Why do people hate 3.x? It took us out of the RPG dark ages and

>>53673755
baito des

>>53673755
"Judge a fish by it's ability to climb..."
Sure, what it did, it did okay. But d20 and dnd 3.5 are not fully realized rpgs any more than Kraft dinner is fine dining food.

>>53673755
Because despite not being a very good system it was held up as the posterboy of the hobby. Far too many people swear by it when there are games that do everything it can do but better.

>>53673801
Like what?

File: 1423487505740.png (102KB, 625x1254px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 625x1254px

>>53673755
go away you fucking sperg

File: That entire comment of (You)rs.jpg (48KB, 441x439px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 441x439px

>>53673861

File: 1467597238935.png (302KB, 500x495px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 500x495px

>>53673950
>you're autistic if you call me out on being a sheltered little faggot

There's only one way out of your shame anon.

>>53673809
Dungeon Fantasy.

>>53673755
>3e
>took us out of the RPG dark ages
>didn't directly start the RPG dark ages
It's bait but I don't care. It's just too yummy.

>>53673755
Gave awful DM advice, which grew many awful DMs, who flowered many awful games.

>>53674639
Any actual examples or are you just talking out of your ass?

>>53673755
>dark ages

You mean niche ages? Because these were great and the influx of people can fuck right back off

>>53673755
In the off chance this isn't bait I'll bite, what do mean by the dark ages? What do you like about 3.X?

>>53673755

People wouldn't sperg about something if they didn't care about it

>>53674818
OP's terminology is a bit confused.
3.5 took RPGs out of obscurity (>>53674735's "Niche Ages" is a pretty good term for that) but at the same time, plunged them into the Dark Ages.

>>53674954
What's your thoughts on 5E? It seems like there's the same phenomenon only more pronounced

>>53674992
Not as terrible mess as 3E, rules-wise, but subscribes to about the same dark age philosophy and all that play it should be taught better games to go for.

>>53675098
Honestly I prefer 3.X if only because the bloat if you can handle it allows for more option, that and I've always felt that my problem with the 3.X and 5E was that they were built to run games that I didn't want to play personally

>>53674992
I view 5e primarily with disappointment and disgust. Started out promising, then turned out to be what amounts to a scam.

Not really convinced that 5e has boosted the popularity of RPGs. And it doesn't seem to be quite as toxic as 3.5.

3rd started the RPG dark ages, which can best be summed up as "everything needs a D20 variant."

It had its good points though, without it OSR gaming would never have been a thing.

>>53673755
Naga please. If anything it brought about a dark age, 3.x plunged us into the d20 glut which nearly destroyed all diversity in the hobby. When 4e came out it seemed finally the Dark Ages were behind us but Paizo had to shit out Pathfinder and the 3aboos live on.

>>53675252
At my local store and online it seems like most people are getting into TTRPGs through 5E, that could just be me though, I don't have any concrete data

File: elder_evils.jpg (429KB, 1280x1169px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 1280x1169px

OP there were a lot of issues with 3.5. This was obvious to even me when I started with the game at age 15. It's still a lot of fun, and it will always be my favorite D&D edition. 5th edition is pretty good, with fewer flaws, but there is also less game so its flaws are more obvious and thus more obnoxious.

Here are some issues with 3rd:

>save or die spells
>quadratic wizards
>attack bonuses way too high
>bad number balance in general (proficiency was a step in the right direction but too extreme)
>not enough options for certain martial proficiencies

That said, the only thing in 5e I really like are the dex-to-attack with light melee, dex-to-damage with ranged, and Eldritch Knight fighter (despite it being shit, apparently). The Battlemaster fighter is just kind of dumb, a lot of the archetypes are shit, everything is dumbed down to damage now, so DPS is king. Mind flayers can't kill you properly, there is zero potential for insta-death so if you have high HP you have nothing to fear. The game is pussified but it's still fun. The art / aesthetic style is too glossy and generic, I loved 3.5's art, like pic related. It just felt like D&D. Same with AD&D. But 4e and 5e just felt like generic fantasy art. Better than anything I can draw, of course, but still.

>>53675355
Well, sure. But that's just brand name inertia, rather than any quality of 5e.
And afaik, 5e hasn't spawned an OGL that will spaw-- wait, let me look that up real quick...

Oh.
Ohh...


Fuck.

>>53673755
>out of the RPG dark ages

WTactualF?

>>53673755
3.X is the skyrim of pen and paper. It has brand recognition. It isn't a terrible starting point for the hobby especially since people outside the rpg hobby associate it with ttrpgs entirely. That said people latch on to it like it is the entirety of the hobby the only rpg to exist (looking at you I'm running a gundam game in modified 3.5 thread that happened several months ago)
It's almost entirely combat focused
It's poorly balanced
It's glitchy as hell
And of all of the things people think it is capable of, it really only does itself alright, outside of its specific experience it falters hard

Meanwhile you could be playing literally anything else. Preferably something which does what you're looking for better.

>>53675471
Wait, how many other games have been made in the 5E system?

>>53675588
None that I know of yet, but it can only be a matter of time.

>>53675588
Ultramodern 5, Adventures in Middle-Earth, probably a couple others that I'm forgetting but those are the two big ones.

>>53673755
>Why do people hate 3.x?
For it's hateable flaws.

>It took us out of the RPG dark ages
If you say so, Chief.

>I don't understand why people sperg out about it.
Because they are spergs, either for it or against it.

This is not hard, OP.

>>53675650
So it HAS begun...

>>53675725
For some reason I don't feel like it will be bad as 3.X

>>53675742
Of course, 5e doesn't have anywhere near the destructive and corrosive potential 3.5 had, thanks to the vastly different market situation.

Was 3.0 really that bad? I never see anyone talk about it at all.

>>53673755
It took us out of the RPG golden age.

>>53675161
Honestly, 5e homebrew is easier to make and easier to balance. It's a hundred times easier to just build what you want for 5e than it is to wade through splatbook after splatbook of mostly feces to get what will usually be a highly questionable and possibly-not-even-viable version of what you want for 3.5e/pathfinder.

>>53677100
There's a reason why nobody ever considers downgrading from 3.5 to 3.0 despite ongoing edition wars about everything else, anon

>>53677199
Yeah but it's not even
>'Remember how shit 3.0 was?'

It's more like it never actually existed

>>53677213
It kind of didn't, though. It's less of an edition shift and more of a video game update. Talking about 3.0 as opposed to 3.5 is kind of like talking about a version 1.17 of Diablo: there's little point at all.

>>53675355
I know 5e was a really big seller. The player's handbook was a NYT bestseller among all nonfiction for a fair bit. No idea what the actual conversion rate of new players is, though.

