Let's try something different. The way I see it, a thing

Don't do this. Delete this shit thread, and don't give any more attention to the whiners.

You're better than this.

>>52839976
>You're better than this.

Bitch you best not be tellin me what to do.

>Started with D&D
>It's great
>Play more
>It's shit
>Want to play something
>read lot of others systems
>cant play them because others dont want to
>D&D isnt so bad
>D&D is fine

>>52839957

>The way I see it, a thing does not remain popular for more than 40 years without having legitimately good qualities to it

Public executions were popular events for centuries, all over the world.

>>52839957
There's plenty to like about D&D and there's plenty that D&D doesn't do well, which is why I'm glad I live in a time when there's a plethora of easily attainable systems to do whatever I want.

I don't HAVE to play D&D because there are options, and that's a good thing.

>>52839997
See, the haters are just going to use it to give backhanded compliments and otherwise just try to debate and whine.

System "warfare" is the worst.

>>52839957
3e introduced me and hooked me
4e showed me it can be good
OD&D showed me it can be simple
5e showed me what squandered potential looks like

>>52841691
And they had legitimately good qualities to them. What's your point?

>>52841874
How is 5e squandered? It's basically the AD&D 3rd Edition we would have gotten after 2nd, if the folks at Wizards had already learned all the lessons of actual-3rd and 4th Editions.

>>52841898
For fuck's sake, you're talking to a troll.

>>52841924
This is 4chan. We're ALL trolls.

DnD is a great party game if you've got a board, figurines (or proxies) and either people who know the system or premade sheets.

Drop in, locked-down dungeon setting, nethack-style progression with the occasional puzzle and friendly NPC. It works as a really fun boardgame with roleplay elements and the combat is fairly varied and tactical.

It's a limited system, sure, but it's damn good when used for what it was originally intended.

>>52841898
It's good (a lot better than 3rd and spinoffs), it's just not as good as it could have been.

>>52841898

The playtests showed that it could be an interesting game with good, original design ideas, actually innovating and moving things forward.

Instead we got the blandest, safest, most boring game they could possibly make in the current climate. Something entirely reliant on familiarity and nostalgia without any real ideas or direction of its own. 5e is the epitome of wasted potential.

>>52841940
>I'm a dumb troll giving out backhanded compliments

Wow, you really fooled everyone into thinking otherwise. Aren't you clever?

>>52842005
Nah I'm being sincere, that's how Gygax played it.

If you've not tried a straight dungeon crawl in DnD recently I suggest you try it; the strong points of the system are problem-solving, combat and mechanical character growth.

I find it kinda fascinating. I'm not sure whether it's just the size of its fanbase, its age or its dubious quality, but it seems impossible to mention D&D without a few people piping up to claim that absolutely anyone criticising it is a troll.

It's this fascinating preemptive defence which effectively shuts down any rational discussion or conversation about its flaws because they'll just dismiss any and all negative comments as trolling.

>>52841977
>without any real ideas or direction of its own

I find this assertion vague and unsatisfactory.

>The playtests showed that it could be an interesting game with good, original design ideas, actually innovating and moving things forward.

What got left out that was in the playtest? The biggest "casualty" that I know of is that Battlemaster features were supposed to be available to all martial classes, but I actually prefer not having them. My thief character would have felt and played very differently if it relied on being a worse fighter.

>>52842267

You're missing the Dragon Sorcerer, who used a spell point system to cast and manifested passive bonuses based on how many points they'd spent, which was a fucking awesome idea.

That's the kind of thing that's missing from 5e. New ideas of basically any sort. Nothing in the system is new. It's all rehashes, reworkings or streamlined versions of things that existed before, leaving it completely lacking any sense of identity beyond 'being D&D'.

And being fair? They knew what they were doing, and it's obvious that their core demographic loved it. Playing safe and simple and generic as humanly possible won them a lot of love.

I still call it a waste of potential because it did nothing to move the hobby forward or add anything to D&D. It just filled the space in a way that was very unlikely to offend anybody who'd care to play it.

>>52842057
That's not how he played it you moron. Gygax's original crew eventually evolved from dungeon delvers to political rulers. Quit spewing lies about what you don't know to try and pigeon hole a system you don't understand. You are trying to undermine its versatility, all in a transparent attempt at system politics.

