Poison the arrows. Poison the blades. Poison the well. Work with DM to make poison to kill the metagaming druid player's character to kick her out of the game because she was an annoying child. Put it on my character's own storage equipment so she'd be poisoned by an unknown poison that drained Wisdom stats until it hit 1 and leaves her senile because she wanted to steal equipment given to me by her prior characters.

>>druid does nothing
>I see a conflict of interests here

Yep. She was a fucking moron, and we all hated her. Our gaming group often asks if she will be included in the game or not, most of them will not participate if she is.

>And also shitthatneverhappened.txt

This campaign went on for over a year on roll20. Just because you're too stupid to figure this shit out yourself doesn't mean other people do.

>>52391833
>It wouldn't have! That's the point!

So then you don't actually have problem with people wanting that, do you?

>>52391833
Too bad poison is shit in 3.5.

File: 1426457135638.jpg (6KB, 171x171px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 171x171px

>>52391861

Welcome to DM powers. Fucking house rule and homebrew that shit!

>but it isn't in the rulebook and that isn't fair and whaaaa

Then don't be a metagaming little shit and try to steal magical items that only my character possesses and no one else in party in character knows about.

>>52391854

Balance is a pointless way to make people lazy and stupid.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Typical D&D players, folks!

>>52391900
>Balance is a pointless way to make people lazy and stupid.
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Typical D&D players, folks!

I'm sorry, I must be really stupid because I don't get it.

Are you implying that "balance is stupid" is typical for D&D players? Or that balance makes people lazy and stupid?

In the second case, wouldn't imbalance make people lazy? Since you can just spam your OP shit without thinking.

>>52391861
Not to mention Druids are immune to it anyway.

>>52391833
See, the thing is... A wizard could pull the same shit, except do it better. Silently cast a few fire spells on the surrounding trees, Minor Create poison in their food, double down on the fear and surprise by throwing up illusions...

Or even worse, summoning a fire elemental and a few imps to do all of that for you, and sitting back on your hovering, sentient laurels while the mere thugs need to use their hands.

The main problem with balance is that each player should be starting at the same 'base'. A level 1 character should be just as overall powerful as any other level 1 character. A level 20 should be just as overall powerful as any other level 20 character.

The class system tries to imply that the game has 'Archetypes'. The Sneaky Assassin, the Big Damage Dealer, the Medic, and finally the Squishy Cannon or Utility Plus. But the problem is that a caster can- with three spells- completely negate most of a rogue's class features. For a fighter? It takes only one.

The problem is that the wizard can 'Deal Damage', 'Sneak and Pick Locks', 'Prevent Others From Being Hurt In The First Place', 'Stop Time', 'Instantly Telepor't, 'Turn Enemies Into Drooling Piles of Negative Levels', 'Fuck The Action Economy Entirely', and so on.

I mean, yeah, it doesn't end up that way. My wizard ends up doing just as much as the cleric or the fighter or whatever. But that's because I make an effort not to summon instant armies, or turn invisible, or cast celerity three times to Reached Chained Empowered Maximized Shivering Touch 30+ or so dragons into paralyzed, dexterity-less piles of frosty uselessness.

But it would be SO EASY TO DO. A rogue puts all these points into the ability to sneak, hide, pick locks and pockets, and finally disable traps. But a wizard can spend a few hundred gold to learn all the spells he'd need and some summoning spells to trip all of the traps, and he's taken the rogue's place as well as his own.

File: e26567e1-26b8-4a73-a452-820ab3c5f4e2.jpg (100KB, 600x424px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 600x424px

>>52391939

The latter. And, again, it is the DM's job to make sure that the player *can't* spam the OP shit for everything.

How is this not obvious?? Power is a trap!

Are people still actually arguing with these idiot trolls, or are we deep in trolls trolling trolls territory now?

I honestly can't tell how genuine this stupidity is.

>>52392009
Well, ideally, in a balanced game the DM wouldn't have to do that, since the game would be made in a way where OP options can't be spammed.

Wouldn't it be better if you removed that extra work from the DM?

>>52363225
>Diplomancy
That table is the dumbest fucking thing in the entire history of tabletop gaming. People constantly bitch about wizards and shit. Nuking an entire fucking planet is nothing compared to the power of the diplomacy skill.

DnD 3.5 is a Litmus Test for good GMs. If a GM runs 3.5 exactly as written, never play with them again.

>>52392030

It encourages lazier (bad) story telling.

>>52391952

Retard

>>52392105
>Retard
No u

>>52392105
>It encourages lazier (bad) story telling.

Why?

>>52389877
No offense autist dude but you are a fucking idiot if you think a monk should just be throwing Bruce Lee punches in a game where people are throwing fireballs or cutting motherfuckers up with an excalibur.