>>53677213
I heard that a lot, but it's mostly because I hung around Neverwinter Nights modding community.

And on /tg/ there's no point in beating a dead horse aside from pointing out fun mechanical abuses like infinite STR sick wizards or bag of rats giving you 20 extra hits.

>>53677213
3.0 really only had two major differences from 3.5:

magic item bonus specific DR ie: Dr 10/ magic +2 means your weapon needed to not only be a magic weapon, but it needed to be a +2 weapon to get past DR.

And the big one: Haste was comically broken. It effectively gave extra turns.

When 3.5 was released, people called it a glorified Haste Nerf.

>>53673794
>any more than Kraft Dinner is fine dining food

You shut the fuck up
t. Canadian

>>53674405
>Dungeon Fantasy
No thanks, I prefer sanity over GURPS.

>>53673755
3.5 gave us Legend, so as far as I'm concerned it's a good thing.

>>53677410
>he thinks GURPS is more complicated than D&D

ayy lmao

>>53677325
Anyone want to figure out the sales figures and conversion rates for various games? I know a bit about statistics but probably not enough to do this justice

>>53677433
I've played both, 3.5 is astronomically simpler.

>>53675252
Seeing 5e as it is now after some of the great shit we had in the playtest still depresses me.

>>53677488
What was so complicated about GURPS?

>>53677612
Practically everything. I tried it in high school, it was such a cluster fuck I never looked back. If there have been new editions that make it playable I honestly don't care.

>>53677100
It's just 3.5e with overall worse UX and slightly weaker classes. Differences are mostly a slew of quality of life and balance tweaks, and some editing. A lot of it is minor; a major difference is that rangers got bumped a hit die size. That's the scope we're talking.

The main issues of third edition were much deeper, and are present in both.
>>53673755
The issues are mostly, from my perspective:

- Terribly limiting and overly specific action economy and basic action options (trip, disarm, etc.) - generally lots of waffling and a high burden of knowledge with very little gain. Mostly just serves to needlessly hamstring and discourage imaginative action descriptions without a huge degree of system mastery first.

- The way the feat system interfaces with this (can't wipe ass without 8 levels of feat tree investment)

- The way classes and feats and spells are fundamentally structured. e.g. excessive bookkeeping, trap options, classes with near-zero utility and not much to do but wait around, deceptively worded features that seem good at first glance but are actually pigshit (trap options and ivory tower game design in general), total lack of class balance that gets worse with higher levels, MAD,and many other disparate but serious failures of game design.

- DM rulings strongly discouraged in favor of endless rules lawyering. (This is an aspect of the way the game is typically played, but I don't know if it came from the books or just the community.)

- Perhaps also, arguably, the way class skills function at higher levels vs lower levels (as one example, investments in non-class skills as well as racials and other smallish skill bonuses become largely worthless when doing adventures of a certain level of challenge or higher, resulting in the vast majority of, say, high level elves actually being incapable of being highly alert.)

>>53677658
Oh, you must've played 3e if you're talking about highschool. 4e is a massive update, and it's definitely less complicated than D&D in all regards, but it's unfortunate that you don't want to try it out. However, nobody plays 3e GURPS anymore, so saying that GURPS is more complicated than D&D is disinformation.

File: 1437047141155.jpg (187KB, 736x1039px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 736x1039px

>>53677488
>uses per rest
>looking for a diffrent die every time something deals damage
>all the combat manouvers having diffrent rules
>a bunch of spells that will break your campaign in two if you don't pay attention
>keeping track of inflated HP and DC on everyone
>bullshit minutae +1/-1 buffs on everyone and everything
>having to wing compensation or mechanics of players making non-standard characters (like them missing a limb)

>astronomically simpler than just rolling 3d6 under a value from your character sheet 99% of the time

Ayy-fucking-lmao

>>53677697
High school was '98 to '02 so if that's GURPS 3e then yes.

>>53677725
3d6 under a stat value wasn't the GURPS I played.

>>53677697
Yeah, 4e GURPS is better than 3.5 D&D in my opinion

I think the main problem people have with it is that chargen takes forever

File: Changeling The Lost campaign.jpg (52KB, 480x608px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 480x608px

>>53677783
>>53677697
Then by all means, 4e is a completely diffrent game. Find a PDF of Basic Set and give it a read.

>>53677785
That's why I recommended Dungeon Fantasy, since it has a bunch of templates that take you all of 10 minutes to go through, especially in a program like GCS.

>>53677783
Yeah, 4e came out in 2004. 3e was shit, nobody'll deny that, but 4e really is a huge improvement.

>>53675471
5e is honestly a pretty good game.

>>53677427
I'd be more impressed if they ever actually finished it.

>>53677824
But chargen taking hours is fun, (at least for me)

>>53677725
Yeah, I mean, GURPS is super simple if you ignore everything but its resolution mechanic. It's not like character creation involves going through reams of options, just setting up the game involves going through two densely packed rulebooks just to pick the appropriate rules, or that the game itself is full of fiddling +1/-1 mechanics either, no siree.

GURPSfags are the third worst RPG fandom (first is Pathfinderfags second is 4rries).

>>53677881
I agree. Chargen as its own sort of game is a lot of fun (for me), but not everybody wants to play it. Thankfully, templates exist, even if they are retina-searing abominations. I can't wait for DF boxed set to drop in October so there's a true intermediatry between GURPS Lite and Basic Set, since DF uses tactical combat (which Lite doesn't have, at all), but telling people they have to read 3+ books to understand the game (Lite, Campaigns, and DF) really makes GURPS a hard sell.

>>53677871
That's fair, but to me the base system and classes are goo enough to be worth the effort of finishing it myself.

>>53674735
>reee normieeessss

>>53677919
>character creation
You got points. You spend said points however you want, be it stats, skills or advantages. There's no steps or phases. Just start off with a concept and pick and choose what fits said concept. Shit's easy yo.

>just setting up the game involves going through two densely packed rulebooks just to pick the appropriate rules

Depends on the game, obviously, but I've ran my first games on nothing but Basic Set just fine. I don't even know what second book you are talking about, unless you mean a combat cheat sheet.

>or that the game itself is full of fiddling +1/-1 mechanics either, no siree.
It ain't. Magic costs and diminishing probability of success means there isn't a million buffs applied every single time combat happens. The only calculation bullshit that happens regularly is the abstraction of fainting and telegraphed attacks, and that's always a 2-for-1 thing

File: 1381797196593.png (28KB, 513x402px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 513x402px

>>53677979
I'd rather have my hobby be grognard-only rather than infested by people glued to their phones and not paying attention, thank you very much

>>53673755
It killed entire publishers, though some of that was the first recession and the rise of the internet. It also strangled just about every other system off the shelf. There was an explosion of fresh ideas and systems while 2e was in its death throes that went ignored the moment 3e came out. Everything became a d20 clone and sucked shit because of it.