You are a simple-minded troll, and no where near as clever as you think you are. You've been called out. Trying to pretend otherwise will just embarass yourself further.

>>52839957
It does the one thing most systems don't.
It gets players.

>>52842524

The sad truth about why most people play D&D. Also a depressing self fulfilling prophecy. Although it's less true now than it was before.

Star Wars sucks

>>52839957
Never played D&D, none of my friends have any interest in it either. Sucks.

>>52839957
I like 5e and all but it really is carried mostly be momentum. It's really evident that a significant portion of D&D and PF's continued success is just familiarity and momentum, without taking a stab at the systems, you can probably just open Roll20 listings and find a dozen games unsuited for the systems that people've forced into them for lack of knowledge of better systems.

>>52842584
Yeah, only normies listen to Metallica, there was another band called [no one remembers] that was doing the same thing musically 20 years earlier.

>>52842490
>thats not how he played it

Except it objectively and demonstrably was. Occasional exceptions barred, Gygax was known for playing the old-school game he initially created with high-lethality and a focus on dungeoncrawl.

As I've said, the combat and the 'dungeoneering' stuff is solid and fun. Put it next to just about any other system though and the flexibility and potential for simulating a wider world is laughable. It's not a hard system to understand because outside of the combat, it's mechanically very very simple.

It's not a bad thing for a system to have a narrow focus, and it's a shame it upsets you so much to hear that.

Also you type like the kind of guy who unironically owns a katana, so stop doing that shit.

>>52842670
everyone remembers beethoven, who was the heavy metal of his day

>>52841977
I remember back a few years back when they had a playtest-like thing with the Caverns of Chaos at Origins Games Fair. Being drunk gave you advantage on stuff, so I just had a character that was constantly drunk.

I think I was the reason that's not a thing anymore.... and I apologize for that.

>>52842700
>Put it next to just about any other system though and the flexibility and potential for simulating a wider world is laughable

I see this claim a lot. Can you give an example, please? Bonus points if it's concerning something that D&D is NOT consciously choosing to ignore about "reality" in favor of a more cinematic/fun experience, such as the fact that falling damage caps at 20d6.

>>52842912
I mean if you consider a knife to the throat holding 0 threat if you've got enough HP to be 'cinematic/fun' then you're going to be the type of person to be fine with PCs being capable of swimming through lava with enough HP too.

>>52842948
I feel like that just folds into the "hit points are not necessarily meat points" thing. Of course a knife to the throat isn't a threat in and of itself when you have a lot of hit points, because you're still capable of fighting back.

>>52842999
There's also the fact that the social rules are very much barebones when compared to other systems of a similar complexity like GURPS.

Most of this stuff was never intended to be front-and-centre of DnD, and that is 100% fine. Edge of the Empire isn't a good system to run a high-lethality tactical operations game in and GURPS isn't any good for a shounen punch-and-scream game.

>>52839957
>having legitimately good qualities to it.
I don't think anyone really thinks that DnD is complete garbage that does nothing right at all. It clearly does have at least some good points, and at least a few people consider it fun to play. I think people can just see that those good qualities don't account for the MASSIVE gap in popularity that exists in between it and most other games.
The way I see it it's like...I don't know, facebook. There are plenty of other social media sites out there, and some of them do things much better than facebook does. Facebook rules simply because it was around first, and its popularity snowballed despite under performing in certain areas. However, that's not to try and say there is literally nothing good at all about facebook.

>>52843042
>There's also the fact that the social rules are very much barebones when compared to other systems of a similar complexity like GURPS.

This is, again, vague. Can you provide a detailed example?

>>52839957
All of my players are lazy fucks who do the littlest amount of work possible, I have to lay out the setting and books right in front of them because even when I give them all the resources they never read a single word and have to be walked through everything.

5e is simple and dumbed down so my players easily understand everything, and it's not so simple that I can still make interesting stuff.

>>52843049
This yeah. DnD is good at being DnD, and as long as you play it for that you're solid.

But I'm certain if I open up Roll20 now and filter for 5e I'm going to see somebody trying to hack 5e into either some particular anime or some inappropriate sci-fi setting. That is not okay.

>>52843049
MySpace predates Facebook by about a year. Both were preceded by Friendster and Hub Culture, which itself was preceded by a few other social networking services like SixDegrees.com and Makeoutclub (which were among the first to have "user profiles", the defining feature of Facebook and MySpace).