>>52363225
D&D 3.5 is one of these things that is so bad it ends being great. I tried out many systems in my time, and besides Cthulhu 6e, which is the greatest thing ever, nothing surpasses D&D 3.PF. The sheer autism that you can invest in it thanks to its complicated rules and near endless amount of resources just can't be found anywhere else.

>>52388282
>No, it's a basic assumption with how classes are supposed to work.
It's YOUR assumption.

File: 215b6dfe-e32d-4b78-8ae9-7370568ddd54.jpg (47KB, 534x486px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 534x486px

>>52392159

If you aren't able to figure out why on your own, you wouldn't be able to understand, even if I explained it. Don't ever fucking GM a game: you're not smart enough to make it interesting.

>>52392223
In other words you're full of shit.

>>52392247

Okay, keep thinking that. Go play your tabletop WoW simulator. Or 4th edition. It's super balanced.

>>52392247
This. Just stop arguing with him.

>>52373007
Underrated post.

>>52392192
I wish a monk could do shit like run on walls, walk on clouds, parry spells, shit like that. That would be cool.

>>52392269
>implying WoW isn't imbalanced
>on purpose

>>52392301

It has to do with WoW being an almost moba and not a cooperative story telling game with a world infinitely more complex and interesting interactions with the world. Even in combat, you can use abilities in creative ways in tabletop: modern D&D players don't do this as much and treat it as a videogame with hard, set, defined purposes.

>>52392335
So... balance has nothing to do with it?

File: 1453671511301.jpg (311KB, 441x578px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 441x578px

>>52392362

Correct. It has everything to do with the mindset of people who advocate for "balance".

>>52392335
I wonder if this has anything to do with 3.5's attribute check rules being cancer on a stick, its martials having fuck all for skills so chandelier jumping was a suicide mission, and its combat maneuvers being very, very situationally useful with lots of investment, useless with investment, and all of them are actively harmful to use without investment.

Nah. That can't be it.

>>52392375
>Correct. It has everything to do with the mindset of people who advocate for "balance".

So then balance doesn't encourage lazier storytelling?

File: 1442188630555.jpg (20KB, 277x296px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 277x296px

>>52392377

Be creative. It's easy if you try.

Green is not a creative color.

>>52392395

See >>52392405's picture. It's about you.

>>52392414
If you can't explain to my "pretend I'm 5" posts what you mean, you are full of shit

- Einstein

>>52392405
It doesn't matter how 'creative' you are when the mechanics the DM defaults to to model your 'creativity' are shit and are stacked against you the whole time.

Monks are uber shit at worst or meh at best, unless you play 4e. Unarmed combat sucks in all editions.

File: 1488772253985.gif (909KB, 440x508px) Image search: [Google]

909KB, 440x508px

>>52379735
Falchion is a 2 handee weapon in PF.

It triggers me too.

/tg/'s ideal system
>no classes, everyone is the same
>everyone has same attack bonus
>everyone has same health bonuses
>magic can never do any more damage than someone swinging a weapon and is only allowed to do minor tricks that can't solve problems any better than a normal person can
>everyone can take any feat or skill they like

What am I missing?

>>52392446
>being unarmed is weaker than using a weapon or casting spells
how imbalanced....IDIOTS will defend this -.-....

File: jackie chan ladder.png (528KB, 853x480px) Image search: [Google]

528KB, 853x480px

>>52392446
>tfw playing a Monk in Legend

>>52392442

Go play AD&D1. Get back to me. I've explained why over several posts above. If you can't figure it out, you have a problem and I can't help you.

File: mutants & masterminds.jpg (70KB, 389x499px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 389x499px

>>52392460

>>52392481
I started out playing AD&D and BD&D years before 3.0 was even a thing, though. 3.X is a fundamentally different game that needs the DM to overrule the system a hell of a lot more to do the same things I could in either of those games.

>>52392481
I prefer Basic, if you don't mind.

I read >>52391537 and >>52391833 but I still don't understand what the problem with balance and wanting balance is.

>>52392505

Yes. It is a bad game

>>52392512

>OD&D

Muh man.

>>52392460
More like
>Classes fill a specific niche or role, none are too generic (Fighter) or too flexible (Wizard)
>Some kind of bonus increases with level
>Front-line classes get meaningful increases to toughness, not a piddly d8 or d10
>Spells and weapon attacks are balanced against each other while filling separate rolls; spells might specialize in AoE effects and debuffs, martial abilities might specialize in interrupts, repositioning, and exploiting said debuffs.
>Anyone can take any feat or skill they like, but characters who don't have magic are better at non-combat skills to compensate for their lack of magical solutions to problems the party might face

>>52392540
Don't get me wrong, I can get an enjoyable game out of 3.5 in the hands of a DM who understands the system as well as I do.

It just has nothing to do with any of the classes in the PHB except for the Bard.

