So 5e is pretty much objectively the best edition of D&D

File: 1459261391083.png (245KB, 900x851px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 900x851px

>>52876246
>the best edition of D&D
Not exactly a high bar.

>>52876246
some of the people i play with and dm for either keep confusing rules from other editions (including pathfinder) or try to argue "but in X i could do this, why can't i do it here?" and whine that they dont like it.
i dont dislike the game, i dislike some of the players

>>52876246
I don't hate 5e necessarily, I just hate that people think that it's literally the only RPG option outside of Pathfinder.

>>52876246
>It's caused the people in the hobby to explode to unprecedented numbers and few of them would have a reason to ever play anything else.

Why do I hate 5e? You just explained it. We got a huge influx of players (who didn't pick up the hobby because of a new edition and WotC marketing by the way) but instead got into the hobby because of the Twitch boom and flocked to horrible wacky random redditfun shit like Crit Role. And as a result of this huge burst of players, I as a DM, have to wade through dozens more of fucking awful "roleplayers" in order to find good ones. It's made finding good players 10x harder than it should be and it's distorting what roleplaying should be. I'm not a diehard OSR grognard, but I'm also not dumb enough to be blind to the massive playstyle shift towards freeform storytrash that should be contained in a novel and barely resembles being a game.

I would rather play with the average troglodyte from /pfg/ than pick up a Mercer watching degenerate 5e player. Let that one fucking sink in.

>>52876288
I'm sorry, but what's even in the same ballpark of being the best game series?

As much as you bitter kids want to cry about it, D&D is pretty firmly stapled to the position of Best Game, and 5e has cemented that statement essentially for the next decade or so.

Like, what? You're going to try to pitch us some shit like GURPS?

>>52876246
Because there's nothing interesting built into the system (by design, if I remember the discussion around it correctly), and I could instead be playing something that does have such things.

Alternatively, if I wanted simple and old-school, I could play something OSR, which generally does "being simple" better than 5e, if only on the players' side of things.

>>52876246
I didn't need it.
My D&D experience is (like most of us) rooted in what I was introduced to. I like level 1-6, 3.5 edition, mostly first three rulebooks. Truth be known, I don't play that much any more, and I rarely revisit sword and sorcery as a genre. When I do, it's a nostalgia trip, and nothing else can be my childhood as much as the real deal was. Plus, the SRDs are free and I can still pick up a game that fits the bill 24/7 online.

File: 1439842711588.png (39KB, 620x456px)

39KB, 620x456px

>>52876393
You should try to be a bit more subtle next time, kid.

>>52876246
I like to play smaller more tone-specific games. Ive been at this so long that I dont need a system with as much horsepower as DnD 5e, nor do I need something that is so heavily focused on combat.

I think that 5e is a good starting point, but nobody with more than a year or one campaign under their belt should play it.

>>52876246

Because it's boring.

I won't say it isn't a well executed game. It's simple, streamlined and straightforward, combining elements of the classic experience with a new player friendly way of operating.

But... It's completely without novelty. There is nothing new in 5e. No innovation, no progression, no new ideas of any kind.

I can see why new players, or D&D purists, love it. It's a modernised iteration of everything they love about the game, combining familiarity with a lot better execution than classic forms of the game ever had before.

But... For me? For people I play with, who play a lot of other games? There's no reason for any of us to care about 5e. Anything it can possibly offer, another game has already done, done better and done in a more interesting way.

5e is a game which might have expanded the scope of D&D, but in many ways it's kind of irrelevant to the rest of the RPG industry- Admittedly, the rest of the RPG industry is significantly smaller than D&D and its offshoots.

But yeah, that's basically it from me. I'm well aware I'm not in their target audience, but I still expected better from them, especially after stuff in the playtest.

For all 4e's faults and controversies, it tried something new and was utterly astounding as an example of clear layouts, easy to use templates and good, user friendly rulebook design, as well as the best game out there for grid based tactical combat.

For basically every edition of D&D you can point to some aspect of it that was new or interesting or meaningful, that had an impact and opened up new design possibilities. 5e... At least from what I've seen, and after a few years of play and discussion, just doesn't. Its resting on its laurels, and that disappoints me.

File: 1490276753221.png (190KB, 416x304px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 416x304px

>>52876357
Literally all the players I've had who've come in from watching CR and the like have been pretty good.

At worst they're a little under the illusion that every game should be exactly like CR, however if you're not a massive sperg and explain it to them it stops being a problem.

They are however some of the most committed, immersed players I've ever had. They play decently rounded characters, they try to act and speak IC, and even if they're not good at it they're usually willing to learn.

>>52876357
95% of everything is shit. I can guarantee you that 5e is not unique with this - it's just got a lot more players all of a sudden, so it's got a lot more shit in it too.

Keep on looking through them until you have a few guys that you can tolerate, maybe introduce them to a different more specialized game, and have fun.

>>52876445
No. Seriously. Tell me about this mythic game that comes close to being as good as D&D.

>>52876767
You tell me how you define "good" and I'll tell you why you're wrong.

>>52876767
D&D is a jack-of-all-trades, but master of none. It's all right at what it does - that's to say, pretty much anything fantasy related - but there are far more focused games that're a lot better at the thing or two they do.

Burning Wheel, for instance, is excellent at roleplaying and actual plot stuff. Savage Worlds does great fast-paced rules-light adventure games. WFRP is great at grimdark shitty-life sort where you can be killed or maimed by the rusty blade of a goblin. Risus is pretty great if you're looking for something -really- rules-light for just a single evening's play. And that's just the ones I like - there are great many more that other people could recommend you.

All of them are probably better than D&D in the narrow areas they focus on, but will be left to dust in other ways. If you're looking for something specific, then you might want to try out a non-D&D system.

>>52876797
Can you really not name a game? Sounds like D&D is really just the unbeatable juggernaut everyone already knows it is.

>>52876953

It's hard to name anything when you give zero clarification or context. Without actual statements to base things on, you make it impossible to give you a meaningful answer.

>>52876246
>So 5e is pretty much objectively the best edition of D&D ever published

The dumbest statement ever posted on /tg/.

And that's a well-defended title.

Props anon.

>>52876246
>objective best edition
What is Moldvay B/X

>>52876767
That depends on what you think D&D does well.

But broadly speaking, Burning Wheel does fantasy roleplaying better than D&D, Lamentations of the Flame Princess does dungeon crawling better than D&D, and FantasyCraft does being D&D better than D&D.

>>52876953
>he says one minute after someone posted 4 different systems
To add: Even for the dungeon crawling that old school D&D was known for there are alternatives which may have more appealing mechanics for some groups, like DCC. Mutants and Masterminds reigns supreme for superhero games.

>>52877001
>>52877011
Why not directly answer the question presented at the OP - why do you not like 5e?

>It's not moldv-

Be more specific.

>>52876767
D&D does plenty of things well but you are retarded if you thiunk it is the end all be all system for any RPG you wish to run. The "best system" will largely come down to what kind of game it is you wish to run.
>low fantasy, high lethality?
Riddle Of Steal
>Dark fantasy, high lethality?
Shadow of the Demon lord, WHFR
>Capeshit and/or mixed setting?
Gurps

>>52877033
>Why not directly answer the question presented at the OP

I replied to this:
>So 5e is pretty much objectively the best edition of D&D ever published.

Do you see a question there anon?

Does that look like a question to you?

>>52876246
d20 was a mistake

>>52876935
>Burning Wheel
It's got awful mechanics that encourage people to ignore them rather than be forced to use them. Calling it good for roleplaying is more of just avoiding its weaknesses mechanically.

>Savage worlds
Doesn't really do anything that D&D can't do better.

>WFRP
Some genuinely awful mechanics that have so many dead sacred cows that it makes people who still play GURPS seem relevant. It's only saving grace is its atmosphere, but that can easily be ported to just about any edition of D&D in the lower levels.

>Risus
Really? As far as rules-light games go, this is one of the notoriously bad ones. It's beer-and-pretzels in the worst way.

>>52876246
Because it is bland and uninspired.

It took everything that was D&D known for and thrown it away. Yes there was a lot of bad things but what is left is not enough. As a result we got a boring, bland system that is ok for newbie players as their first RPG but for more experienced people it doesn't offer anything that other systems don't do much better.

File: [Coalgirls]_Moretsu_Pirates_19_(1280x720_Blu-Ray_FLAC)_[791F4859].mkv_snapshot_10.01_[2016.11.24_01.55.15].jpg (107KB, 1280x720px)

107KB, 1280x720px

>>52876393

Yeah yeah, Avatar is the best movie ever made and CoD is the best game ever made.

If anything being the most popular game means it's crap for the lowest common denominator.

>>52877071
The question was
>Why do -you- not like 5e?

Were you so eager to come here and tell how horribly wrong OP was that you didn't even read his full post?

>>52876312
>"but in X i could do this, why can't i do it here?"
Like what, go ahead I will wait.

>>52877099
>. As a result we got a boring, bland system that is ok for newbie players as their first RPG but for more experienced people it doesn't offer anything that other systems don't do much better.

^^This guy is reading my mind.

5e is baby's first ttrpg.

>>52876246
It's basically just 3e again. The classes, races, monsters, the book formatting, the art - dear god, some of the fucking art - just ranges from plain to awful.

>>52877114
His opening sentence voided any hope he may have had for an objective answer, or an honest discussion.

OP, is a faggot (as usual), and not entitled or deserving of being taken seriously.

>>52877142
srs question anon.....

Because I see comments like that a lot.
Is the art work really that important to people? I never give it more than a passing glance, so it's difficult for me to relate that people judge (for lack of a better phrase), the system on the art.

File: e5c.jpg (57KB, 750x500px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 750x500px

>>52877143

>>52877097
>It's got awful mechanics that encourage people to ignore them rather than be forced to use them
Such as?

>>52877024
>Burning Wheel does fantasy roleplaying better than D&D

Only if you play it like you're not playing Burning Wheel, and at that point you might as well be playing D&D.

>Lamentations of the Flame Princess does dungeon crawling better than D&D

It does Masochist dungeons modestly well, but overall it's a prohibitive system that stumbles at doing anything other than bleak and punishing. It's only good point is that it has some pretty decent dungeons written for it.

>FantasyCraft does being D&D better than D&D.

FantasyCraft doesn't even do FantasyCraft well.