Personally, I just don't like how it presents options like it's generic fantasy but there's no way to tweak it to taste without rewriting everything. That and nothing does what it says it does or what you would expect it to do.

>>53678023
>You got points. You spend said points however you want, be it stats, skills or advantages. There's no steps or phases. Just start off with a concept and pick and choose what fits said concept. Shit's easy yo.

That's actually a detriment, because there's no clear way to setup your character and it's easy to screw yourself at a later stage by investing too much in one area. Compared to a game like Savage Worlds, GURPS chargen is an accounting course.

>Depends on the game, obviously, but I've ran my first games on nothing but Basic Set just fine. I don't even know what second book you are talking about, unless you mean a combat cheat sheet.

The basic set is two books, you dingus, and just the basic set alone is packed with variant rules; you can't run it just "by the book" because you have to tailor it to your game.

>It ain't.

BULL FUCKING SHIT. "I aim my assault rifle for a +3 to attack, using autofire for another +2, taking -3 for range, -2 for lighting, and another -whatever because they're moving." is a totally reasonable sentence in GURPS. It's every bit as chock full of fiddly bullshit as 3.5.

It's like GURPS is a cult or something, and its faithful are obligated to lie about their game in an attempt to gain converts.

>>53673755
That's actually backwards. It was literally the same situation as the dark age of comic books, where everyone was doing MATURE, and EDGY superheroes, because that's what one successful comic did.

Except Watchmen was actually kinda good while 3rd edition's success is unrelated to its quality.

>>53673794
It's somewhat dated now, but for its time, it was haute cuisine.

>>53678396
>"I aim my assault rifle for a +3 to attack, using autofire for another +2, taking -3 for range, -2 for lighting, and another -whatever because they're moving." is a totally reasonable sentence in GURPS.
But it isn't necessary. That's the key point here. You don't have to be penalized for shooting at a moving target if they're not using the high speed movement rules, for one, which means shooting at human targets moving at human speeds doens't incurr a penalty. You also don't have to use the granular range penalties from the SSR table, either; Action! 2 has range bands that greatly simplify them to four grades of penalty, going 0/-3/-7/-11. As for lighting, that depends on if the GM is using lighting penalties - it's entirely reasonable to not include them, and most people stick to a general band of -3/-5/-7/-9/-10 for torchlight/full moon/cloudy night/tunnel/utter darkness.

That isn't to say GURPS has a lot of modifiers available, but they're available, not mandatory (unlike 3.5e).

>>53678396
>I aim my assault rifle for a +3 to attack, using autofire for another +2, taking -3 for range, -2 for lighting, and another -whatever because they're moving.

Fair enough. Forgot about that since I'm running an iron age fantasy campaign that didn't come up much aside from one archer character.

>That's actually a detriment, because there's no clear way to setup your character and it's easy to screw yourself at a later stage by investing too much in one area. Compared to a game like Savage Worlds, GURPS chargen is an accounting course.

I disagree. Absolute freedom is always preferrable to handholding that stilts player creativity in chargen. It's hard to fuck yourself over, even if you don't diversify, simply because you can improve whatever you lack with points you gain, especially since getting a new skill is just 1pts. And to be perfectly honest, suboptimal builds were never a problem in my group, but I know that's a fallacy.

>The basic set is two books
Oh hey, you're right. This is the first time I actually googled up Campaigns. Been running with Characters and some extra books for fluff ideas

>>53678569
Actually, no, scratch that last part. It's just that I got both in the same PDF and never actually bothered to look at either cover

>>53678513
AUGH! You fucking deny on one hand that you have to tailor the game to your desires by plowing through two dense rulebooks, and then you go "BUT LOLZ YOU DON'T NEED TO USE THE RULES!" FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU!

You fucking GURPSfags wouldn't admit a fault in your game if it was stabbing you to death.

>>53678602
>You fucking deny on one hand that you have to tailor the game to your desires by plowing through two dense rulebooks
... I didn't, though? If you want to play with that much granularity, you're more than welcome to. I don't. And, yes, you can choose which rules you want to use. That's how you tailor the game to your desires, which is GURPS' intended function: being tailored to run the game you want to run.

File: Przechwytywanie.png (127KB, 730x437px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 730x437px

>>53678602
>You fucking deny on one hand that you have to tailor the game to your desires by plowing through two dense rulebooks

>>53678686
You mean that thing I said you have to to do?! SHOCK AND FUCKING AWE?! You changed my mind GURPSfag, I'm gonna go offer my ass up to Steve Jackson right now!

Here's an idea: use none of the rules because GURPS is trash meant to stimulate the interests of insufferable pedants and nothing else.

It wouldn't be nearly as hated if it didn't cause the entire hobby to be inundated with D20 games. Shortly after D&D 3 came out, nearly every game on the shelves was using the D20 system. For those who didn't like D20 or enjoyed checking out new systems, it was a really shitty time.

File: Super Mad.jpg (148KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 640x480px

>>53678754

>>53678754
>DENSE BOOKS DENSE BOOKS DENSE BOOKS

Have you actually ever seen a dense book in your life because I'm slowly doubting that. The line spacing and page framing are more than generous in Basic Sets.

Also nobody is ever telling you to read through every single advantage, disadvantage and skill description. That's what their names are there for. So you can skim through and find what is going to be relevant or not in your campaign.

>>53678797
Anyone who doesn't have a problem with this wasn't there. It wasn't just that everything was d20, it's that most of it was fucking terrible and ill-fit on top of it.

>>53678569
>Absolute freedom is always preferrable to handholding that stilts player creativity in chargen.
Constraints breed creativity.
Absolute freedom is detrimental if you don't come to the table with a fully fleshed-out character concept.

>>53679128
>constraints breed creativity

I heard the same argument used about D&D martials and it's bullshit every time.

>>53678883
>nobody is telling you to actually read the book

Kek.

>>53679161
Except it's true. There are several examples of creatives that were at their best when put under constraint. George Lucas comes right to mind.

>>53679161
Well, yeah. That because it's used in an inapplicable context.

>>53679192
>reading every single thing in a modular system

Are you honestly that autistic.

>>53678569
>Absolute freedom is always preferrable to handholding that stilts player creativity in chargen.

But you don't have absolute freedom. You're still limited by the constraints of points. What you call handholding is what I call proper design. But hey, I guess those other games wont let you play a psychic muffin with a crippling addiction to auto-erotic asphyxiation, so they're just not good games.