The point being that merely being the "first" is not a guarantee of success in and of itself. There need to be other qualities that prevent a thing from being overtaken by successors.

>>52843166
I was using it as a random example. Facebook was the first one to do things sort of well and so it's the first one to take off like that, and it remains on top even if other sites have equal or better functionality. Besides, I could argue that it was more the internet finally coming into it's own as a thing everyone uses and FB just getting the timing right. My point still stands that popularity is in many cases it's own cause, you don't really /need/ to be the absolute best to be the most used, whether its a company or a site or anything else really.

>>52839957
>The way I see it, a thing does not remain popular for more than 40 years without having legitimately good qualities to it.

one word MICROSOFT WINDOWS.

Ok it doenst have 40 years but you get the point

>>52841929
on this blessed day

>>52842700
>Except it objectively and demonstrably was

Wrong again, you demonstrably objectionable idiot.

>Occasional exceptions barred,

You mean the dominating trait of his later campaigns, you exceptionally mentally-barren idiot?

> Gygax was known for playing the old-school game he initially created with high-lethality and a focus on dungeoncrawl.

Oh, you're the kind of absolute moron who's only looked at the Tomb of Horrors, an exception to Gygax's ordinary style that he built as a high lethality tournament module, and has the fucking gall to try and pretend you know jack shit about how Gygax ran his games?

Fuck you, you dimwitted troll. I knew you were going to embarrass yourself, but to this level?

D&D is a wide fucking game with enormous scope and range, and a large part of its popularity comes from the fact that it can do just about anything fantasy very well. It's a kitchen sink system, with optional rules and variants provided to enable literally infinite styles of play, enabling the game to have broad appeal.

The system may not appeal to you, but fuck you for trying to keep beating the old "D&D can't do anything but dungeon crawls" drum when that hasn't even been true since the very first campaign. Gygax had his now high-level characters deep in world-shaping politics, complete with intrigue, conspiracy, assassination, large-scale warfare, and just about everything else you could strip from the fantasy novels that served as Gygax's inspiration.

So, to reiterate, not only are you stupid for opening your mouth after getting called out for being a troll, here's a sound spanking, because frankly, you deserve it.

File: Vivian_Malone_registering.jpg (4MB, 4642x3014px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4642x3014px

>>52839957
Yes, true, true!

>>52844961

>D&D is a wide fucking game with enormous scope and range, and a large part of its popularity comes from the fact that it can do just about anything fantasy very well. It's a kitchen sink system, with optional rules and variants provided to enable literally infinite styles of play, enabling the game to have broad appeal.

In terms of mechanics this isn't true, though.

D&D's tried to do a lot of things, but its mechanics for anything other than heroic high fantasy dungeoncrawling generally sucked.

The breadth you're talking about is not in any way a trait of the system, but a side effect of GMs who only play D&D, or who didn't have any other options, making it work through gratuitous homebrew and handwaving.

D&D is a very narrow, focused and specific system. That's not a bad thing, but that's a factual statement about what it provides for RAW.

>>52844961
>that he built as a high lethality tournament module

Different Anon here. Point of order, no he didn't. He built it for his home campaign, and liked it enough that he then adapted it to a tournament. Says so right in my copy of Tales from the Yawning Portal, among other sources, like Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_of_Horrors
>"Gygax designed the adventure both to challenge the skill of expert players in his own campaign"

I don't otherwise disagree with your points, however.

>>52845037
>but its mechanics for anything other than heroic high fantasy dungeoncrawling generally sucked

I asked this before, but evidently I have to ask again: can you give examples of this?

>>52845059
The original module was solo'd by two of his players on two separate occasions. He upped the ante to make it deadlier as an actual tournament module.

>>52845037
>In terms of mechanics this isn't true, though.

It had adaptable mechanics you fucking twit.
If something didn't match your exact personal vision, there was a variant that enabled that, you piece of shit, including things like replacing the HP system with a wound system or keeping the game centered around a particular level rather than progressing rapidly.

So, shove it up your ass about "narrow, focused, and specific," and if I hear you say one more word about how you think people should only be able to play the game in a single way, I'll spank you even harder by simply gesturing at the variety of adventures available that directly, objectively, and completely dismantle your entire absurd claim.