>>52392554
Niches are bad and if whatever class you choose can't do everything whatever other class exists then it's bad and makes people feel inadequate.

>>52390696
Whenever alternatives are named they aren't D&Dfinder so don't count.

File: 1471993997797.jpg (43KB, 307x309px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 307x309px

>>52392460
>>52392554
>>52392635

>>52392562

I don't like 3.x/Pathfinder. But I'm often forced to use it by players because "it's easier." It's why I often argue to use the DM's position to manage the game.

Dealing with OP is the same method as dealing with munchkin min makers. I find players who started with 3.x or whatever are often not creative enough to deal with this methodology, for whatever reason.

>>52392554
nothing wrong with having some generalist classes and some specialist classes

>>52389797
>But this isn't problematic design as they're not intended to lose concentration often.
THEN WHY DOES IT FUCKING EXIST IF THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO FAIL CONCENTRATION CHECKS? Why not just have a hard rule that just says "you can only have one active spell up at a time" rather than lie and make it seem as though you've made your game balanced for once.

>>52392643

Anti balance anon here: what about RuneQuest?

I'm not lindybeige, I swear!

>>52392463
Yeah, how unrealistic wanting martial arts to be compared to weapons in a fantasy game with dragons, werewolves and magic

DnD is fine if you only play it as Gygax intended. Campaign locked strictly down to a dungeon with a series of encounters, mostly combat.

It's literally a strategy board game with role-playing elements, trying to use it for anything more open than that is what brings its flaws into sharp relief.

File: rideNeverEnds.jpg (15KB, 241x210px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 241x210px

>>52363225
>Vast majority of the playerbase

>>52390696
I'd love to see recommendations for D&D alternatives that aren't just d20 heartbreakers.

>>52392009
How does the DM stop the wizard from casting time stop + force cage + cloud kill for every major boss in the game without heavy handed DM fiat that runs counter to the rules of the game and punishes the player for utilizing his class abilities in an effective way?

>>52392213
Yeah, because my assumption is that it's a good game that's worth playing until the game proves me wrong and shits the bed in the WORST possible way.

>>52392712
Yeah, man. Christ can you believe you go faster on a horse than on foot? How dense are they, that in a FANTASY universe with monsters, magic, and fucking WERWEOLVES, they won't just make walking and riding a horsie equally as good for the sake of (((equality)))

>>52392779
OSR stuff count?

Aside from those, I've played Savage Worlds, Advanced Fighting Fantasy 2nd ed, Fate/FAE, some sort of Story Teller (WoD/CoD) hack, Dungeon World, and probably a bunch of other stuff that I'm forgetting that weren't d20. And even the d20 heartbreakers aren't all bad.

And if you liked 4e, there's Strike!

>>52392799

Traps. Anti Magic artifacts. Etc.

git gud

>>52392829
He said without heavy-handed DM fiat.

>>52392829
>Traps
Largely ineffectual since there are spells that can easily detect traps and spells that allows the wizard to bypass them easily, such as using spider-climb to walk on the ceiling or mage hand to purposefully open the door from a relatively safe distance away.
>AMF
Fucks over martials twice as hard as the mages, especially since there are spells that allows the wizard to still cast spells even within an AMF.

Also, the challenge was to stop the mage WITHOUT resorting to heavy-handed DM fiat.

So you're the one who needs to git gud

>>52392822
As much as I love OSR stuff I wouldn't count it due to it still being the same basic framework, even if the design goals and playstyle are totally different.
I do want to try Strike! someday. It looks interesting.

>>52392848

It's not heavy handed. Make the badguy have experience with time magic. He has an item that makes him run in his own time field. Everything else freezes but him.

Alternatively, make him easy. But the consequences from removing him from power dire.

It's not heavy handed: it's just unexpected.

File: 4ucznoef.png (67KB, 488x218px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 488x218px

>>52392799
You gave your players the most broken super power of all time. A power that literally can only be combated if the enemy has the exact same power (since something as simple as anti-magic is a "fiat" >>52392848 >>52392874).
Wow uh time to pull out that Same Stand Type card. Dunce.

>>52392913

We're arguing with people who are stupid and/or have autism. They're not creative enough to figure this shit out.

>>52392812
Except:
1. You can be like way faster than a horse
And
2. They give you options to be way faster than a horse
If they give you options to pursue an unarmed concept they should make them as viable as other options or remove that concept from the game, otherwise is a trap option which doesn't belong to games, maybe to your sex life, but not to games

>>52392904
>It's not heavy handed. Make the badguy have experience with time magic. He has an item that makes him run in his own time field. Everything else freezes but him.
That would only work if a) time magic is enough of an occurrence within this setting that such measures would be taken and b) that the BBEG is powerful enough to construct such an item in the first place.