>>52876246
>Why do -you- not like 5e?

Terrible balance all around.

d20 is a bad system with HP bloat and boring repetitive combat that makes it seem like a board game with RPG elements.

Obviously best race/weapon/spell options for every class meaning there is 0 freedom unless you want to be gimped.

Is there anything worse that could have happened to the hobby than Geek and Sundry, the father of Critical Role? The autism that shitlordian place brought upon us with the Stream shit has turned the entire hobby upside down.

>>52877143
Artwork may not be as important as the actual mechanics, but it still has a role in evoking mood and imagination. Even mechanically bad games can be remembered for their good art, and terrible art is a stain on even a good game.

And 5e's art ranges from adequate but still fairly uninspiring, to downright awful.

>>52876393
huehuehue/10

What 5e did to the hobby reminds me of what EA Games did to video games.

Yes, there are more people playing and it's more popular than ever. But at the same time games are a mass produced boring shallow crap for the dumb masses.

>>52877100
D&D isn't a movie or a video game.

It's a roleplaying game that has dominated the roleplaying market. More than half of all players play some variant of D&D. These are people choosing to play this game because, frankly, there's very few games on the market that are even capable of competing with it.

There's some games I do like better, but damn, you've got to be one dumb cunt to even try to call D&D a bad game. If D&D is bad, all roleplaying games are bad, and most are terrible.

>>52876357
You can't see it because you're too close to the issue, but you are the real problem with this hobby. You can't find players because nobody you know IRL wants to play with you so you have to go looking, and that always turns out poorly. If you weren't a miserable gatekeeping curmudgeon, maybe you'd have friends who wanted to play games with you, but given your use of le edgy reddit boogeyman, I'm guessing you're more content to sit alone and sniff your own ass fumes than to actually interact with another human being in person.

>>52877097
Every game has shitty mechanics.
You think that measuring gold coins weight is a fucking good mechanic?

>>52877310

You don't have an argument. You're making baseless assertions and acting like they're so obvious you don't need to justify or defend them. Just thought I'd point this out.

File: 2eart.jpg (12KB, 201x251px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 201x251px

>>52877205
Fair enough. Thanks.

2e had some art that drew me in somewhat.

>>52877310
No one said Avatar is a bad movie or Call of Duty a bad game. Both are perfectly entertaining and functional, and there's a reason they're so popular.

There are better ones out there, though. It's just that most people don't get deep enough into the hobby to go looking.

>>52877178
Alright, I'll bite.

>Only if you play it like you're not playing Burning Wheel, and at that point you might as well be playing D&D.
Almost objectively false. Burning Wheel's strengths are explicitly in facilitating both personal and grand-scale fantasy roleplaying beyond the scope of D&D's "a bunch of hobos get sent on quests" model of game design.

>It does Masochist dungeons modestly well, but overall it's a prohibitive system that stumbles at doing anything other than bleak and punishing. It's only good point is that it has some pretty decent dungeons written for it.
Considering D&D's difficulties in making mechanical systems outside of the ones meant for dungeon crawling satisfying, you might as well go for the system that builds a better dungeon crawling experience if that's what you want to play.

>FantasyCraft doesn't even do FantasyCraft well.
Sorry, I couldn't hear you over the sound of martials being useful at all levels in combat with casters.

While we're at it, I'll throw 13th age on the pile of games that take everything good about the D&D edition they're derivative of (in this case 4E), refining the mechanics, and adding something on top of it that's more mechanically and thematically interesting than anything D&D has ever done (the Icons).

>>52876246
Haven't tried it, but if I had to guess I'd say:
>Promotes gameism via players having meta knowledge
>Class Based system
>"HP" as luck abstraction/ HP bloat

But I haven't looked so, I couldn't say for sure.

>>52877327
>You think that measuring gold coins weight is a fucking good mechanic?

It's horrible!
PC's should be able to carry 11 billion ton of metal, as long as that metal is in the form of a coin!
Weight is stupid, and racist.

>>52876935
>jack-of-all-trades but master of none

GURPS. You described GURPS.

>>52876246
OD&D with supplements & houserules > B/X = BECMI > OD&D as written > 5e = AD&D 2e > AD&D 1e > 3.5 = PF > 3e

Never played 4e.

>>52877384
Keep pounding on that strawman and eventually we'll believe you're right. Don't forget to keep mentioning it's a LEFTIST strawman either because it's totally relevant to the discussion

>>52877384
>waaah the shitty mechanic in my system isn't shitty because realism
Mechanics that only serve to bloat the game instead of further the enjoyment of it should be stripped out. I came to roleplay and kill monsters not manage my funds and have to protect some fucking horse cart. I legitimately cannot tell if you are only pretending to be retarded or are this mind-achingly fanatical about this game.
Before you go strawmanning, no there is a difference between a shitty bloat mechanic (weight of gold) and a challenging mechanic (disease, survival etc.)

File: gurps.jpg (107KB, 750x600px)

107KB, 750x600px

>>52877442
All right, so D&D is a jack-of-all-trades but master of none so long as you stick to fantasy. GURPS removes that restriction, but it's also even more rules-heavy and difficult to learn and play.

I do still like GURPS as well, though. I like to take that advantage of versatility and play it to its max by bringing up these bizarre mashup crossovers where you could play just about anything. If you were to stick to any single theme, you'd probably be better off with something else. [](Such as D&D.)

>>52877352
>There are better ones out there, though

There's ones that have specific advantages to specific groups, but as a whole it's really not too farfetched to go ahead and call D&D the best roleplaying game, or at the very least one of the best roleplaying games. It's very hard to populate a Top 10 list without D&D on it while remaining honest.

>>52877497
>I came to roleplay and kill monsters not manage my funds and have to protect some fucking horse cart.
> there is a difference between a shitty bloat mechanic (weight of gold) and a challenging mechanic (disease, survival etc.)

There was a time weight of gold was counted among the latter. You got experience points out of gold for a reason.

File: 1338107966752.jpg (45KB, 396x400px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 396x400px

>>52876246
lol

Stupidity. The Post.

>>52877512
It's true that D&D's range and versatility do a great favor to the game, and that it would almost certainly populate any list of top 10 systems, but saying it's objectively and irrevocably the very best system out there is still a bit too much.

Sure, it might be for you, but others may disagree and they're no less right than you.

>>52877504
You can always play GURPS Dungeon and see and behold as everything that D&D promises, being done better.

>>52877565
>objectively

Yes, that's silly.

>irrevocably
Honestly, I think that may actually be the case. D&D is the spotlight game that everyone wants to work on and the best designers compete with to contribute to. It's been the #1 game since the start of the hobby, and very likely may retain that position for at least the next twenty years, if not trully forever.

Even when the WotC D&D faltered, that was only because people went to a D&D clone.

>>52877601
Meh. There are many other dungeon crawlers that do dungeon crawling better than D&D, and probably better than GURPS.

>>52877635
Every dungeon crawling is better than D&D. D&D is turn-based-combat The Game and nothing else. You could have an entire campaign inside a room with few to no skill checks and people wouldn't notice. I would know, I done this before. Twice.

>>52877601
Is GURPS Dungeon actually good? I have a bunch of rule books for it but haven't gotten a chance to play. does GURPS allow for flexible styles of play and intrigue?

>>52877601
GURPS Dungeon is terrible though, especially the magic. It also just suffers from being GURPS.

The core mechanics of GURPS can be summarized as "What if someone tried really hard not to be D&D, with being different more important than being good?"

>>52877686
>D&D is turn-based-combat The Game and nothing else.

I don't know about that either. Sure, 3rd edition and beyond are exactly what you described, but AD&D and especially B/X do the whole range of dungeon crawling, focusing on avoiding combat nearly as much as or even more than actually fighting. Battles in those systems are ugly attrition you'd be best to get around without.

It's just that fights are also kind of complicated and require a bunch more rules than anything else in the dungeon.

The problem with statements like this is that D&D remains dominant due to sheer size. Most people who play D&D just aren't aware other RPGs exist, or have any real inclination or opportunity to explore them.

Among those that do, it seems quite common that people find a game they prefer or find enjoyment in the variety available.

The size and market penetration disparity makes it impossible to really make a meaningful comment. When most people who play it have never had an opportunity to play anything else, you can't really call it a choice or an informed preference.

>>52877764
Still, though, it's pretty much completely gotten around anyone that's played older editions of D&D. Only the truest fanboys and weirdos still play 3rd or 4th editions, let alone even older ones. Even most AD&D players have decided 5e is their thing.

And all of those guys have been playing for years, and have had all the time in the world to find a system they'd like even more. Yet they never strayed far from their D&D edition of choice.

>>52877703
Flexible is the whole GURPS shtick.

GURPS Dungeon also will be done on kickstarter as a separate bundle with bestiary.

>>52877816

That's only really true for 3.5. 2e, 4e and the older editions all have very distinct playstyles that 5e does not cater to. 5e borrows elements of them, but it doesn't capture the same experience.

>>52877686
Sounds like a problem with your players, not the system.

>>52877764
>Most people who play D&D just aren't aware other RPGs exist, or have any real inclination or opportunity to explore them.

Why do people act like this is true? What? Do you live somewhere that the internet doesn't exist, or do you buy your games from magical D&D stores that only carry D&D?

Do you honestly think that most people who play RPGs, not just D&D, but RPGs in general, are unaware that there's more than just D&D? Are you so fucking stupid that you honestly are trying to say that the only people who play D&D are the ones who haven't seen any other game like people are trying to hide them or some shit?

Stop belittling the community just because you need to try and rationalize why you think D&D is undeserving of its dramatic popularity.

>>52877686
>You could have an entire campaign inside a room with few to no skill checks and people wouldn't notice.

D&D is a far older game than skill checks.

>>52877893
You'd think it would take an ignorant moron to think D&D is the only roleplaying game out there, but that's precisely what most human beings are.

Lucky ones are those that break free of the mold and grow to something more.

>>52877816
> Only the truest fanboys and weirdos still play 3rd or 4th editions, let alone even older ones.

3rd edition remains the second most popular game. 4e is also rather popular, ranging from 3-6th place.

The older editions of D&D are barely blips.

Stop being dumb.

>>52877816
>Only the truest fanboys and weirdos still play 3rd or 4th editions

Wot, loads of people still play 3.5 and will continue to play it.