Look at the wave of my hand, and see the variety of worlds explored by D&D, and weep at your own folly.

>>52845153

My god, you have an amazing combination of arrogance, anger and a lack of reading comprehension. It's truly spectacular to behold.

>>52845194
I enjoy your tears. It's nice to see someone with an ass so red and sore from being freshly spanked reduced to just sobbing.

Cry more for me.

Always

>>52845194
I mean, he has a point. Remember that one of the very first adventures for D&D (Barrier Peaks, I think?) involved the adventurers exploring a crashed flying saucer and all the weird technology and alien life that it entailed. The game doesn't come crashing down at having to do sci-fi instead of fantasy.

So, again, I have to ask - can you provide an example of D&D, in particular 5th Edition if possibly, "can't do?" And I don't just mean saying "it doesn't do social stuff well", I mean, show me WHY and HOW it doesn't do social stuff well, and give me an example of a system that does it better and HOW it does it better.

>>52839957
When I realized that nothing about the system actually matters. I've played 3.PF for 7 years now and between all the houserules, the GM handwaving and the non-existant power baseline for both players and monsters, the most prominent thing left is the swingy d20
At least our forever-GM is fed up with it, too, which means our current campaign is the last time I hopefully have to play this garbage. Although it probably wouldn't even matter, since I've grown so indifferent to what makes it bad or good, and I honestly simply don't care anymore.
What good do all the options and funny combinations of ability do me, when the GM has to work around them anyway? What's the problem with highly different power levels/tiers, when our group sits down and tries to get the characters on the same page?
It doesn't, so whatever

>>52839997
>Bitch you best not be tellin me what to do.

This guy is welcome at my table.

>>52841940
>DnD is a great party game if you've got a board, figurines (or proxies) and either people who know the system or premade sheets.

It can be good even if you don't have any of those things. One of the most fun roleplaying experiences I've ever had was a one-shot session where we ran the Tomb of Horrors. We had no board, we had no minis, we didn't use premade characters, none of us had done much dungeon-crawling (we had lots of prior roleplaying experience, but mostly in games where combat was not the focus), and none of us knew the rules to D&D very well. And we all survived, actually, partly because we misinterpreted some magic items (especially the Boots of Spider Climb— it turns out that the Tomb of Horrors is far less lethal when you experience much of it upside-down) and partly because we assumed that a dungeon would be primarily composed of horrible deathtraps and that anything which looked dangerous almost certainly was. ("Okay, let's stay far, far away from that thing with the open mouth.") D&D isn't my favorite system, but it's pretty fun, particularly when you play to its strengths.

...My brief experience with 4e was unpleasant, though. The stuff with the grid and the minis is a huge hassle if you're more interested in talking to people.

>>52845900
You actually experienced D&D at it's peak: When you don't care about the rules. It's fine then, because it contains a lot of very evocative stuff

If you do care about the rules though, you're going to have a bad time

>>52846057
>I'm still not done shitposting

God, you're a living cringe factory.

If you want to run a dungeon crawl, B/X or BECMI is fucking incredible. Especially since there aren't a billion fiddly little parts like later editions so there's less risk of making a houserule and later being like OH SHIT WHAT HAVE I DONE?

Literally the only complaints I can think of are...

>descending AC
Easy to get used to. If it's a dealbreaker, use S&W's ascending AC options.
>alignment
One-axis alignment can just be run as, "Are you aligned with the cosmic forces of law, of chaos, or neither? If you don't know, it's neither."
>thief skills stretched out
Ban thief. It genuinely isn't necessary. If you want, give each player a different thief skill.
>the book is poorly organized
Use a retroclone.
>encumbrance is annoying
That didn't stop being true in later editions. Just use the system from LotFP.

>>52842700
>outside of the combat
You mean the combat that players were generally encouraged to avoid or die?

>>52841691
>Public executions were popular events for centuries, all over the world.

Still would be if governments would allow it. What can I say humans love to see others suffer.

>>52846239
You mean the part of the game which is the most fleshed-out?

>>52841977
>>52842359
I've never understood this criticism.

First or all, D&D is a incredibly lousy vehicle for innovating or "moving the hobby forward" because any new edition has to cater to a huge fanbase which is, by definition, fairly happy with the game the way it is. It's easier to make an innovative game if you start from scratch and don't worry about appealing to half of everyone who plays RPGs— and there's no shortage of games like that, so why aren't you playing one of those instead of D&D, if innovation is what you want?