>>53679205
Except it isn't an inapplicable context. I've seen vastly more creativity out of the D&D optimization community than I have out of any GURPS player.

>>53679232
>actually reading the book when playing an RPG

Are you honestly that autistic.

>>53679274
Do you also read through the entire Monster Manual in D&D and memorise it?

>>53679326
No, but I do read through the entire core mechanics of the game and do my best to memorize them, which things like advantages, disadvantages, skills, etc. absolutely are.

Seriously, the great defense GURPSfags have mounted in this thread can be summed up as "you don't have to use the basic mechanics of the game" and "you don't have to read the books." Well good fucking job, why don't I just play Risus?

>>53673755
>It took us out of the RPG dark ages and I don't understand why people sperg out about it.

Neither having done important things in the past, nor having been a huge improvement over what came before make it a good or useful thing by modern standards.

The world today would be an unimaginably worse place if the catholic church never existed, but that doesn't make attending mass this Sunday sound any more appealing.

>>53678435
>but for its time
No. It was dated even then.

>>53679414
>WHY DO I HAVE TO READ THESE TWO BOOKS TO SET UP A GAME REE
>You really don't, they're much broader than a single campaign will allow
>HA, PATHETIC GURPSFAGS

Stick to a single line of reasoning instead of being a two-fronting cunt, please

3.x is a gateway RPG of the worst kind. It's a bad system, a clusterfuck of rules and writing that isn't very well done by any aspect, but which attempts to compensate for its weaknesses by adding in excessive system mastery and RULES. The normal anon can see this as the shit it is, and may enjoy it, hate it or be indifferent to it, but all the while recognizing that the game itself, regardless of their opinion, is plain bad.

However, these very aspects that try to smear over the shit of its core make it a breeding ground for aspie, unsociable underageb& faggots who engage in every kind of faggotry both online and in the real world. The superpowered casters all trying their hardest to look cool, the spells, peculiar, colorful races, the whole CoDzilla faggotry and everything about the 3.x world fuels their escapist fantasies, while the min-max character backgrounds, emphasis on character optimization, and overall opaqueness of the system make it fit just right with the mary-sueish drives of your average preteen and his sense of unwarranted self-importance towards the world. Exactly the kind of shit that makes little kiddies and underageb& retards eat this shit right the fuck up.

3.x is basically THE game to attract the most hated RPG fanbase known to D&D, which is why, regardless of individual opinions, it is the responsibility of every anon to troll the fuck out of this edition and everyone who likes it, and ensure that no 3.x threads ever encourage the newfriends to show their faces here.

>>53679506
>GURPS can do anything, you just have to tailor it to you needs!
>You shouldn't have to go through two massive books of options every time you want to run a game.
>Lol, you fucking faggot, you don't have to read the book.

This is what GURPSfags actually believe.

>>53679515
Been a while since I saw this delicious spaghetti

It was originally about something /a/, wasn't it? Bleach or Naruto or somesuchh

>>53679590
Disprove any of these, emphasis on the first point

>>53679590
>every time you want to run a game

But you don't. You don't read entire player manual back to back before every game either

>>53679616
It can't run a game RAW without deciding which RAW you're using.

>>53679414
>"you don't have to use the basic mechanics of the game"
What are you talking about? GURPS Lite is the entirety of GURPS' mechanics. Full stop. Read that, and you can play GURPS. It's 32 pages total.

>>53679616
I don't deny the first point. But the first point and the second point conflict. To tailor the game to your needs, you have to actually know the fucking game, which means reading the fucking book. Otherwise, why would you use GURPS at all, rather than a game like Risus, which is already rules light and can do anything?

I'll believe GURPS isn't a religion the second I see GURPSfags stop shilling it in every thread and start acknowledging that the reasons normal people don't like it are valid.

File: 1459481445620.jpg (320KB, 500x572px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 500x572px

>>53679616
Not that anon but...
>Lol, you fucking faggot, you don't have to read the book.

Yes. You fucking do. Read the fucking book. READ THE FUCKING BOOK. JESUS CHRIST AT LEAST PRETEND TO HAVE READ IT. HOW CAN YOU PLAY A GAME BY THE RULES OF THE BOOK IF YOU'VE NEVER READ THE BOOK. </reeeeeeeeeeeeee>

>>53679646
GURPSlite is incomplete trash. For instance, you can't actually run a modern setting game in it because they didn't bother to include autofire rules.

>>53679636
If you were determined enough you probably could just do a game encompassing every TL from 0 to 12. It would be stupid and impractical, but you can do it

>>53679669
I did. But I didn't touch the autofire rules or interplanetary travel rules until someone proposed a SPAAACE campaign

Context, anon, context

>>53679683
You're not making much of a case. I'll stick to BoL because it does what I want well and I can explain it to a newfag and help them build a character in a drunken stupor.

>>53679658
Tables of contents exist. I really don't need to know the system to notice it has X pages on magic and I don't want to use that because I'm trying to make a modern millitary campaign

>>53679675
And they didn't include any guns capable of automatic fire in Lite. Yes, they should have added the two lines of rules for number of hits = 1 + MoS/Rcl and 2x9 meaning you fire one shell that holds 9 pellets. That doesn't mean you can't run a modern setting game, though, because... not everywhere has guns. Run a game about glaswegians cutting each other up with knives. That's definitely modern.

It's just amazing that no one has come up with a fantasy RPG alternative since D&D became popular. Every system that came out after 3.5e focused on some incredibly specific niche: deadly combat, endless splats, sci-fi, or entirely endgame (deities). Fantasycraft was the first attempt in ages.

>>53679847
Bronze age drunks isn't my idea of modern

>>53679847
Oi m8 whachu laffin at, u gonna get shanked m8

>>53679847
>you can run a modern setting game, just not a modern setting game that uses the defining light arm of the modern era

Kek. GURPSfags BTFO.

>>53679953
How do you craft a sentence that is almost entirely wrong?

>>53680003
I said that they should have included it, and that it would be an easy inclusion to make. GURPS does have rules for guns; Lite is just lacking rules for multiple hits with firearms. It would be trivial (but, I agree, should not be necessary) to open up Basic Set: Characters and use the guns listed there instead. The main appeal of GURPS Lite is that it does teach the basic rules of the system, from rolling and contests to spending points on advantages and skills, to death and injury and various hazards.

I would still recommend people read GURPS Lite before reading Basic Set. I really do wish Lite had included a few more rules, which would take it from launching point to self-sufficient. Grappling is one, because zombies are a good introduction to most generic systems, and you can't have zombies without grappling. Fleshed-out guns rules would also be one. A basic magic system would be a great addition. But Lite lacking those things doesn't take away from GURPS as a whole, it takes away from Lite as an entry point into GURPS. I would say it works well enough if the GM already knows GURPS, but for GMs completely new to the system, it falls short.