>>52877816

>And all of those guys have been playing for years, and have had all the time in the world to find a system they'd like even more. Yet they never strayed far from their D&D edition of choice.

Again, in my experience? Most of them have never had a chance.

It's hard to imagine, because I can't think of a single entertainment medium other than RPG's where this is true, but D&D in and of itself is significantly larger than all other RPGs put together.

If you're a casual roleplayer you might never even think about other systems, and even for people who care enough about RPGs to look up things about them or discuss them (which is a minority), a huge number still purely focus on D&D.

However, this is changing. D&D has been pretty consistently losing market share as the RPG space has gotten bigger. I think one day, if RPGs continue to exist as a medium, we might see a day when D&D is no longer the majority. It might still be the biggest, but it won't eclipse the whole rest of the industry the way it does now.

>>52877916
You're trying to spin this idea that only idiots play D&D, all because you're just upset that they don't agree with your opinions.

That's pretty pathetic.

So what do you guys reckon is most popular non-D&D (or PF) RPG out there?

>>52877893
Ehh, I've seen such attitude. Many D&D players just plain refuse to read anything else. Or just skim the book and throw it away.

Those who try even one other system normally over time develop a portfolio of systems that they like besides D&D.

>>52877893

The vast majority of any community will never look on a board like this. Enthusiasts who care enough to do so are always the minority. They don't really care about discussing things or looking things up. They stick to their local community and the things they enjoy and they're happy with it.

Some people buy all their RPGs from book shops which only stock D&D and Pathfinder in small, limited selections. Despite all the convenience of the modern age, the sheer number of groups like that would surprise you.

>>52877948
Nahh, it works with all systems. There is those who have the same relationship with WoD or GURPS.

D&D just the biggest kid on the block so it gets the biggest share of retards.

>>52877948
No, I'm just saying you vastly overestimate the average intelligence of mankind.

>>52877968
World of Darkness.

>>52877968
GURPS would be my guess.

File: 1481450938203.jpg (88KB, 620x880px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 620x880px

>>52877934
>casual
>roleplayer

>>52876437
e6 is the best way to play 3.5. You, Sir, have good taste.

>>52877968
Call of Cthulhu is very popular at my RPG club

>>52878172
You may as well play 5e at that point.

Tier 3-4 only is the best way to play 3.5. It's literally the only thing it does arguably the best.

>>52876246
>Why do -you- not like 5e?

Because I don't care for boilerplate fantasy conjured up by guys who read a lot of Tolkien. I don't play D&D at all.

>>52878214
>Why do -you- not like 5e?

Because it's shallow as fuck, but still too crunchy as a "light" option.

>>52877764
>Most people who play D&D just aren't aware other RPGs exist

A challenger to OP's "STUPIDEST FUCKING POST EVER ON /tg/" title.

>>52877310
And yet, D&D domination is only a thing in US and few other countries, while Europeans play other games. European roleplaying scene, while smaller, is also vastly superior to american in terms of quality. Make of it what you want.

>>52878195
3.5 has more options in 6 levels than 5e has in 20. you actually can do pretty interesting characters in E6 that still feel powerful compared to the rest of the world but remain mortal.

>>52878316
>3.5 has more options in 6 levels than 5e has in 20.

One reason to why it's so famously imbalanced and utterly unplayable. Good luck maintaining that many options without such an effect.

>>52878353
Yes it is one of the problems. But at least it's not boring.

>>52878304

But it's true. It's that simple.

If you're posting on this board, you're probably an enthusiast roleplayer, or a casual roleplayer who was on 4chan anyway. Given that, it's very easy to realise that the vast, vast majority of the people in any hobby do not care enough to post about it or discuss it or read about it. And this is true for any community you care to mention.

The people actually talking about it, debating it, investigating it and comparing it? They are always the minority. The trouble is, the non-interactive majority are essentially invisible due to their non-interaction, so it's really easy to believe that everybody must be like you and me, people who care enough to post on this board and such. But that's just not the case.

File: tumblr_m7z30ykG0F1r9nm0io2_500.gif (955KB, 500x225px)

955KB, 500x225px

>>52878304
from
>D&D players are fucking morons
to
>Americans are fucking morons

>>52876246
I prefer an unbalanced 3.5. You have to pay attention to what can break the game, but my players after year remember a specific series of spell in an encounter with timestop, a well timed vorpal karmic strike, a x4 on the right spot, the monk defleting like 30 spell at epic, all th ridiculous stuff.

A balanced game that plays it safe is not necessarily the best. I would prefer a 3.X/PF over-the top and yet better balanced (they don't exclude each other, I can elaborate) but if I can choose, is either the simplicity of BECMI or 3.X/PF.

I would play 5ed still, has its merits and feels like D&D.

>>52878353
It was written in a period people were not considered babies to be spoonfed on everything.
Grave mistake, as much as the retards that take CharOpt memes seriously.

>>52877481
Except the different editions achieve different effects which are better or worse depending on what sort of game you want to run and the preferences of the GM and players? 3.PF is absolutely broken, but that can be hilarious fun for a bunch of Timmy players with a GM to match who enjoy stretching the mechanical bounds of a system, options really not supported by the others. Meanwhile 4e will get you better grid-based tactical combat, and 5e will get you a better stable roleplaying experience.

>>52876246
>It's caused the people in the hobby to explode to unprecedented numbers and few of them would have a reason to ever play anything else.
That has been the case for each current edition of D&D since at least 3.5.

I dislike 5e because it was successfully designed to be as inoffensive, bland and boring as possible for marketing purposes, good game design be damned.

>>52878390

>When d&d players go to the store to buy books, they NEV&d. The other systems are magically hidden from their view.

>When d&d players use the internet to read any rpg info, they NEVER encounter anything beyond d&d.

Wow......that's just crazy

>>52876246
>So 5e is pretty much objectively the best edition of D&D ever published
No, that's Rules Cyclopedia.

>>52878510
You know what, though? Most D&D players do not in fact do that.

It's the D&D DMs that do. The players just get handed over the books by the DMs and that's it.

There's about four players for every one DM.

>>52878553
Arguably yes. You get the most from 1 single book and you still have skills, mass combat and shit. If something is too much into old school like level limits for demi-humans or the rogue sucking, you can modularly add suggested houserules to adjust the level.
Best combat system for weapons and parry.

>>52877979
>Some people buy all their RPGs from book shops which only stock D&D and Pathfinder in small, limited selections

Aside from almost all book shops/game stores/hobby shops/comic book stores having at the very least two or three other games, it's still absolutely ridiculous to try and pretend that there's people who've played the game and never bothered to ask the question "Could there be other roleplaying games beyond D&D?"

It's absolutely ludicrous to even suggest that these people are even a significant minority, let alone a majority.

>>52878643
Most people do -not- buy their books. They share with the one guy that actually buys them. That one guy of course knows there are more games around, but he doesn't bother suggesting them because his friends are shallow dumbfucks that don't give a shit.

>>52878557
Pretty much this.
And the DM has problems finding enough good players to run dnd, let alone a more obscure system.

I was lucky my first group was already devoted to playing systems other than DnD.

>>52878314
D&D is still extremely popular in Europe though. While there's a few other games that do manage to take the #1 spot in a few regions, D&D is rarely far behind and usually firmly in #2.

Make of that what you will.

>>52878472
Good post, however concerning 3.X, you don't have to necessarily stretch it.
After an high power campaign, we decided to switch to a medium power level one in which everyon had classes like bards, rangers hexblade, warlock, beguiler and played a less OP party. As a DM I adjusted the challenges accordingly and it felt like a new, different game.
Of course nobody tried to minmax a Druid but what can I do if I don't play with faggots?

>>52878668
I like how you need to rely on people not only being ordinary stupid, but absolutely ignorant in order for your hyperbolic universe to function.

>>52878727
>>52878643

Again, you're speaking as an enthusiast, assuming the only way to interact with the hobby is in the same way you do.

And it isn't. The enthusiasts are the minority, and for the huge swathe beyond that, D&D is all that they know.

>>52878727
Listen, if you seriously believe an average person is any smarter than this, then you haven't gotten out enough.

Go have a word with random passers-by. Visit other websites than 4chan. Look at the news. Remind yourself who our current president is.

Yes, the average person really is this dumb.

>>52878643
We just had fun with D&D. For decades.
We played Vampires too, liked less.
Occasionally, an independent RPG based on an italian comic (Dyland Dog. Googling will find an american movie that has no connection whatsoever to the comic in tone, style, character.. anything).

>>52878694

It's in top5 but definitely not #2.

>>52877707
How you would ACTUALLY summarize GURPS is
>What if someone had made 3.0 without getting rid of THACO.

>>52878761
>>52878763
There's stupid, and then there's "I believe Coca Cola is the only drink in the entire world."
Or that there's no other game except Solitaire.
I'm sorry, but your narrative of "most of the people who play D&D do so out of ignorance" is just nothing but you hating.

>>52877893
>Do you honestly think that most people who play RPGs, not just D&D, but RPGs in general, are unaware that there's more than just D&D?
Most of the people I've played with, a number of about 50, don't buy RPGs or read about them or think about them at all when not at the table. RPGs are just "that game anon brings when it's his turn on game night." The only games they know exist are the ones I run for them. I totally believe that if I wasn't a contrarian anti-D&D hipster, they wouldn't know other games exist.

>>52878915
>it cannot be possible that people play D&D because they enjoy it

>>52878915

It's not that they play it because of ignorance. It's that D&D is so stupidly huge it's easy to play it without caring.

Ask any random person to name an RPG. They'll either not be able to, or they'll name D&D. That's the power of the D&D brand. The name 'Dungeons and Dragons' is a larger, more recognisable term than 'Roleplaying Game'

>>52877504
>so D&D is a jack-of-all-trades but master of none so long as you stick to fantasy.

I have found that it works just fine for any genre, actually. Some houseruling is needed, of course, but for the most part the basic system of levels and experience, six ability scores, based around a d20 where rolling higher is better, and the skill/feat system, works great.

>>52879029

And so, so, so many other things would work better without needing any houseruling, tweaking or lingering D&D bullshit.

>>52876614

>At worst they're a little under the illusion that every game should be exactly like CR, however if you're not a massive sperg and explain it to them it stops being a problem.

Being aware of the show but not having watched it, what's the problem and what's the explanation you give them?

>>52878557
Er...i want to argue that.