Second, there's no intrinsic need for a game to be revised constantly; chess and bridge remain good despite the fact that they don't get new editions every five or ten years. What's wrong with D&D remaining the same? Why does it need to be reinvented every now and then?

>>52842912
I'm not him, and I'm not trying to make his argument, but I always had trouble running social stuff in DnD. I mean at a low level, coming up with a convincing excuse to a guard as to why you are where you are, it works well, simple skill checks with diplomacy/bluff/intimidate. But what about high level stuff? What about trying to convince two kingdoms to not go to war, or convincing some evil someone or other to give up their ways?
Granted this is more of a problem with RPG's in general, I can count on one hand the number of games that do this sort of thing well.

>>52846341
0e didn't even have combat rules in the book, anon. The whole point of the game is resource management, being clever, and never getting into a fair fight because somebody will probably die. Then story emerges through your decisions.

>>52846310
Or maybe I want to just see some murderer's head roll.

File: 1491064426720.jpg (180KB, 623x414px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 623x414px

>>52839957
Personally, the way that I see it, DnD is very representative of "The american way of GMing". Now, this may not be a familiar term to you but I can tell you that the way that you play ttrpgs massively differs from America to Europe, even with people who actually use the same ruleset.
As someone who's played in both places and mastered in several european countries (with locals, not on a tour or something), I think that it's safe to say that American roleplaying puts a higher emphasis on rules while europeans put more attention to the roleplay side of ttrpgs. Now I'm not saying that people cannot have similar ways of play across the ocean (and god knows that there's significant differences between european countries themselves, so I assume it to be the same in the US between states).
You might think that the reason explaining why DnD's not the top rpg in Europe is because of the existance of other rpgs, but that's only partially true. Even with 5e, the game is still quite opaque to the newcomers. However, it's massive popularity seems to imply that it is, in fact, easy to pick up while several of it's points are confusing for newbies. For me, DnD's sitting in an awkward cross between being a thing for newbies and for oldfags who want to open their ways to play, which often fails to deliver.
Young players will get simpler stuff, and older will pick it at some point to leave it for stuff that's more relevant to their taste or more relevant to their current game

>>52846057
>You actually experienced D&D at it's peak: When you don't care about the rules.

Well, we did care about the rules, but none of us knew them very well, and it was just a Halloween one-shot, so if we misruled or misinterpreted something we just ran with it. Nobody wanted to interrupt the game in order to correct a previous event. I don't know whether this consistently worked in our favor, outside of the misread magic items. (Those were mostly mistakes we made during character creation, so they weren't discovered until after the campaign had ended.)

>>52839957
Dnd is... Circular. Its trapped by its own popularity.

Its limited. Most of its rules involve combat. There are rules for exploration too, but they tend to be less concise. The rules for social interaction are of course there and a staple, but its never really been a focus.

Lets be honest, 5 bestiaries lends itself to the idea that dnd is about killing things and taking their property in new and creative things, because thats what its always been about.

Its always been a bit ridiculous, from the old days where hiring a team of 10 villagers with 10 foot poles was a clever way of circumventing a heavily trapped dungeon that just ate your rogue.

Its absolutely blithely mad to think those villagers would actually have anything to do with the murder ruins.

A friend described dnd is an ouroboros, trapped in its own fandom and self references. Dnd is its own genre of game at this point. Its not sword and sandal, or anything. Its dnd. With all the tropes associated with that.

I happen to enjoy dnd, but I play many systems, and I would not can any edition of dnd as my favourite system. Its serviceable when you want to whip up a quick campaign because everyone is so intimately familiar with what that entails. What their roles are.

Its sort of like my McDonalds of roleplaying. Its nice to come home to when you've been travelling for so long and want a taste of home.

>>52849035
>Lets be honest, 5 bestiaries lends itself to the idea that dnd is about killing things and taking their property in new and creative things, because thats what its always been about.

This doesn't seem honest at all. I just finished playing through the first 5e campaign, the combo of Horde of the Dragon Queen and Rise of Tiamat. And combat was something that was frequently avoided or worked around in both if we could help it, within the rules, and as expected by the modules themselves.

