How would you compare or rate D&D's mechanics to other

8/10.

>>55191246
I don't like systems with character levels, especially when they're tied to acquiring specific abilities. It encourages a mindset of seeing character progress in purely mechanical terms, and most of the murderhobo exp-chasing is down to this.

The DnD system is alright for gameplay outside of dungeon-crawls. It's mostly rules-lite in those areas, particularly social encounters, and that's what I prefer anyway. I don't like 'social combat' systems like in Traveller 5, I much prefer straight RP + a simple system to use when NPCs are being asked to do something they might not want to do. 5e is fine for this, with the rolls being simple and the DM able to set the DC for the skill check to what they think makes sense.

>Honestly D&D's mechanics remind me more of a boardgame's rules
I certainly feel that way about the magic system, rest mechanic, and some of the arbitrary powers in the backgrounds section. All feel very articifial and 'top-down', meaning, as you say, not really using a simulationist mindset.

Overall though I think rather than preventing simulationist/narrative gameplay, 5e just leaves it more down to DM approach. That isn't inherently bad, but does require a DM who a) can communicate well enough to talk to the players about what type of game they'll be playing beforehand, and b) is not an asshole or idiot.

Strong agree. DnD has all the complexity of GURPS with zero flexibility.

That being said, assuming a group where everyone already knows the system (common since it's ubiquitous with tabletop) it makes for a pretty fun dungeon crawl combat game, since most of the mechanics were designed from a gamist perspective of what's fun.

IMO DnD at its best is a boardgame with light RP elements.

Compared to other published games? 10/10, because there's really no other games that are up to its standars. After playing dozens of games, I'm saddled with the sad fact that for every problem a game professes to have solved, it introduced six new ones in its place.
All the games you listed are in the 6-7 range, with the exception of WoD getting an extra docked point to 5 because it has the genuinely awful mechanics of the storyteller system.

Compared to homebrew and the theoretical perfect game, it's a 7/10.

>>55191538
Could you elaborate on why you think DnD is so great and everything else is so bad in comparison? Or why nothing can apparently live up to homebrew?

File: 6233413918_7875b39b84_b.jpg (609KB, 1024x914px) Image search: [Google]

609KB, 1024x914px

>>55191246
>the concept of using D&D for anything besides specifically dungeon crawling seems like it would end terribly.

>>55191490
>zero flexibility.

Guess how I know you guys are just talking out your asses?

>>55191638
Not those guys but just because it's been finagled into any old socket doesn't mean it's actually good there.

>>55191246
You got the right idea. It was indeed a boardgame for the better part of the game's life cycle. DnD is less of a game and more of a game engine, made with a very specific purpose and type of gameplay in mind. Its derivatives like pathfinder are the same but even more so, if that makes sense.

>>55191607
Would you rather me explain why the WH RPGs are all shit that only sell because of WH fans, the ST system barely qualifies as one, or how both Fate (not an acronym) and the SW RPG both suffer from pretty basic and obvious Narrative pitfalls?

Published games are all mediocre and need rules on top of rules to tune them into something worth playing. Sticking to them is like buying a pre-assembled computer and feeling content with it even after the honeymoon phase has passed. At least D&D is a top-of-the-line model.

But yeah, you're going to want to go into the case and upgrade those parts as you realize what works and what doesn't, and in the case of shit like anything published why White Wolf it's best to just abandon the system all together because even absentmindedly generating random mechanics will produce a more balanced and intuitive system. They have some neat lore though.

>>55191638
Guess how I know you're a blind fantard who'll defend this shit to the death, way past the point of rationality?

Two words, kiddo: investment bias.

Checkmate.

>>55191665
Exactly. A millions splatbooks on '''''different''''' generic fantasy settings, new spells, new classes, lewd shit, and whatever else is going does not equate to DnD being some kind of perfect omnisystem that can run anything.

If we're expanding this to D20 in general, then let's all laugh at D20 Modern.

>>55191864
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that underneath all your posturing, your reasons for liking DnD over the others will turn out to be entirely subjective.

>>55191676
> It was indeed a boardgame for the better part of the game's life cycle

Absolutely untrue. D&D was a departure from wargames. It's like saying an airplane is a bicycle because the first one was made in a bike shop and from bike parts. Even the very first games went far beyond just adventuring into dungeons.