(but I can't with any honesty)

>>52879062
When I say "houseruling", I mean "D&D does not have stats for a Corellion YT-1300 freighter, so if you want to include one in your game you're gonna have to make it yourself". That's not a mark against D&D as a system, just an acknowledgment that D&D doesn't have starships statted out in it. Yet. God I hope we get a Spelljammer update.

>>52879029
>Some houseruling is needed, of course, but for the most part the basic system of levels and experience, six ability scores, based around a d20 where rolling higher is better, and the skill/feat system, works great.

I agree with this.

We've tried other games of course. (Going all the way back to spycraft and VtM)

Always, we come home to d&d. 3.5 gave us a lot of enjoyment and thousands of hours of gaming. Then we busted out the 2nd edition books, and have stuck with that for the last couple years.

The freedom to customize, everyone staying in their own lane, and the common sense restrictions placed on levels and classes, makes it the game of choice for us.

>>52879155
>God I hope we get a Spelljammer update.

Fucking Wotc...someone needs to kick them in the ass, and explain that to them.

>>52876393
Best game? Not even close.

Most popular game? By a very far margin yes.

Best game for new players? It's okay. There are certainly easier systems to learn.

>>52879220
I can understand why. D&D has had two settings for connecting all their campaign worlds: Spelljammer and Planescape. Of the two, Planescape sold much better. So it's not surprising that inter-setting stuff has tended to focus more on Sigil and questioning what can change the nature of a man.

But Spelljammer is just balls-to-the-walls insane from the ground up. I badly want it back.

My character in a recently-ended campaign had a kind of open-ended vague conclusion, so I'm writing a story to finish her arc off. Among other things, it's going to involve the City of Brass and an efreeti-and-azer-made spelljammer

>>52878152
Lots of people are literally only into RPGs because their partner/roomate/sibling is, and they're just along for the ride.

>>52876246
It does nothing 2e doesn't do better.

>>52879088
The show is a bunch of professional actors playing D&D for money on camera. Honestly it shouldn't take too many leaps of logic to figure out how that is different from a normal game.

For starters, they only take about 10 minutes on average to get straight to playing the game, and only ever spend about 10% of the time out of character. And they rarely, if ever, talk to each other out of character.

The game is VERY roleplay focused, and they almost never get off track because they know they are on camera so they don't spend half the game making stupid fucking meme references like most actual games.

>>52876246
I'd like to discuss this in a novel way.

Here's some of the things we've done with d&d 2e.

>A sea faring adventure with pirates and ship to ship batles
>A long siege war campaign with castle building
>Murder mysteries
>Lots of McGruffin quests
>Solo combat, duels, arena fighting and ambushes
>Spell researching, item crafting, weapon forging, animal training, and even an upscale art museum
>Mage battles
>guard tower assaulting, prison breaking, dam building
>Class specific questing (holy sword finding, poison injecting dagger locating, lost magical shield finding)
>Frozen Wastelands, deserts, forests, mountains, plains, cities, capitols swamps, Rivers, oceans, islands, beaches, and dungeons and other planes
>racial questing, human, orcish, elven and dwarven and even a gnome related adventure
>Tree top battles, bar fights, ship to ship combat, stair battles, gryphon riding battles, castle turrets, cave fights, and fights in muck

Just to name a few....

All of that, using this system that people call a failure.

So, what does 5e offer beyond that?

>>52876357
>freeform storytrash
Stick to vidya. It will make us all happier.
You will not be missed.

>>52879354
^^this

>>52878915
I know people who don't know that RPG is it's own type of game. They think that D&D is "that board game where the rules are really loose."
If you actually asked them if there were other games like D&D they'd say "...Uhmm... I guess there probably is? I hadn't thought about it before."

File: 1432375363679.png (90KB, 200x218px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 200x218px

Why is DnD crap even so dominant in USA when it's not even close to doing that in other markets?

Is it just brand name?

>>52879423

How much of that was directly supported by the system, how much of it did you create for yourselves?

A lot of groups and GM's don't give themselves enough credit, attributing to their system things that they achieved entirely on their own, without the involvement of or even despite the system they happen to be using.

>>52879354
better art, better presentation

>>52879469
>How much of that was directly supported by the system, how much of it did you create for yourselves?

Hard to answer honestly.

A lot is covered directly with rules. Some (tree-top fighting), is covered by adapting rules for unusual combat (a general term), to a specific situation. I don't know that any of it is really 'free formed' or doesn't have some basis in printed rules.

We do have a great dm and some creative players. But we've tried other systems, and none allow the variance that d&d has. (not that we've tried ALL the systems out there)

File: 5th-edition-halfling.jpg (66KB, 500x703px)

66KB, 500x703px

>>52879471
>better art

File: 2e2.jpg (14KB, 259x194px)

14KB, 259x194px

>>52879471
>better art
>is that a joke?

>>52879546
Halflings are fucking disgusting

>>52879535

>none allow the variance that d&d has. (not that we've tried ALL the systems out there)

Can you go into this a little more? What about D&D lets you exercise greater creative freedom than you feel able to in other systems?

File: MC7 Spacer 1.png (1MB, 1226x1490px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1226x1490px

>>52879471
>imblyink
Sounds like you've got shit taste, my man. They got rid of the three columns thing in fairly short order, too.

>>52877099
>It took everything that was D&D known for and thrown it away
What kind of things spring to mind? It's still a fantasy, dungeon crawler based on a D20 system with all the same classes and races. What do you think is missing?

>>52877968
Sales wise, FFG's Star Wars trilogy. Back in the 90s, it was WoD in general and Vampire specifically.

System wise, it's probably Fate. Having the Dresden Files license gave it a leg up on other indie systems.

>>52877316
Well said.

>>52879659

Savage Worlds are also pretty damn popular.

>>52879535
The thing here is all of that can be done with a solid understanding of any game system. Some parts are purely role-playing (murder mystery) and can be done without a system.

Your table is comfortable enough with it to be flexible. If the table had gravitated to, say, V:tM and stuck with it, there's a good chance they'd say the same about it.

>>52879590
>What about D&D lets you exercise greater creative freedom than you feel able to in other systems?

I'll clarify my statement a bit, it could have been misleading.

Our preference is for sword and magic games. So games like VtM and Hunter and Spycraft and M&M, are amusing, but get boring for us. That may be due less to a system fail, and more because of our tastes. (or our lack of creativity within those systems)

Gurps was sorta a nightmare to sort through and we didn't like (pretty much everything) about it. However, to be fair here, we were already invested heavily in d&d, with hundreds of dollars in books, and not an equitable amount in gurps, and that may well factor in.

One thing that 2e does really well, is protecting each classes' unique flavor. Pally's don't stealth well, and rogues don't use wands like a mage. Clerics are ok as a fighter, but a fighter is simply better at fighting. Druids are decent healers, but not as good as a cleric. Each class, maintains it's own supremacy by staying in it's own lane.3.5 twisted that up, and make it less special to be a certain class, because so many other classes duplicated it's abilities.

When I defend d&d as a great system, I only defend it to 2e. Beyond that, the things that made it fun and unique....start running together in a big lump of equality that tends to suck.

>>52879618
>What kind of things spring to mind? It's still a fantasy, dungeon crawler based on a D20 system with all the same classes and races. What do you think is missing?

Normality.

File: 4749991260_3972028fa1_b.jpg (40KB, 697x491px)

40KB, 697x491px

>>52877172
>Is the art work really that important to people?
On the one hand, not really.

On the hand, really bad art is very off putting and implies a general lack of quality.

>>52879772
>One thing that 2e does really well, is protecting each classes' unique flavor. Pally's don't stealth well, and rogues don't use wands like a mage. Clerics are ok as a fighter, but a fighter is simply better at fighting. Druids are decent healers, but not as good as a cleric. Each class, maintains it's own supremacy by staying in it's own lane.3.5 twisted that up, and make it less special to be a certain class, because so many other classes duplicated it's abilities.

Given that this is what you really like, you might want to have a look at Dungeon Crawl Classics. It does the class thing even better than 2e, at least in my opinion.

>>52879770
I don't know that you're wrong.

>>52879732
The thing about Savage Worlds is that there are like... 8000 different games for it. And none of them are very good. It's like with the OGL for 3.5 D&D.

Because bounded accuracy is a shitshow that pushes the game in a direction I will never agree, because damage stays low but HP doesn't unless you throw godlike magic items at the party, because it's worse at running low power games than AD&D or Basic and much worse at running high power games than 3.5 or 4E, because its combat is a tactical bore that's even less interesting than core 3.5 combat and doesn't even have the good grace to be over in a couple rounds, because classes are nowhere near as interesting than they were in late 3.5 or 4E. It's a shitty game for everything I play D&D for.

>>52879808
>Dungeon Crawl Classics

I will look into that. Thx m8.

>>52879842
3.0 OGL had some gem. Do you know Midnight?

>>52878445
>I like it when publishers make things intentionally obtuse and don't respect my time.

>>52879932
Fuck your time, businesses only want your money.

>>52879354
>It does nothing 2e doesn't do better.

Cantrips alone prove this false. A low-level wizard no longer has a single spell per day (two if specialized!)

In fact, the big thing that 3e, 4e, and 5e do to improve over 2e is make classes do more than simply provide numerical increases to stats. Spellcasting classes never had to deal with this as much thanks to spells, but the addition of a plethora of tangible class features to every class is a marked improvement.

Like, here's a rough interpretation of a 2e fighter's table from levels 1-20 (including optional proficiency rules), verses the 5e fighter's table. Note that the 5e fighter doesn't just get numerical improvements to his basic stats - he gets *stuff to do* which other classes don't.

Before you go on about roleplaying or whatever, note that being provided with mechanical outlines for stuff to do, doesn't prevent you from doing other stuff. Like, neither the 2e nor the 5e fighter get any particular bonus to dipping their sword in oil and lighting it on fire, but neither one is prevented from doing that, either. 5e doesn't "spoonfeed" players options, it provides clear mechanical outlines for certain options, while leaving other more esoteric or situational ones up to the player and the DM.

>>52879932

It's one of those things I'll never understand, that some people will actively defend or even argue for pointless obfuscation in RPGs, hiding rules from the players and limiting their ability to make informed decisions.

>>52879932
Nah, you just prefer a machine easier to use but with less tools.
I bet you play it safe in life, too.