You're absolutely 100% allowed to like 3.pf. There's zero problems with that. I mean, shit, who's gonna stop you?

What you're not allowed to do is deflect any and all criticisms about 3.pf as being made up/not valid/whatever other mental gymnastics people do to justify their pet system. It has flaws. Big ones. They've been proven time and time again. It just can't do certain things outside its niche. No, that doesn't invalidate or diminish the enjoyment you've had or are having with the system. Yes, you are still allowed to like the system despite that. No, you can't just say that the flaws don't exist or are matters of opinion. Just acknowledge it and move on.

>>53679669
https://youtu.be/GlKL_EpnSp8?t=25s

Can we all agree then that Mutants and Masterminds is the perfect middle ground between GURPS and 3.x? A base d20 point buy system that only uses one dice and only needs one book to play?

>>53679598
Naruto

>>53680515
Nah. It's honestly not much simpler than GURPS, and winds up saddled with much of what made D20 kind of a slog to play.

My friends have been gaming exclusively 3.5, but there are moves towards trying out 5e.

What are the pros and cons of the systems, and what system (if any) is preferrable to these two? I'm inclined to take a look at GURPS, though being honest I know absolutely nothing about it.

>>53680206
Have you ever actually seen a GURPS zombie block? They're dense enough to make zombies unfun.

File: 1484590970735.jpg (37KB, 324x333px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 324x333px

>>53681196
Have you?

>>53681261
That's the one. Look at all those unnecessary details.

>bad smell
>no sense of smell or taste
>sexless

Yeah, because GURPS is designed for the sort of pedant that can't figure out that a walking corpse would smell bad without the game telling you so and how many points they get for smelling bad.

>>53681261
>>53681288
Or while I'm at it, how about that fucking bite that would have a hard time hurting wet paper? Disturbing voice? Why in the fuck would you include that detail? The fact it takes a dozen fucking qualitiies (ignoring the pointless fluff mechanics) just to stat out a bloody zombie?

>>53681288
>>53681325

I always assumed the people that got really into 3.PF's character building would like GURPS but most of them reacted like you two. I wonder what it is about it that makes it a bridge to far for them to cross when I look at most 3.PF stat blocks and think similar things to what you're saying about GURPS.

>>53675355
It's also nearly half of all roll20 games

>>53681395
>criticizes GURPS
>assumes he likes 3.5

Nah man. I always recommend GURPS to 3.PF players, it's the kind of game they deserve.

>>53681288
>>53681325
You're really grasping at straws here if you think listing traits of what makes a zombie a zombie makes them unfun or something. The traits are compiled there for completeness's sake. GURPS is a universal, generic system whose content needs to be broadly applicable. I can easily think of reasons it would be helpful to list out a zombie's traits. What if you wanted to run a game where you played as zombies? There's a template you can build off of. What if you wanted a base zombie template to build your own off of? There it is.

>>53681406

Sorry, I always assume everyone plays 3.PF because it may as well be the only game that exists in my area. I mean I can't even suggest CoC or WoD without someone whipping out their d20 variants.

>>53673755
Bad game mechanics, makes it too easy to get exponentially out of control if you play it like a normal game with game mechanics and objectives.
So as a system, playing it like a game where you try to win will end up ruining any story you're trying to write. Makes it a bad roleplaying game since its game part steps on its roleplaying part, and causes turbo autists to sperg out every time you try to minmax.

A good gaming system will allow you to minmax and also craft a decent story while doing so. 3.5e is not a good system.

>>53679502
Name a game better than it when it came out.
Oh wait, you're going to just name trash, because you're a dumb contrarian or some guy still bitter about some edition war.

>>53673755
because It's cool to hate popular things

>>53681455
No, I'm pointing out that GURPS is designed for beancounting pedants. You try to obfuscate that fact with such stunning defenses as "you don't have to use the core mechanics of the game" or "you don't have to read the book" but the fact is you try to claim GURPS can be used for a manner of play that NOBODY engages in as a defense of the system, while overlooking the fact that its core mechanics are a mediocre mess.

>What if you wanted to run a game where you played as zombies?

Use common sense. Even All Flesh Must Be Eaten doesn't consider it worth pointing out that zombies smell bad.

>>53681489
>d20 CoC and WoD

I honestly thought those were designed as a thought experiment. People actually play those?

>>53681491
Is it opposite day? The problem is that if you don't know how to optimize, bad things happen.

>>53681550

I don't think they ever actually played them, they just bought them to plague me with them when I suggest trying something besides 3e.

>>53681573
Both of you are correct. If you don't optimize, the game half of 3.5 suffers badly. If you do optimize, then it's hard as hell to tell a remotely satisfying story because the players (and you) are too busy babysitting their dice rolls.

>>53681614
Did 5e fix any of that? All I really know is that it's a bit bland.

>>53681531
>"you don't have to use the core mechanics of the game"
>"you don't have to read the book"
Nobody says either of these things. You're fabricating straw wholesale here for you to grab.

>overlooking the fact that its core mechanics are a mediocre mess.
And what problems do you have with 3d6 roll-under +/- modifiers?

"Use common sense" isn't an argument, because common sense isn't common. People forget things, or aren't familiar with the source material, or just want a mechanical ground to work off of, or aren't aware how something would be built in a system. There's also internal consistency. If you list traits for some monsters, you should list traits for all of them.

>>53681550
During the heights of the d20 boom faggots just wanted to play the d20 versions of L5R and 7th Sea. It was fucking awful.

>>53681652
Yes, 5e only has two bad options in its core: Ranger and one of Monk's subclasses. Otherwise the game is painstakingly balanced so that you don't need to be optimized to have a good time.

>>53681672
In order of topic:

In this very thread people have made those specific defenses.

Saying GURPS is just 3d6 roll under is like saying 3.5 is just D20 roll over; facetious at best, retarded at worst. There is a lot more to the core of the game than that.

Kek, you ARE the sort of pedant that can't figure out that a walking corpse smells bad without the game telling you.

File: library-alexandria-destruction.jpg (87KB, 600x417px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 600x417px

>>53673755
>It took us out of the RPG dark ages

A better historical parallel would be the fall of Rome or the sack of the Library of Alexandria. The existing paradigm fell away -- all the good and the bad -- and suck and feces followed. There was a dearth of ideas as everyone jumped on the EVERYTHING D20 train. And, notably, the vast majority of those OGL D20 titles sucked out loud; in some cases, established IPs hitched their wagons and subsequently crashed and burned.

The growth of online gaming and distribution, and the ability to have niche systems see use and (relative) popularity rather than get zero-sum choked out by D&D is the ongoing Renaissance.