Like, no all the time - there were plenty of times when we had to fight. But just as often we'd sneak past guards or bluff our way into castles or negotiate with dragons or whatnot. And all these options were accounted for in the campaigns themselves, with them explaining to the DM that they might happen and giving suggestions as to what to do.

>>52846341
its the part that needed rules, because the other parts are handled by the players being competant at real life social skills.

>>52842948
>I mean if you consider a knife to the throat holding 0 threat

well, helpless targets can be killed one per round with no contest, as per 1e/0e, so it would be at the DMs discretion whether knife to the throat counted as such

File: mnzdt6fGen1s645eto1.gif (1019KB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

1019KB, 500x280px

>>52839957
I never really had a probem with it, but I've slowly come to accept to that I'll almost never meet a soul who'd be willing to play any other system than D&D. So I need to learn to stop complaining about it and try to make the best of only being able to do medieval fantasy within a specific system because I'll never be able to every do any other kind of role-playing ever in my life.

Out of all of grand possibilities of the concept of collaborative storytelling because the only thing, I have to accept that out 99.9999999% of people, all they want do with the medium is "kill things and take their stuff."

And like it's fun to kill things and take their stuff, but I just wish other options were popular enough that I could actually experience them for once in my life.

>>52849226

that's because the social situations have no saves to avoid getting fucked up and dying. not rolling is safer than rolling. that's what happens when the game focuses on one thing and you do another. it's vague territory where you're safe in how liminal that situation is supposed to be.

>>52839957

I honestly really came to hate 3.pf because of how radically clumsy the entire thing is, but 5e has it's appeal, and 4e is still one of my favorite systems for emulating a dungeon crawl on paper with dice.

>>52846456
>0e didn't even have combat rules in the book, anon.

um.

it didnt have the "core" rules but did have the "alternative" rules which became the d20 rules roughly known today

also

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9vECzikqpY

>>52839957
DnD got me into Tabletop and I have a lot of found memories of it, it's also the father of table top rpgs which are one of my favorite things, so realistically I can't really hate it.That being said I would never call any edition of DnD great, maybe good, but not great and nowadays there's so many RPGs to pick from that you don't really have to settle for DnD, but it can definitely work if your too stubborn to learn anything else.

>>52849460

you realize for every 5 D&D-only chucklefucks you find, there's usually 2-3 in those 5 that have vested interest in other systems, or would gladly try something new, right?

there's nothing i hate more than this "i'm trapped by SOCIETY'S choices" bullshit. fuck you. be the change you want to see and host a fucking game of literally WHATEVER YOU WANT.

can't find people? there's online groups. there's forums online of people who specifically want to play one kind of game.

i could go on the exalted discord chat right now and start fishing for players for a game and i can fucking promise you i'd get at least 5 prospective interested people by this time tomorrow. and that's a game that's REALLY narrow in interest and theme.

I could do the same with eclipse phase. with world of darkness. fuck you. fuck your blaming the people around you.

>>52849493
Fuck you too, anon

>>52841924
you smell of reddit

>>52843069
Binary pass/fail on a single check with a tiny pool of modifiers and feats that modify the check vs degree of success skill check(s) with a huge amount of advantages and disadvantages that can modify them.

That's assuming you're using one of the editions with a function social skill system instead of 3E's fucktard shit.

>>52849465
>not rolling is safer than rolling

Except we were rolling all the time. Deception checks, Acrobatics checks, Stealth checks, Persuade checks, Disguise checks, Thieves' Tools checks...

>>52850041
>Binary pass/fail on a single check

But D&D 5e only has binary pass/fail for checks on checks where binary pass/failure is possible. I.e., "I want to convince the guard that I'm a guard too" is a binary thing: the guard either believes your lie or doesn't.

Extended checks where you're trying to accumulate successes have been a thing since 4e for more complex situations, like negotiations. That came up a bunch in HotDQ/RoT. The game didn't implode in on itself or fail to function.

>>52849460
One word mythic solo dmd

>>52845900
One of the things I like about 5e is that it's the only WotC edition that you can do that sort of thing in. TSR was still better though.

>>52846348
To sell books, which keep the industry alive.

>>52841663
Pretty much this. It's great to bring people into the hobby, but fuck me it can be a chore to wean them off it. Same goes for Pathfinder. Some folks welcome the chance to try new systems, while others will cling to a brand name religiously.