>>52879982
>A low-level wizard no longer has a single spell per day (two if specialized!)
Which proves that WotC didn't understand a damn thing about the system they were working with.

File: Untitled.png (334KB, 1087x484px)

334KB, 1087x484px

>>52879982
Whoops, forgot the table I spent time making. Mea culpa.

>>52879982
There is a certain mindset it all provokes, though. Before 3rd edition, imagination and making shit up were far more prominent than later: ever since feats and skills came out, players thought you couldn't do anything unless you had the right stats for it - and there was a feat that fucking allowed you to wield your polearm from closer to the haft to get to hit things right next to you, so you indeed probably couldn't do anything if you didn't have the stats for it.

2e didn't have that problem. Whether the system directly en- or discouraged it or not, players tended to be a great deal more imaginitive about how to fight stuff than in later editions.

>>52879982
>A low-level wizard no longer has a single spell per day (two if specialized!)

Which is a mistake. Wizards SHOULD start with few spells, and work their way up. Magic shouldn't be easy.

Huge fuck up by WotC

>>52880016
They understood that, having decided to be in a class that is all about using magic, it's pretty likely that you want to be able to use magic more often than once per day.

I mean, okay, I cast my sleep spell 'cause things are pretty hairy and the party needs me to. Now what am I supposed to do for the rest of the dungeon? Hit things with a club? Yeah, that's why I went to the Unseen University, so that I could hit things with a club. And not even very well, at that.

>>52880016
>>52880061
These. Why do you think they call it Caster Edition?

It's been Caster Game ever since 2e.

File: 257war.jpg (173KB, 391x491px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 391x491px

>>52880039
Very well said anon.

Here's a rogue for your efforts.

>>52880039
That's a problem that exists in 3e and probably 4e. Not 5e. The system outright states and makes clear that you can do stuff outside of what your features specifically allow, and a major reason why new feats for 5e have been slow to come is specifically because the WotC design team doesn't want to publish a bunch of feats that leave people thinking that they can't do thing X without the feat.

>>52879367
Itmejp's games In my honest opinion are far closer to an acutal roleplay experience. I know some people hate Adam, but he's a decent GM for his style, and Neal is my ideal for how to do hardcore DMing, where players are at serious risk. Also, the fact that they have used multiple systems, and groups are always selected to ensure a good dynamic OOC and IC means that very few of the shows are actually dull, even if the story goes a way you find boring. And I can never imagine Matt Mercer doing anything like the Diekea game.

>>52880069
Now you study esoteric texts in the dungeon walls, warn the party of magical objects, and use your high intelligence to formulate plans that the thick-headed fighters couldn't come up with.

In earlier editions, resource management and attrition were the key. The wizard had his one spell, the fighter had a few precious hit points, and so forth. You didn't just cast the Sleep spell when it was appropriate - you made sure the party really only fought that one time a day, and spent the rest of the time sneaking around or negotiating.

Later editions made combat the focus, and so the wizard needed more spells to be useful as well.

>>52880069

>what is gaining levels
>what is growing

>>52880069
Thanks for proving you too do not understand how the wizard worked.

The wizard is a near-guaranteed solution to [n] problems, same with the cleric's spellcasting abilities. That's his role in the resource economy. When you fuck with that without reworking the whole thing to accommodate it, you break shit.

>Now what am I supposed to do for the rest of the dungeon?
Get creative you great big faggot, like you should have realised you'd need to when you chose to play a wizard. Your character's got a brain, start using it.

>>52880149
>Get creative you great big faggot, like you should have realised you'd need to when you chose to play a wizard

But I'm a wizard! And I should be able to cast a spell every round. Cause' I'm a caster, and casters cast! Also, gimme some feats so I can buff my HP to be equal to the fighter. Gimme a pet too. Oh, and I wanna make scrolls at little to no cost, so I can cast even MORE spells per day.

Now, lets laugh at the other classes that can't do shit.

And that, sums up 3.5

Their solution to that? Make every class like the wizard.

wut?

>>52880102

4e has a full set of rules for improvised actions in the DMG. They're not perfect, but it's more support than it got in 3.5.

>>52878195
Fuck no I wouldn't play 5E over E6. A level 20 BM Fighter in 5E is way less interesting than a level 6 Warblade or PsyWar. Same with EK vs Duskblade or Magus, Rogue vs Factotum or Psychic Rogue, or Ranger vs Ranger.

>>52880000
>I bet you play it safe in life, too.
Wow, thanks Sigmund Freud, I'm going to cancel my next therapist appointment because you read me so damn well.

3.5 may have "more tools," but it's hard to phrase that as a positive when 90% of them are just worse versions of one another and the game expects you to figure out which are which in a patronising attempt to make you feel smart.

>>52880126 >>52880121
>what is gaining levels
>what is growing

Starting in 3e I can do that AND cast more than one spell per day. Cantrips aren't game-breaking by any means and are notably worse than even 1st level spells. The ability to use them at-will starting with Pathfinder/4e, however, means that my mage character can continuously do even minor magic throughout the day and thus I can still feel mage-y, not like a commoner with a club.

>and spent the rest of the time sneaking around or negotiating.

Or, more likely, you then headed back to the entrance of the dungeon and camped until you could cast the spell again. The 15-minute adventuring day didn't begin with 3e, it's as old as the hobby itself. Cantrips actually help put the kibosh on it by ensuring that the wizard isn't useless if a fight breaks out just because he cast his 1st-level spell.

In particular, your argument that the party should fight once a day falls apart if the party, in the course of subsequently sneaking or negotiating, fails a check or flubs a roleplay and ends up getting into a second fight they are ill-prepared to handle. Plain bad luck has just resulted in a TPK that likely happened at least in part because the Mage character has already cast his spell for the day and so is basically a worse commoner with a club rather than a magician.

For certain playstyles this is fine - in fact this was the original idea of D&D, that characters were expendable and the vast majority of them are going to die. But in the waning days of 1e and as we were getting ready for 2e, as DMs began to focus more on the story than the dungeon and Players began to think up motivations for their characters beyond "get rich", players instead preferred if they could have a singular, well-developed character that didn't die due to bad luck. And cantrips help with that.

>>52880273
>Cantrips aren't game-breaking by any means and are notably worse than even 1st level spells.

Some of the cantrips are literally the exact same spells that used to be 1st level before 3e.

>Or, more likely, you then headed back to the entrance of the dungeon and camped until you could cast the spell again.

Most likely because by that time the cleric had also run out of spells, the fighter was in his death's throes, and the thief had broken his lockpicks.

>>52880272
This tells more about your limits, than about the limits of the game.
Also, I gave an example above: you are not supposed to use everything at once. But you can have a full caster gestalt up to level 20, and the next time a martial plus low level casting.

Of course the aim and options and monsters will not be the same but there is no "bad" or "good" there is only context.
Now I don't excuse bad design (3.X/PF is FULL of it) but if can only feel pity for those stuck with the "90% is shit" meme.

>>52880018
You know, there's the thick list of things the fighter improves at for 5e, but all I'm noticing is that all of them have to do with hitting people and being hit, while the 2e fighter actually learns to do more things.

Also:
>THAC0 increasing -> ASIs
>Progression in all Saves -> ASIs, Indomitable
>Extra Attack -> Extra Attacks, Action Surge
Fighting style and Archetype are genuinely good additions, especially given the less expendable nature of characters nowadays, but they could have been better than
>Fighting Style: here's some numbers
>Archetypes: I wish I was playing 2e, the reason I've had a DM argue you're not allowed to shove as a barbarian, multiclassing without multiclassing

>>52880395
>I don't excuse bad design
>proceeds to do so

>>52880395
>those stuck with the "90% is shit" meme.
Sturgeon's Law is very real, Anon.

>>52880412
Except that ASI's can be traded out for feats, and with more ASI's then any other class, the fighter gets more feats than any other class. And that's actually a good thing this time around, unlike in 3e.

The fighter table there also didn't include the fighter's skill or tool proficiency, though I will admit that I dislike that in 5e the only way to acquire new skills is either an arduously long training process that is fully up to DM fiat; or else blowing an entire ASI to get a feat to get skills. Still, the fighter, as mentioned, gets more ASIs than anyone, so if anyone wants to throw a feat at getting skills, it's the fighter.

>>52880494
Look man, I had like 13 years of fun with 3.X/PF.
Every campaign was different, one went up to lvl 40, and my players remember important moments years and years later.
You can play it as i did, you be a massive faggot and keep whining.
I already won this discussion 10 years ago.

>>52880565

From the sounds of it, you stopped playing 3.PF and started playing your own game very loosely based on it. Which is what most people who claim to have enjoyed those games for that long ended up doing.

>>52880583
That doesn't sound like what he's saying at all. D&D has official rules for getting up to level 40 and beyond, you know.

>>52880652

I am reasonably certain it does not. The only places I've seen things like that are third party.

>>52880583
This is a completely baseless statement.
I always played 3.0, 3.5 and PF by the rules, using the right elements for the right campaign.
We did not make up stuff, but just on campaign had access to everything and there was taint/wild magic/dead magic, one to few classes and there was a tamer magic, and so on.

But please, keep being a butthurt faggot because your group had not the maturity to pull that off.
Or because you never played and all you know from 3.5 is this place and CharOpt memes.

>>52880652
And those official rules are incredibly bareboned unless you use third party rules.
>>52880565
>he thinks he "won" because he enjoyed one of the worst made games ever, such that it has warped the perception of pnp games for an entire generation
Keep going, kiddo.

>>52880669
The ELH is shit, almost unusably so, but it is 100% official.

>>52880669
I am this >>52880684
The rules for level 21+ are OGL for 3.5 and PF both.
You are yet another example of people shitting on 3rd and never played it.

>>52880686
>Keep going, kiddo.
You lack of self awareness would be fun, but is, too common in this place to be more than very sad.

>>52876246
No one I know irl has anything bad to say about 5e, and a fair few people I know play it.
The only time I see anyone shittalking the game is on the internet, and as we all know, the internet doesn't actually matter.
I don't play 5e, but I'm genuinely not interested in it, and have no opinion on it whatsoever. There are many games I don't play, and have no opinion on, and unlike some of you, I don' need dopamine rushes from shitposting, so I say nothing.

>>52880684
I don't really care about the opinions of someone who thinks 3.5 is a good game for any reasons outside of spellcaster only powertrip games or the tiny handful of actually good content that came out.