>>53681743
>In this very thread people have made those specific defenses.
Where?

>Saying GURPS is just 3d6 roll under is like saying 3.5 is just D20 roll over; facetious at best, retarded at worst. There is a lot more to the core of the game than that.
Then what do you have problems with?

>Kek, you ARE the sort of pedant that can't figure out that a walking corpse smells bad without the game telling you.
No, I just like knowing the mechanical effects of smelling bad.

>>53681761
>The existing paradigm fell away

You mean it was dying or already dead before 3.0 breathed new life into the dying hobby.

You revisionists need to stop pretending that there was any life left in the hobby before 3.0 shocked it back to life. It is responsible for doubling the amount of RPG players, a feat not repeated until 5e.

>>53681779
>Where?

I aint spoon feeding you. Read the fucking thread.

>what do you have a problem with?

Basic Set: Characters, Basic Set: Campaigns, and GURPS Lite.

>The mechanical effects of smelling bad.

Which as I recall are a fiddly modifier to social checks, which most other games expect you to be able to handle on your own like someone with a brain.

>>53681857
Anon is right about the real change being internet distribution and online gaming. It's one of the main reasons 3e got as popular as it did. What was the existing paradigm before 2000 anyway?

Where are these statistics coming from? I have an academic interest.

>>53681871
>I aint spoon feeding you. Read the fucking thread.
I have read the thread, and I don't see those specific defenses being made. I am asking you to point them out because I don't see them. If you aren't going to point them out, then it isn't a point you're willing to defend, so I can dismiss it.

>Basic Set: Characters, Basic Set: Campaigns, and GURPS Lite.
Be specific. What, specifically, do you have problems with about Characters? What, specifically, do you have problems with about Campaigns? I already covered some issues with Lite here (>>53680206), so I don't think that needs repeating as we likely agree on some points.

>Which as I recall are a fiddly modifier to social checks, which most other games expect you to be able to handle on your own like someone with a brain.
Reaction modifiers are used for reaction rolls, which is when an NPC's reaction isn't predetermined, and as modifiers to influence rolls. Bad Smell's -2 to a group of skills is a significant penalty that should be accounted for, when it is applicable. If what you take issue with is GURPS' design philosophy of discrete traits, which is essential for a generic and universal game, then I'm not really sure what to tell you. It just sounds like you don't like GURPS because it isn't your style.

>>53673755

I've found people hate on it because they invariably had shit groups tat focused on on munchkin-heavy playing. 3.5 was very good as it gave more depth and options than AD&D. That said, it had the downside of giving the audience literally the *most likely* to sperg out and break the rules due to being unable to comprehend that fun is not winning, but playing, the vehicle and motivation to push the system to that extreme. Bad DMing contributed to it - if someone so much as breathes the phrase "castersl supremacy", it's a sign their group has never been pushed to their limits on an adventure and never seen exhaustion or being unable to sleep for new spells.

And thanks to the pervasiveness of douchy web builds, it multiplied all these problems when people show up at game and barely know their own class powers. Part new age tech doing something AD&D could never expect to see at its height, part a new generation that struggled to learn the fun of "group storytime".

I still love it, and I like 5th ed because it feels like it. 5th ed needs more non combat skills, but my group also plays Dark Heresy & Only War to scratch that itch, so your mileage may vary.

>>53681991
>I can dismiss it.

Kek, OH NOES. The authority of internet debates is going to dismiss my claim. How will I recover?

>specific problems

Nah. It's been so long since I dropped that travesty I can't remember. GURPS is a mediocre rules etc unDer some bean-counting nonsense with vociferous fans.

I take issue with GURPS because its fanbase is pushy and clamorous over a game designed for the sort of people that think you can't have a universal game without literally every inane detail put to paper (despite the fact games like BESM, Fate, Risks, Savage Worlds, and True 20 somehow manage).

>>53682599
>risus

Not risks. This is why phone-posting is cancer.

>>53682599
Well, okay then. GURPS isn't your style of game, that's fine. There are many games available on the market because different people want different things. I don't have any problems with games like Fate and Savage Worlds, and regularly recommend them alongside GURPS for universal systems, as different people want different things.

>>53681261
>Traits
Oho anon. You can't escape responsibility that easy. Please list out all the relevant rules for how all that shit works because like hell a GM can memorize all that shit.

>>53684501
Ok.

>High Pain Threshold (Combat relevant)
Never suffer shock penalties, +3 on HT rolls to avoid knockdown and stunning. Common advantage for PCs and monsters to have.

>Infectious Attack (Combat relevant)
Any damage done via the natural attack carrying the infectious attack (biting, for example) has the victim roll 3d vs. HP of injury received, becoming infected if rolled under and changing in 2d days. Not common, but relevant for zombies, werewolves, etc.

>Injury Tolerance (No Blood/No Vitals; Combat relevant)
Don't have blood or vitals, so they can't bleed out and their only weak spot is the brain.

>Injury Tolerance (Unliving; Combat relevant)
Imp and pi++ have a wounding modifier of x1, pi+ x0.5, pi x0.33, pi- x0.2. Reduces effectiveness of guns against them.


The rest of the traits mostly concern themselves with reaction penalties, penalties to social skills, being creatively challenged, and lacking senses/emotions.

>>53678513
>Action! 2 has range bands that greatly simplify them to four grades of penalty, going 0/-3/-7/-11.
>>53678513
>most people stick to a general band of -3/-5/-7/-9/-10 for torchlight/full moon/cloudy night/tunnel/utter darkness.
Jesus fucking christ.

>>53673755
>It took us into the RPG dark ages
FTFY

>>53673755
>community so stupid we have the same fucking arguments because one side doesn't know shit about the game and doesn't listen
>retard DMs doing stupid shit like banning ToB and crying OP about psions while letting CoDzillas run rampant
>Durrr core only
>countless bad d20 games like BESM d20 are the direct result of it
I wonder...

>>53680942
>What are the pros and cons of the systems
Pro: 5e has less bullshit to deal with
Con: it still has some bullshit to deal with

>>53681261
Fucking hell. That is horrendous. It's like an autsm simulator.

>>53680942
That depends entirely on what kind of 3.5 you were playing. 5E is utter shit at doing all-spellcaster shenanigans or the equivalent of a T3-only party, which is one of the reasons I tell people to fuck off if they try to recruit me for a 5E game, but it's maybe better for you if you're playing the game with a typical sword and board Fighter/blaster Wizard/healbot Cleric/skill monkey Rogue setup.

>>53688086
>5E is utter shit at doing all-spellcaster shenanigans

Are you nuts? Best party is probably bard/wizard/druid/sorclock

Maaaaybe dip into paladin/fighter with a few if you really need to.