Also, if that were the case, the mage could just cast dimensional prison + force cage + cloud kill and now have an item that allows him to ignore the effects of stopped time whenever he wants.
>Alternatively, make him easy. But the consequences from removing him from power dire.
Do you really think that a wizard who is that powerful is going to care? Either he can defeat whatever "greater evil" you throw at him or he fucks off to a demi-plane and scrys upon the world ending until the shit dies down.

>>52392942
Every player starts with the same opportunities, if you choose wrong is your fault, not the game. People still don't reralize this and keep going abloobloobloo muh martials suck, no, you suck, pick the better option not the worst.

File: 1486016592226.jpg (55KB, 480x472px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 480x472px

>>52392473
>playing tao in anima
>playing unarmed in GURPS

>>52392913
Antimagic is a 6th level spell- so it's considered a CR12 challenge, so at any point behind 12th level would be a seriously disproportionate challenge- like siccing a dragon on level 3s. Moreover layering a dungeon in enough antimagic fields for the wizard to not break the universe over his knee is essentially telling the player 'you shouldn't have been a wizard at all, go wait outside while the REAL MEN USE THEIR MUSCLES'...

And then the real men get crushed too since their magic items don't work in an antimagic field.

It's like having an anti-air field to stop a pyromaniac. Yeah, he might not be able to set fires everywhere, but his non-pyro mates will suffocate too.

>>52373633
>Why does morning star do 1d8 damage while mace does 1d6? They're essentially same implement.
A baseball bat with nails deal a lot more damage than one without nails. It pierces your flesh while still crushing your bones. So yes, that +0-2 damage is justified.

>>52392913
>>52392926
Your original position, as stated here >>52392009
was
>it is the DM's job to make sure that the player *can't* spam the OP shit for everything.
which was in response to
>Are you implying that "balance is stupid" is typical for D&D players? Or that balance makes people lazy and stupid?
>In the second case, wouldn't imbalance make people lazy? Since you can just spam your OP shit without thinking.
I'm just saying man, the fact that you're self-destructing this hard only proves how full of shit you are.

Also, I didn't give them shit, he can choose time stop as a spell that his character just knows as a result of reaching level 17-20. If it was like how it was in earlier editions where the DM was the one who decided who got what spell(s) then maybe you'd have a point but unfortunately, that's just not the case anymore.

File: 1433131391368.jpg (34KB, 500x581px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 500x581px

>>52392956

Who says he is a wizard? What if he just hires them? You're assuming that as a DM, I'm even allowing those powers.

>great evil
>high power

Oh, anon. See, that's the beauty. It isn't some great evil or anything magical. It was about the socioeconomic balance he enforced. I hope you enjoy economic collapse, balkanization, wars, and a greater evil caused by man and whatever sentient races exist in world.

Heavy is the crown.

>>52393022

Forgive me for dealing with shifting goal posts.

File: DOCTORED PHOTOSHOP IMAGE.jpg.png (2KB, 122x55px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 122x55px

>>52393022

>>52392991
At the same time though, presenting these options as being equal to one another when it's clearly not the case IS a fault in the system, especially when the game gives casters strong melee options to match or exceed the martial's DPR.

At least in games like GURPS, WoD or M&M, if an option is powerful or underpowered, the game explicitly tells you so instead of trying to claim that a human is as powerful as a vampire or that the dude who can learn any language is equal to not!Wolverine either by comparing the two options, directly telling you that one option is better than another, or attaching an appropriate amount of points to more powerful abilities so you can't just GET that power at the start of the game unless the GM lets you have enough points to do so.

>>52393030
>Who says he is a wizard? What if he just hires them?
You can't just higher a wizard who is capable of casting a 9th level spell. At best you might be able to hire someone who knows 3-5th level spells but even then that's a BIG assumption for the setting.
> You're assuming that as a DM, I'm even allowing those powers.
Okay, but that would still fall under heavy handed DM fiat and there's nothing stopping from taking any of the other powerful spells that can end most encounters by turn 1.
>Oh, anon. See, that's the beauty. It isn't some great evil or anything magical. It was about the socioeconomic balance he enforced. I hope you enjoy economic collapse, balkanization, wars, and a greater evil caused by man and whatever sentient races exist in world.
see
>he fucks off to a demi-plane and scrys upon the world ending until the shit dies down.

>>52393050
It's not shifting goalposts, you're just an idiot.

>>52393131

Says the people who thinks GMs being creative are "breaking the rules". Someone needs to reread the rules.

>>52393110

Who says you can't hire a wizard that powerful? He's the BBEG.

>>52363225
>Just about everything is 1d20
>Usually hidden threshold for success
>Non-normal distribution of roll
>No reliability in how your character will perform
>No pre-knowledge about chances of a certain action succeeding
>No way to know if you should spend extra resources beforehand or save them for later
>Your character will become incompetent or stellar based off the even distribution of 1d20 and not really based off your character themselves
>At its core becomes "roll and see what happens"