>>52880700

Looking it up, I now see why I'd never come across it. It was a 3e book that was given a digital only errata/update.

>>52880565
>I had fun with the system therefore it's not dogshit!

And there it is.
It's fine anon. No one is saying your fun memories are not valid.
You can reminisce on a game and acknowledge that it's not good. As someone who ran a Star Wars D20 Revised game for three years and loved every second of it, I can attest to this.

>>52880723
>lack of self-awareness
>he thinks I didn't do the same thing, or play a lot of 3.pf while still being able to acknowledge what the game is or how it polarized the community
No, anon, you should perhaps think about what you are saying and why. You can have fun playing with a turd, but it's still a turd.
Alas, this is your last (you), as I have no stake in this and play better games that require less hurdles.

>>52880753
You are ignoring what I did write. Also, my players were 50% martials. The casters sometimes blasted, sometimes healed, sometimes SoD, sometimes controlled, solved situations, and always buffed them very well, on the principle that there are less immunities, especially at high level game, to physical damage.
Martials protected them when casting a divine spell gave taint, when casting had to be focused on movement and control of the environment, when the magic went crazy and so on. All in the rules.
But the kind of person that comes out from what you do post.. well I am not sure is able to grasp that.

>>52877118
"I used to be able to crawl up a guys ass and cut him open, why can't I do that in 5e?"

>>52880816
>there are less immunities, especially at high level game, to physical damage.
>what is damage reduction

>>52880775
>>52880781

Is a turd because you guys just follow CharOpt memes. >>52880816
You try to saw wood with an hammer and to peel a banana with a chainsaw. I am not responsible of your inability of using the right tools at the right moment, to be honest.
>waaaah your had fun by accident
the worst of /tg/ in a nutshell. I bet you don't even play.

>>52880846
You show again that you are clueless.
even a 15/- is ridiculously low for a mildly optimizd martial.
Jesus fuck people stop posting. You are talking about a game for hearsay.

>>52880669
3rd Edition had the Epic Level Handbook, 3.5 had the rules for Epic Levels right in the DMG (extended out to 30th level, but with details for how to progress beyond that if desired (starting on pg. 206 if you're curious)). Pathfinder doesn't have official Epic rules that I'm aware of.

Both 3.0 and 3.5 also had most of the additional Epic stuff - Epic monsters, Epic feats, Epic spells, etc. - as part of the SRD.

>>52880773
Which still means it's 100% official for 3.0 and 3.5 and very easy to port into Pathfinder.

>>52876246
But anon, 5e D&D is the Skyrim of pen & paper games. It's shit without mods.

>>52877118
Called shots, sundering weapons and armor, special maneuvers like knocking someone over or making them drop an item (without the Fighter path), charging (without the feat).

>>52880927
You can do all those things in 5e, though. Fighters can do some of them easier, but you don't need to be a fighter to knock someone over. You just tell the DM you want to do it and then he tells you what you have to roll and what the DC will be.

This isn't a bug or missing data, it's a feature. The intent of 5e is to be open-ended so that you just do stuff rather than questing after a specific class feature that lets you do stuff.

>>52880988
Not him, this is something I am not sure of.
Is not a criticism to 5ed, I found it in older games as well.
I cannot genuinely tell at which point something should be a class feature, or it should be a thing accessible to everyone (through feat or "just try", or both).

>>52880988
But then they added in a class feature that lets you do stuff, and why would a class get a feature that lets them do something they already can?

Why not just give the Battlemaster proficiency in unusual combat maneuvers, plus the other abilities (giving an ally an attack, giving an ally a move, and so on)? This gives them extra room to do things without implying other people aren't allowed to do them, plus some unique things only they can do.

>>52880988
>>52881095

IMO it's better if games provide some guidelines for non-specified actions. It doesn't need to be much, but a few bits of advice for GMs, example DCs or damage values and how to judge the value of one effect or another. Things a GM could learn in time, but the system providing it makes it easier on them.

>>52881131
I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the roaring sound of the hole where the guidelines for skill DCs are supposed to be.

>>52881131
I agree on that, but in specific, how much should be (as an example) "warrior only"?
In older D&D as an example, you could get bonus from strength and, IIRC, constitution only if you were a warrior class. Or one could argue that sunder and disarm should be warrior only (perhaps disarm for the Rogue, too).

>>52881197
>you could get bonus from strength and, IIRC, constitution only if you were a warrior class.
Only in specific cases. Percentile strength and an HP bonus of more than +2 per die being those specific cases.

>>52881095
>I cannot genuinely tell at which point something should be a class feature, or it should be a thing accessible to everyone (through feat or "just try", or both).

Depends on the DM. Some are stricter, some are looser. For my own part whenever a player wants to do something I rarely tell them "no", I just tell them what skill or ability to roll and then set a DC in my head.

>>52879367

But desu that actually sounds pretty decent - At least better than the usual alternative of everyone fucking around and spouting 'stupid fucking meme references' all the time (I get that too of course).

I get that their expectations might be high on the DMing and misc. production values, but other than that, eh. I don't see what the negative connotations are?

>>52881260

Did they change 'to be honest' to 'desu' ....?

What the hell?

> desu

>>52881173
It's on page 238 of the 5e DMG.

Reprinted for convenience's sake:

Very Easy <> 5
Easy <> 10
Moderate <> 15
Hard <> 20
Very Hard <> 25
Nearly Impossible <> 30

Ta-da~!

>>52881288
It's been like that for years, famalam. Also I think it replaces famalam with sempai, or some variation of famalam. If I'm right this post should look pretty weird, DESU

>>52881343
Family
F amily
Fa mily
Senpai ily
Fami ly
Famil y

>>52881373
Hmm. Could have sworn it did that.

>>52876246
5th edition simply doesn't have enough mechanical depth to keep my attention. There's not enough variation between different characters of different classes, so every time I play a Barbarian, I feel like I'm playing the same character.


In contrast something like Pathfinder has a shit ton of options and different ways of approaching a Barbarian in mechanically distinct ways, such that you could have two similar characters who are mechanically rather different.

Plus the mechanics themselves are so simple that I can't really get into the game. I know some people prefer "rules-lite" games, but I generally don't'

So 5th edition is okay when I want to turn off my brain and just kind of cruise through a game, but when I have a choice I prefer something that gts me engaged a bit more.

I think GURPs is autistic. I just can't read that ugly pdf, D&D is so much prettier.

>>52881321
But what's Easy, when a commoner fails an "Easy" task 50% of the time?

I'd call climbing a rope easy, but I don't fail at it nearly often enough for me to call it 50% (and I certainly don't have any positive modifiers)

Is climbing a slick rope easy? I wouldn't call it that, but that fits more with what the DC is called.

2-3 examples of what a DC means is all I ask. I don't think that's too much.

>>52881321
The examples, anon!

Where are they!

And those DCs are set where very high CR beings can barely hit 20 half the time, while a Bard/Rogue can rather easily hit 25 at around 12th.

File: damar.png (148KB, 320x320px)

148KB, 320x320px

>>52876246
5e is final vindication that the 3eaboos were right and the 4rries were wrong. You know who advised on 5e? The RPGPundit. I consider the lack of debate on 5e to be a sign of utter submission. It took a long time, but we won. The WoW simulator is dead, WotC recognized the gravity of their mistake and apologized in an appropriately humiliating fashion. Pathfinder is still alive as an eternal testament to their shame, but 5e is a suitable penance to excuse their lapse in judgement.

>>52881478 >>52881489
>I'd call climbing a rope easy, but I don't fail at it nearly often enough for me to call it 50% (and I certainly don't have any positive modifiers)

Then climbing a rope is probably Very Easy, not Easy.

>Is climbing a slick rope easy?

That's up to you as the DM.

>>52881587
For myself, I prefer the term "3tard"

>>52878353
That's why you make your parties make characters together, and limit what they can make, you fucking sperg.

If you let someone play a fighter and a wizard in the same party, yeah the fighter is gonna feel useless by level ten. But that's why you don't fucking do that. You have the fighter play a psychic warrior, or have the wizard play a rogue.

Criticizing a role playing game for having overpowered options is pure idiocy. It's like being salty that your human character is a weakling next to a mage character that your storyteller inexplicably lets someone in the group play in World of Darkness

On the topic, I'd call 5e trash but trash has a strong odor, which 5e is far too bland to ever muster up. I dislike 5e because it's watered down as fuck. It's good practice mode for getting people into 3.5 though, which IS actually the best system.

>>52881626

That you can work around the problems doesn't stop the problems existing

>>52881626

The difference is that WoD doesn't tell you an ordinary human and a mage are on the same level. 3.5 explicitly does try to claim that Fighter and Wizard are equally viable choices.

>>52881626
>If you let someone play a fighter and a wizard in the same party, yeah the fighter is gonna feel useless by level ten
Okay, and how would a novice DM know this? If I had never played a variation on 3e before, what is there in the book to tell me that playing a fighter when my buddy's playing a wizard is a bad idea? The most stereotypical party is Fighter, Rogue, Wizard, Cleric, so what indication is there that this isn't viable?

>>52881617
So unless my DM feels like handing out custom charts of DC examples I as a player have no idea what my character is actually capable of.

File: best.png (248KB, 299x401px)

248KB, 299x401px

>>52880061
>>52880016
>one spell per day was a good mechanic

Jesus fucking Christ.

That's how retarded old DnD tards are.

>>52881626
>>52881656

That's not even a workaround to the fucking problem.

How do you justify a system where you literally can't have someone play the base classes they want, and the DM tells them "NO, YOU PLAY ROGUE!" !?

That's fucking retarded. No game is 100% perfectly balanced, but 5e at least I can say is close enough that /you can have a wizard and fighter in the same fucking party/

>>52881700
How often does Gandalf cast a spell throughout the entire story? About four times.

Does that make Gandalf fucking useless for the rest of the time? Fuck no.

Would the story be as exciting were he to solve every single problem they had with magic, like 3e wizards and beyond are so fond to do? Well, you may disagree, but I at least don't think so.

>>52881700

Notice the 2e fans, have played a long time, and don't have ANY of this bullshit:

>>52881682

>zomg there's no balance!!!!!!!

>>52881692
I guess? If you've got a good Strength then you know you're good at climbing and swimming.