>>53688104
3.5 all-spellcaster shenanigans. Guess I didn't imply that hard enough.

>>53677725

t.shot memory autist

>>53682599
>BESM, Fate, Risks, Savage Worlds, and True 20 somehow manage).

BESM, Fate and Savage Worlds are all terrible though

>>53688120
I mean, aside from not being OP as shit _all_ the time, low levels are pretty similar. There's a lull in mid levels, with some of the more gamebreaking spells missing, but then high levels you got the same simulacra-wish shenans.

I guess concentration does put a damper on things.

>>53681531
The key thing is that when people attack 3.5, they do so in a manner that they think can't be turned back against their favorite system because they think no one has played their favorite system.

This is what modern system wars have evolved to. Hypocrisy, and demands that games need to be inflexible purely so that people can criticize them better.

>>53688279
Are you retarded?

Half the systems I keep mentioned on /tg/ use the tagline "unlike in D&D, in X you can...".

They literally advertise their game iwth what D&D faults it doesn't have.

Fuck, I do that all the time.

>>53688359
The issue is that in D&D, you can.

> Hypocrisy, and demands that games need to be inflexible purely so that people can criticize them better.

See? This is why you are retarded.

>>53673755
One day, I sincerely hope someone makes the Tower of Babel. Or a space elevator.

>>53688359
>I shitpost because I don't like a game
>Fuck, I do that all the time.

Wow, you're THAT guy?
Can you kill yourself already, you spamming shitposter?

>>53688634
>all systems are the same because you can houserule them
Fuck off forever please.

>>53673755
It literally brought nothing fresh to the table as far as the overall hobby is concerned. It merely brought the D&D crowd up to speed with, at the time, more recent developments.

>>53688841
>I need to strawman and use hyperbole

Your Notice of Concession has been acknowledged.

>>53688861
You can't say something like that without several examples.

>>53678754
Says the man who believes in Levels, Classes and Hit Point bloat? That ain't trash in itself?

>>53689206
>Levels
>Classes
>bad

Nope. They are just mechanics that can be used or misused.

Hell, liberally interpreting levels really are just a number of character building blocks you have available. Saying "make level 10 characters" isn't any different from saying "make 500pt characters" in a pointbuy game.

>Hit Point bloat

This, on the other hand, is just being sloppy

>>53688170
It removed pretty much any unusual way of using spells.
For instance, you can no longer water walk unwilling underwater creatures and tons of other ways a spell coupd ruin encounters because the GM didn't think of it.
Druid animal companion remains way weaker, quicken spell isn't that good anymore, stat damage is pretty much not a thing and you can keep naming dozens of reasons why they are weaker. You can even lose access to wish. . The only of those classes that is bette is bard because full caster now.

3.5 sucked dick. Three fucking books. Most games fit the setting and rules into third of that space and it says something. Overdeveloped fighting mechanics whlist lacking substantial mechanism for anything else, heroes quickly getting too powerfull to resonably fit into the world. At the same time creating characters on higher levels (for a planar campaign for example) is problematic and PHB does not help with it at all. I have outived 3 hour fight that was so boring drudgery that part of the players went shopping. I think it was living holocaust or something like that.

GRUPS is autism through. Creating characters may be fun, but it's too time-taking when someone new looks for new options. And I haven't bought the game to cut everything out of it as well, so hurrr hurrr modable argument is shit.

>it was new life for rpgs and brought many new players
That's sad, you imply we could have avoided patchfucker crowd in there?

>>53673755
Absolutely love 3.5 and still think it's the best system. Best variety and hundreds of choices in character customization
People just need to control themselves to prevent overbalanced messes

>>53689515
>For instance, you can no longer water walk unwilling underwater creatures and tons of other ways a spell coupd ruin encounters because the GM didn't think of it.

So make them willing first. Cast some spell like suggestion, then water walk.

>Druid animal companion remains way weaker,

I'm sorry you don't get to have what is essentially a secondary T4-5 character as a level 1 class feature anymore

> quicken spell isn't that good anymore,

I'm sorry that you can't fuck the action economy in the ass anymore

>stat damage is pretty much not a thing

I'm sorry you can't instagib a hydra because it has 4 dex with a single spell anymore

You don't want to play a wizard. You just want to press "I win" over and over. The world is better off with your kind contained in 3.PF.

>>53689873
>So make them willing first. Cast some spell like suggestion, then water walk.

I don't think a mind controlled guy counts as willing.

>>53689902
If you tell him to "willingly let me cast this non-lethal a spell on you", he will be.

That's what mind control _does_.

>>53673755
I'd say people like:
>>53689515
are the reason 3.5 is bad. There's a whole culture of players that just want to break shit, and are obsessed with optimization.

File: 1490403920385.jpg (18KB, 480x712px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 480x712px

>>53689515
Why would you want to ruin an encounter? Why would you want to make your GM think of every possible spell interaction in a game with a hundred or so pages of spells in the core book alone?

Are you some kind of cunt?

>>53688992
Feats is a cheap (and due to feat tree subpar) version of GURPS's ads and disads. Heck, even Shadowrun had Edges and Flaws in 1998. Vampire also had long before. Also, a unified game system was long standard in RPGs by then. D&D took till 2000 to catch up. Before 3E, Shadowrun, among others, had an action economy. And so on...

Conversely, I can't think of any mechanical contribution by 3E to role-playing at large.

>>53689579
>heroes quickly getting too powerfull to resonably fit into the world.
but they fit into the gonzo fantasy settings of D&D

>>53690034
That's all stuff present in 2e. Try again.

>>53690034
The feat system is stolen directly from Fallout but you get one at level 1 instead of traits.

>>53690027
All some people care about is being acknowledged as a winner. They don't care that winning is supposed to be a recognition of skill or ability, they just want the dopamine rush of that "congratulations."

And by some people I mean fuck near everyone.

>>53690088
That's the laziest bait I've seen in awhile.

>>53689873
>>53689998
His point was that 5e can't do all caster bullshittery as much 3.5e can, which is true. If you are a fan of that, you should play 3.5e where it's only 4 guys trying to outgimmick each other while the GM doesn't have to hold back and can make way stronger encounters.
If you are into those sorts of games, 5e won't be interesting.

File: Jesus Christ How Horrifying.png (117KB, 444x440px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 444x440px

>>53675517
>a gundam game in modified 3.5

>>53681500
BRP. Only burgers played D&D when 3.0 came out.

>>53690245
"Use 4e for a SRW game" had been a running meme in mecha threads.