>>52881626
>It's like being salty that your human character is a weakling next to a mage character that your storyteller inexplicably lets someone in the group play in World of Darkness

Holy autism.

DnD classes are in core book. Nowhere in the core book does it say that fighter is trash next to a wizard or priest. Book pretends they are perfectly balanced.

In Mage you play as mages. If somebody wants to play a human he does it because he really wants to knowing very well he'll be much weaker than everybody else.

Trying to defend DnD's terrible imbalance is completely retarded.

>>52881726
Yes. By 3e and 3.5 and 4e, and 5e player standards, Gandalf is fucking useless, and hopeless, and utterly worthless, and should be rerolled.

>>52881700
It's one spell per extended rest, not per day.

>>52881726
Gandalf was DMPC made for the sole purpose of railroading other through the story. He didn't need spells because his power was DM-fiat.

>>52881792
>Trying to defend DnD's terrible imbalance is completely retarded.
You mean 3e and newer imbalance issues.

>>52881726

Gandalf is a fucking angel not a normal wizard.

And he's a sword fighter on the level of best sword fighters in the team.

DnD lv1 wizard can get killed by a house cat in melee combat.

>>52881819

3.5 and to a lesser extent 5e, really.

>>52881709
You don't need to do that. Unless the rules of the spells are interpreted in the worse way, and the fighter is unbuffed/unequipped, you can go on just fine.
If something is a problem, ban it but generally is enough have a DM that is not retarded.

>>52881747
Knowing i can pass a DC 10 climb check is worthless without knowing what a DC 10 climb check represents.
Is that a sheer vertical wall? Is it a greased rope? Is it a tree?

>>52881700
Hey, you know what 1st-level clerics used to get in the way of spells back in the very early days? Fucking nothing.

>>52876246
I just find it to be incredibly... boring... I don't really like Pathfinder either because it's too restrictive. WW is borderline my game of choice, but I think it's too rules light, so I've been working on my own system that creates characters as organically as WW but is as structurally sound as PF or 5E. I think I'm almost there.

>>52881856
Clerics were always handy in a fight, though. Wizards didn't have even that.

>>52881856
They still had decent (decent, not good) weapon selection and armor. backup fighters, up to higher levels.

>>52876357
Normies tend to make better roleplayers than long term grognards and autists who came to D&D precisely because it was inaccessible.

Shockingly, people with good social skills that are coming to D&D because it's socially acceptable are more competent group members. Perhaps not as fully versed in the genre, but they're less bitter and shitty for the most part. Granted this is just personal anecdotal experience across ~20 players and 5ish years of playing, but I don't think many would disagree.

>>52881867

WW?

>>52881809
>It's one spell per extended rest, not per day.

It's literally the same thing unless DM is a retard who allows you to rest everywhere with 0 problems and never uses quests with time limits.

>>52881850
Normally I'm the first person to point out that D&D is not a Real Life Simulator, but for fuck's sake, use real life as an example.

How easy do YOU think it is to climb a sheer vertical wall?

>>52881918
Totally agree. My experience as well. Also, they see the game mora as a story with dice so they value RP and agency over DPR.

>>52881937
>How easy do YOU think it is to climb a sheer vertical wall?

We are fat autistic neckbeards that don't get up of our seats if we don't absolutely have to.

It could be perfectly easy for a fit person, or pretty hard, or near-impossible - I honestly have no fucking idea.

>>52881918
>Normies tend to make better roleplayers than long term grognards

This so much.

To this day I can't believe that there are GM's who resolve talking to NPC's with checks instead of actually roleplaying the talk.

>>52879461
You do realize D&D was the first game of it's kind? Even if it isn't in the top spot in other countries, it pretty fucking high up there, and the primary reason it's not dominant is that translations take time, and i'm fairly fucking sure Gary and his bro's didn't translate the originals or 2e, did they?

>>52881966
I try to say this to my players: Diplomacy and Bluff are like attack rolls. You can attack the monster, you have the mechanic written on your sheet, but you have to play to move there up close and strike.
In the same way, your RP will make the Diplomacy or Bluff roll possible, along with bonus and penalties.

An alternative is roll, and then roleplay, but is not for my players. Still, they tend to let speak people with the suitable mental stats.

>>52879843
Subjective opinions, the post.

>>52879461
>Why is DnD crap even so dominant in USA when it's not even close to doing that in other markets?

Because it is close to dominant in other markets. It does very well all around the world.

>>52881937
Honestly I have no idea how hard it would be to climb any of the things I gave as examples.
And even if I did take a stab at guessing it doesn't matter if my GM doesn't agree with me.
I might think my fighter can climb that greased rope with a 10 but doesn't fucking matter if the GM says it takes a 15.

>>52882078
>I might think my fighter can climb that greased rope with a 10 but doesn't fucking matter if the GM says it takes a 15.

Oh, no, you have to deal with the fact that the DM is the ultimate arbitrator of the rules and always has been. How do you know he isn't screwing you over. He might be, you know. Just like he might be inflating the ACs and save DCs.

>>52882054
>Because it is close to dominant in other markets

Except it's not. At least not in Europe.

I see much more Warhammer, GURPS, Savage Worlds, Cyberpunk, FFG SW and WoD games than DnD.

>>52881478
>But what's Easy, when a commoner fails an "Easy" task 50% of the time?

That's not how it works, because you're confused with the language. Rather than easy "task", look at it as an easy "challenge", under the idea that it's something you have a chance of failing. You don't roll for every action you're taking, only the ones where there is a fair chance of failure.

In 3rd edition, they addressed this with the "Take 10" rule, where if you're not stressed, you can forego a roll and simply take a 10 on an action. In essence, a commoner succeeds 100% of the time on easy tasks, assuming that there's nothing altering the circumstances significantly.

>>52882026
I'm one of those people who complains about rules-light storygames being the hot new craze, and even I do rolls as
>give a brief description of what you're trying to do
>roll
>you or the GM describe how you got to that outcome
So you still roleplay social interaction, even when you roll. I have no idea why people do it any other way.

>>52882180
That's nice, but you're only giving me anecdotal evidence. As far as what the numbers of book sales and games run go, D&D is extremely popular throughout Europe.

>>52882219
Where are you getting book sales from?

What's a good fantasy system that uses percentile?

Basically rogue trader is the most fun I've ever had in an RPG but I miss the castles, dragons, kobolds and shit.

File: 1492801771948.jpg (27KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 500x375px

>>52876485
As it turns out, more and more I've noticed /tg/ in particular warming up to 4e and the books are dirt cheap. I'm considering running my next campaign with it. Anyone have experience with it and want to weigh in?

>>52882256
Monster health is kinda wonky in the earlier monster manuals.

>>52882180
>Except it's not. At least not in Europe.

Because Muslims don't into d&d.

>>52882251
It shouldn't be hard to homebrew WFRP to a different setting, one with kobolds in it.

>>52882256
It's ok if you treat it less like a simulator/true RPG and more like Warhammer Quest or another board game.

>>52882276
So point for muslims I guess.

>>52882151
Yeah, he could be screwing me over arbitrarily. That would make him a douchebag. However, without guidelines, it's possible to end up looking like a douchebag without any ill intent, just because what a given DC means is left completely obscured and two people's interpretations are just as (in)valid.

>>52882180
I'd love to see some sales figures to back that up. As near as I know, D&D is very high in every market. Where it's not the top seller it's still somewhere in the top 5, and taking Europe as a gestalt whole D&D still overall #1.

Like, Das Schwarze Auge might be #1 in Germany, but it's not widely played outside of Germany.

>>52882256
>As it turns out, more and more I've noticed /tg/ in particular warming up to 4e and the books are dirt cheap. I'm considering running my next campaign with it. Anyone have experience with it and want to weigh in?

It's shit. The /tg/ people who cheer it on, are shit. If you play it, you'll also be shit.

There, I summed up 4e for you.

>>52881919
White Wolf - basically the entire system, but specifically out of the new games I prefer Geist.

>>52882310
>There, I summed up D&D for you.

File: printablemm3businessfront.gif (27KB, 1050x600px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 1050x600px

>>52882256

Know what you're getting into. 4e is a good system, but it's focused. It does fantasy tactical combat pretty damn well, it has a lot of good content, but some of its elements like out of combat stuff are weaker.

On mandatory fixes- Give everyone Improved Defences and an Expertise feat for free. These fix a problem in the core system math.

Use the Monster Manual 3/Monster Vault combat math. Pic related sums up all the values you need for making your own monsters.

funin.space is a searchable index of all 4e content. You should also track down cbloader, the fan-patched version of the character builder with all the content. It makes building characters a lot easier.

On more personal suggestions-

Consider giving people bonus power slots for out of combat utility powers. 4e has a lot of fun ones, but the fact they directly compete for space with combat powers means they're taken relatively rarely. Giving people one or two dedicated slots (one per five levels is my go to) gives some extra utility to everyone.

Hand out Ritual Components alongside normal gold and item rewards. Rituals are another cool subsystem hampered by excessive GP costs and requirements, making you spend permanent progression for temporary effects. Giving people a specific resource for rituals makes them a lot more useful and fun.

>>52882283
Been reading up on that. WFRPG is supposed to be really lethal, like AD&D 2nd, where I am looking for more heroic scale with solid mechanics and fate points. Might just have to try to homebrew a game inspired by Rogue Trader.

>>52882329

I thought you meant that, but I was kinda confused since White Wolf is in no way rules light. It's honestly quite a crunchy, mechanical system.

>>52882337
How is literally all D&D shit?

That's at least five entirely different games.

>>52876246
I met a guy who refuses to play anything but 3.5. He doesn't even play pathfinder, just 3.5. I asked him why he doesn't like 5th edition and he said that goblins shouldn't be able to damage a level 20 PC.

>>52882416
I want to punch that guy in the dick. And I've never met him.

He's right about not playing 5e tho.

>>52882416
If you get shot with an arrow you get shot with an arrow

>>52882416
That seems like a problem that stems from misunderstanding that 20th level in 5e is not meant to be equivalent to 20th level in 3e.

In 3e, a 20th level character is basically a demigod. In 5e, a 20th level character is just really, really good at everything he or she does.