DESU I really don't see why it wouldn't work

>>53690120
I played video games before I played rpgs, and I don't understand why people treat them like they're similar. In a game with so much verisimilitude with the only limits being the rules and the GMs imagination, why the fuck would you make it into some binary win/lose bullshit?

>>53690268
Seeing as 4e is heavily influenced by turn-based, grid-based video game rpgs this kind of seems like a natural fit.

>>53690126
If you really think feat-type choices, a core system, and action economy didn't exist in 2e, you must be one hell of an idiot.

>>53690504
Or I played 2E and know you're the real idiot.

>>53690401
>4e is heavily influenced by turn-based, grid-based video game rpgs
Anon, you have it exactly backwards.
For one, many of the mechanics in 4e do not work in video games. Interrupts alone would be a shitshow no matter how they were introduced.

>>53684875
>The rest of the traits mostly concern themselves with reaction penalties, penalties to social skills, being creatively challenged, and lacking senses/emotions.
And they all belong in that zombie statblock, meaning it's, what, actually three times bigger than that image? More?

>>53690567
No, that image has all of the traits. I listed the combat relevant ones. GURPS' material is meant to be used for multiple purposes, though, so just having combat relevant traits isn't keeping with the system's ethos of producing generic and universal material.

>>53690511
If you played it, what are you even arguing. You'd know I'm right and you're just flapping gums.

>>53690748
No, that's why I know that you're wrong. Who the fuck can claim that the game where you roll a d20 under class-based saves, roll d100 under for Thief skills, roll d20 over THAC0-AC to hit, roll d20 under your attribute+NWP bonuses for noncombat, roll d10 for initiative, roll d10 for surprise, and look up a fucking table and then roll d20 for Turn Undead has a unified core mechanic with a straight face?

>>53690865
THAC0+AC, my bad.

>>53690879
Actually I was right the first time, neverfucking mind, I'm too tired for this bullshit.

>>53690865
What 3e simply did was make its core mechanic more prevalent. It's not all encompassing, just like 2e's core mechanic is likewise not all encompassing.

>>53673755
>Universal system with three basic books
>Capable of representing only Should-Be-Forgotten Realms and other such shit
Even to port Dark Sun they had to tweak hell of it, for base for dehydration rules (stat damage) was removed.

>>53690511
>taking for the bait

>>53691493
>taking THE bait

>>53690100

If they copied the perks from Fallout why are feats so disappointing in comparison?

>>53692345
Some of them aren't, but by and large feats are shitty because they made a class where its sole class ability was to get more feats.

>>53690555
You ever play Silent Storm? It handles interrupts well enough.

>>53690054
Not really. None of them were *that* gonzo before 3rd, and the only one produced for 3rd avoided high level characters like they were the plague.

>>53688164
Your notice of being a tasteless cretin (it's redundant to call a GURPSfag that) has been filed.

>>53689206
Nah man. I just came to criticize the GURPSfags infesting the thread.

>>53689873
>So make them willing first. Cast some spell like suggestion, then water walk.

Most spells are concentration duration.

>>53673755
It allowed a grand scale but also introduced too much randomisation.

You want to be as powerful and as big of a dick as elminster, Go ahead
You want to rise as an archduke, sure go for it
Magic fuckery without end, as a wizard I loved it. Loved it.

>>53692960
>as a wizard I loved it
3.5: The Post

>>53692758
Yes and...?

>>53690100
Fallout stole from Pen & Paper RPGs as well.

>>53692960
>>53693052
This answers your question, OP.
/thread

>>53693796
You can only concentrate on a single spell

>>53674954
>obscurity

Someone missed the huge D&D fad of the early 80s.

>>53675404
This guy gets it. Medusa? SHIT. Mindflayer? SHIT.

If you don't give your players a chance to know about the medusa you are a mean DM.

>>53675650
>>53675725
Adventure in middle earth is actually pretty good if you look at it from a low/no magic D&D setting. I enjoy it alot.

>>53697427
That sounds kind of neat actually. Is it designed to be very specific to the setting?

>>53675552
>"bob marley is reggae god"
>only know 10 reggae bands/artists at max

>>53681500
Shadowrun.

>>53701676
Dude, that's mean. I mean 3.5 had problems, but saying Shadowrun was better is just an asshole move.

>>53695882
Yes and...?

Nothing you said stops suggestion-> water walk from working

>>53705744
The suggestion would wear off because you can't concentrate on the spell and cast another spell. Goddamn are you dense.

>>53705875
>you can't concentrate on the spell and cast another spell
That's not how concentration works.

>>53705875
>readthebook.jpeg

>>53705919
Yeah, nevermind. It's only spells that require concentration that break concentration, which water walking is not. Sorry about that.

Though I'm not entirely sure what exactly this accomplishes. You got water walking on someone, so what?

>>53706024
The point was that >>53689515 said
>For instance, you can no longer water walk unwilling underwater creatures and tons of other ways a spell coupd ruin encounters because the GM didn't think of it.

You can totally do that, it just takes some setup instead of working right away.

>>53706072
I'd say taking two actions and two slots is a pretty big blow to it.

>>53706078
Sure.

The point being made is that you can still use spells creatively. 2 slots to defeat basically any underwater creature (that doesn't have legendary saves I guess) isn't a bad trade imo, unless you could do it from 1 (but you usually can't).

>>53673755
Pretty much a bunch of beta bitches sitting around whining and be contrarian. The system does it's job fine. It just doesn't do everything. So people whine.

That and it was the last time the D&D side of the hobby was united. So like most leftist hippies they have to say it wasn't actually any good, it was just what was at the time.

>>53673755
>It led us into of the RPG dark ages
FTFY

>>53680206
>open up Basic Set
Use two books to make a character! Bullshit GURPSfag! LOL Shot down faggot! Now I shall go back to using 15 different splats to make a 3.pf character do something basic.

>>53678396
>That's actually a detriment, because there's no clear way to setup your character and it's easy to screw yourself at a later stage by investing too much in one area.
As opposed to 3.PF where you can be screwed as early as level 0 because you took the wrong feat, rolled too low for a stat score, or chose the wrong class with the wrong abilities?

Here's the thing man, if you hate GURPS for being an accounting course then you should absolutely LOATHE 3.PF for doing the exact same shit.

>>53689239
>Saying "make level 10 characters" isn't any different from saying "make 500pt characters" in a pointbuy game.
Except that in the case of 3.PF, levels in a mage class easily outstrips martial classes even though they're both technically level 10 character.

ITT: More proof that 3.PF causes brain damage.

>>53675404
>Eldritch Knight fighter (despite it being shit, apparently)

Eldritch Knight is most definitely not shit

>>53709362
>still trying to make this into a meme
It's never going to catch on, fag.

>>53711158
>t. butthurt 3aboo