>>52882308
So what?
That's not the point.
D&D in europe might be in top 5 basically everywhere, secon in many places or even first in some smaller countreis and as in Europe summarized, it's total market share would be most likely between 15 and 25%. That's nowhere close 80-90% in America. And even in best case scenario of 1/4 of overall market share - while not being locally number one almost anywhe - isn't something you can calll as "dominant" unless you want to sound very slilly. European RPG market is simply very divided compared to US and there is no place for "domination" for any game, including D&D, on a scale larger than extremely local.

>>52882479
But in AD&D and other later editions you become basically a demigod by level -10-, and a goblin can most certainly hurt you.

File: shmoopy.jpg (18KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 480x360px

>>52876357
I got into D&D because of Unforgotten Realms back in the day.

>>52882516
>But in AD&D and other later editions you become basically a demigod by level -10-
No. In AD&D, a level 10 is the sort of guy who owns his own castle and has soldiers show up to swear loyalty to his banner.

>>52882256
it's my favorite combat-oriented system there is, the encounters are easy as fuck to build, even to improvise on the fly if you learn the system
and if you have players that get really into the tactical side of things, i'm sure they'll adore the combat system

there's also the suite of tools for pc including the character and monster builders that make everything super organized and fun to work with

basically just run it as a grid-based combat wargame with everything else serving as compelling and fun context for the encounters
my favorite is premise is having the pcs as some kind of squad of badass specialist problem solvers for a government/wealthy noble/etc, something that doesnt necessarily give the players a lot of freedom in what their goals are but allows for all kinds wiggle room in how they accomplish things
im sure that style isn't for everyone but it makes for some great episodic combat-focused adventures

there are some issues with math that should definitely be addressed if you stick with it long-term, but for just a one shot or short arc you don't really need to bother with anything, it works well enough at low levels

other things to have in mind: you HAVE to build around the combat because compared to just about any other system, combat takes a LONG time
so make sure your players understand what they're getting into
not that you can't run a different kind of game than "cool, interesting thematic tactical combat encounters" but that's really what it's built for

>>52882523
Unforgotten Realms is fucking awesome, though. What's your point?

>>52877327
>measuring gold coins weight is a fucking good mechanic?
Yes it is.
Why wouldnt it be? Its a classic dramatic situation, heroes being in trouble while weighed down by their recently aquired treasure.

More "loose" rules light systems would never have something like that ever happen.

>>52882516
I wouldn't call a 10th level AD&D character a demigod by any means.

>>52882541
No, no. In AD&D, you can be a zero-level NPC with some good relations and get a castle. Just that the level 9+ warrior is good enough to get the castle by default.

Because he's a fucking demigod.

>>52882541
But not a fucking demigod.

Also, 2e is fucking awesome for castles and keeps and running your own kingdom/barony/village/etc

I dislike the Suprise round change and the sneak attack change and as a DM I let my players know that we are using older editions rules for it.

>>52882569
>Just that the level 9+ warrior is good enough to get the castle by default.
>Because he's a fucking demigod.
>I've never played 2e, and know nothing about it

Why are people posting dnd retroclones like theyre not dnd

>>52882256

Contrary to what a lot of people say, 4e is an RPG like any other. That it does combat well doesn't stop you roleplaying, and I've never really understood why so many people seem to believe that's the case. You can run any normal D&D style game in it and it'll do fine, with the added bonus of the combat actually being fun.

Not all the content is good though. Most of the Essentials classes are boring as sin, Seeker is badly designed and underpowered, Vampire is badly designed and fucking weird and Assassin is awfully designed and unplayably bad.

Also http://www.asmor.com/scripts/4eMonsterMathCruncher/index.php is a pretty useful utility, the site has a bunch of neat stuff for 4e on it.

>>52882558
Not through mechanics alone at least. There's always narrative room for it in any system.

>>52882558
It's not strictly a measure of weight, anyway. It's a combined measure of weight and bulk.

>>52882569
>Because he's a fucking demigod.

...do you think that anyone with a castle is a demigod? Because my dad in Ireland has a neighbor who has a castle literally in his backyard.

>>52882612
it's not that you can't run anything just fine
it's just that combat often takes a few hours to resolve
unless you've got all the time in the world, it's hard to fit in a truly compelling bit of intrigue or exploration without avoiding combat entirely

basically combat is where 4e shines so if you play to that strength you'll have a better time with it in my experience

>>52882495
D&D in America is roughly at 50% of the player base. Same goes with Europe, though in some regions it drops to around 30-40.
That's pretty dominant, because even in the few regions where it's only at 30% the more prevalent games are usually no more than 40% of the player base.

You really shouldn't try to underplay how popular D&D is just based on your feelings.

>>52882628
Your dad lives near a demigod?

>>52882569
Anon, you retard, here are some actual AD&D demigod levels:
Heward: MU/Illus 10/10, Bard 20
Keoghtom: MU/Illus 18/16, Monk 10, Bard 12
Murlynd: Pal 12, Mu/Illus 12/12
Kelanen: F 20, MU/Illus 5/5, Thief-Acrobat 10

>>52882684

Combat in D&D always takes a few hours to resolve. That's nothing new.

>>52882612
From my experience the formatting of 4e is responsible for a lot the bad reactions.
For some reason uniform formatting of abilities made people sperg out.

>>52882628
>...do you think that anyone with a castle is a demigod?

No. I was saying the exact fucking opposite.

Most guys with castles are no demigods. They could've gotten their castle by means of inheritance or paying a lot of money or whatever, it doesn't matter. In case of level 9 fighter, that reason is that he is in fact essentially a demigod, so they throw him a castle just to get him to their good graces.

>>52882708

Yeah, I've noticed the same thing. A lot of the mechanics and ideas weren't even new, but the idea that the system presented them to you directly and honestly rather than obfuscating them seemed to drive some people crazy. It's bizarre.

>>52882687
Where are you getting these numbers from?
I'm honestly curious since as far as I know wotc doesn't release sales numbers for D&D.

>>52882707
only if your group is full of indecisive or otherwise easily distracted people.

>>52882711
>that reason is that he is in fact essentially a demigod, so they throw him a castle just to get him to their good graces.
That's not what happens at all, have you even fucking been in the same room as the book?

IF the fighter has a castle/stronghold AND manor lands around it THEN he attracts soldiers to his banner. He does NOT get a stronghold for free.

>>52882684
Some of that was due to the bad math on the earlier monsters.
A lot of it comes from the fact that tactics are actually important in 4e combat.
You really need to think out an plan your group's actions.

>>52882754

Well, let's be clear about edition here.

A large, group combat in 3.5, 4e or 5e all, in my experience, take a significant amount of time.

Of those, 3.5 generally took the longest given the sheer quantity of options, special rules and the like.

4e is shorter in my experience since the mechanics are simpler and easier to use, but you still have meaningful and engaging mechanical choices to make that will influence the combat.

5e seems fastest, but it trades out a lot of tactical depth for the speed of resolution, which some people will prefer but feels like something of a loss to me.

And even then, a big fight in 5e still isn't something you can finish in a short amount of time.

>>52882708
Because giving fighters special attacks per day, is basically a fucking wizard.

Giving a wizard unlimited magic attacks per day, is like a fighter.

Everything about 4e, is fucking retarded.

File: Untitled.png (240KB, 600x403px)

240KB, 600x403px

>>52882694
My dad lives near a cattle rancher. Actually he's surrounded by cattle (mostly bullocks), horses, and so on.

He lives in Kells, County Kilkenny. In point of fact, the pic here is the exact tower.

Ireland's positively lousy with ruined castles and towers and keeps and such. Half the country are demigods according to that fuckwit up there.

>>52882711
>They could've gotten their castle by means of inheritance or paying a lot of money or whatever, it doesn't matter. In case of level 9 fighter, that reason is that he is in fact essentially a demigod, so they throw him a castle just to get him to their good graces.

WTF are you babbling about?

>>52882818
So I take it you don't like 5e either?

>>52882818

Only if you think about it in stupid ways. Like you're doing now.

The AEDU system is more gamist/narrativist, while 3.5 was much more simmy in how things worked.

If you don't like that? That's fine. But for what they wanted the mechanic to do, it works amazingly well. And if you actually play the system, you'd realise that the mechanical differences between character types are actually more significant, not less, than they are in other systems. Having a common structure let them employ more mechanical distinctions while still keeping things balanced and letting everyone interact on roughly the same scale, even if they did so in different ways.

>>52882853
Not in any way.

THAT is what turned me off from 3.5 and up.

I like unique classes.

>>52882617
True but when the mechanics are there it happens naturally during play instead of being a scripted narrative.

Not that scripted narratives are bad or anything. Its just that unexpected situations tend to be more interesting for both the dm and the players

>>52882707
it's amped way up in 4e with every group I've played in, some more than others I admit but I could rarely get in more than 2 encounters in a session where in 2e for example its rarely fewer than 3 on top of more exploration, negotiation, and trap-based moments

>>52882802
oh yeah, cutting that hp down with mm3 math makes a big difference especially at higher levels, but even then

and don't get me wrong im not complaining I fucking love this shit, the tactical combat, designing encounters with monsters that play off of each other, giving the players a difficult challenge to puzzle through while every single character is constantly manipulating and interacting with each other and the monsters and the environment to be effective I live for that stuff
it's just you have to plan around it taking more time away from the real meaty RPG stuff

>>52882870
>Having a common structure let them employ more mechanical distinctions while still keeping things balanced and letting everyone interact on roughly the same scale, even if they did so in different ways.

2e balanced shit 20 years earlier. And did it while keeping classes unique.

>>52882883
Well at least you're consistent in your sperging.

>>52882911
But couldn't give the wizard more than one spell on first level.

>>52882911

4e class design is also unique. Which you'd know if you actually played it. Standard formatting does not mean generic mechanics.

>>52882687
Except nope.
Of course this can't be resolved unless one of us would provide actual estimates based on proper research instead of pulling shit out of the ass but i don't think it will happen.
But at least I am european and happen to at least be able to observe things around while having a feeling that this is not the case for you.

>>52882883

>I like unique classes.

Then you should like 4e.

Compare the Barbarian and Fighter in 3.5, 4e and 5e. The mechanics and how they function in 4e are the most different, interesting and unique.

Same goes for the Sorceror, Wizard and Warlock.

Standard formatting? Sure. But a huge amount of mechanical depth, nuance and details in how they actually function, taking advantage of balanced and universal systems to build distinct and interesting mechanics into each and every class.

>>52882911
2e was a lot of things, but "balanced" wasn't one of them.