And, that "specific purpose" was pretty damn broad, which is evident by the sheer range of all the various subsystems of early D&D and now the more generally applicable approach of recent editions. The "specific" purpose of D&D was basically "run any kind of fantasy game", and it's got all the supplements, subsystems, and adventures to prove that point.

I think that one reason people coming from other games tend to see D&D as being "board game" like is because unlike many other games, combat in D&D is actually fun and not a game of "mother-may-I".

Want some genuinely awful combat? Try something diceless like Amber Diceless, or feel the awkwardness of a Fate battle. It's like some Gaia-tier shit.

>>55191246
D&D got super-popular because it has an obvious "default session" (Go to the dungeon, get treasure) which can be built up into more by the players or the GM. All of the rules dumped on top of that concept aren't particularly important. The game's popularity peaked in the 80s and has been in long-term decline since then, although an aging playerbase has more disposable income to throw at it.

>>55191938
>your reasons for liking DnD over the others will turn out to be entirely subjective
how in the shit could it not be

File: 1500912196637.png (372KB, 270x1920px) Image search: [Google]

372KB, 270x1920px

>>55191665
Cute opinion. Too bad the majority of roleplayers don't share it.

>>55192178
>Too bad the majority of roleplayers don't share it.
I guess.

>>55191938
I'm gonna say your reasons for not liking DnD over the others will turn out to be entirely subjective.

I just hope you're not going to be dumb enough to try and argue like your personal opinions are objective. Please, don't be that dumb.

>>55192006
>combat in D&D is actually fun
Yep, saying "I full attack" every round sure is fun.

But more than that, combat-oriented DnD campaigns suck. Coming from a wargame background, this is how they feel to me: it's like playing an endless series of demo games for a skirmish wargame system. It's like when you go to a gaming store, or an expo, or a con, and a demo agent there says something like "have you ever considered playing Infinity?" before setting up the trial game. You get a team of badasses to stomp all over his generic mooks, which is intentional because it is meant to advertize the game. Dungeon crawls are like a dozen of those games in a row, games where you nearly always win without losses, and with maybe a slightly harder fight at the end. If I want a combat game fix them skirmish wargames do this so much better, because the other guy is going all out to beat you. DMs in a PnP rarely do this because a) they RP the bad guys and b) a TPK is something they want to avoid, even to the point of fudging dice behind the screen. I find this increadibly unsatisfying and while I don't fundamentally hate combat in a PnP, I see it as a means to an end and not the end itself.

>>55192178
The majority of roleplayers who use Roll20: a grid-tool.

Do you know how many games dont use grids or models?

>>55192178
>Twilight is good literature
>the Kardashians are superb role models
Popular opinion =/= truth, and you must be braindead, desperate, or both to even try to invoke it.

>>55192200
Cute opinions. Seems like you just suck at the game and would rather blame the system than yourself.

What's that I hear? The majority of roleplayers have a great old time with the system? It's like a distant sound of cheering come from beyond the horizon.
>ahhhhh ahhhhhhh

Oh, if only you weren't such a whiny bitch.

>>55192197
I never do, I simply have little time for those who pretend that theirs are.

Now is when you pretend that you meant them as opinions all along.

>>55192240
0/10, pathethic.

>>>/v/

>>55192233
Popular opinion is that Twilight sucks and the Kardashians are a train wreck that a lot of idiots watch. Neither make up the majority of all purchases or viewers like good ol D&D.

Might want to try again with your analogy, because D&D's dominating popularity (don't forget it always sweeping just about every single design award every time an edition is published) puts it on a much higher level than simply things that you don't like that somehow ended up getting popular.

>>55191870
>fantard
>kiddo
>checkmate
I can't believe I'm replying to this shitpost

>>55192317
Anon, Fifty Shades of Grey is the most popular book series.

>>55192317
>Popular opinion is that Twilight sucks and the Kardashians are a train wreck
I GUESS THAT'S WHY THEY'RE SO POPULAR

Fuckin' moron.

>>55192376
You're replying because you're mad. You're failing to argue with it because you know it's true. You're looking like a fool in this thread because you are one.

>>55192200
>combat-oriented DnD campaigns suck.
Pretty much. It's a shame that Tomb of Horrors didn't shake them out. At least he tried.

>>55192377
But the majority of readers don't read Fifty Shades of Gray like the majority of roleplayers play D&D. D&D hasn't just been the most popular system since day one, it's also the game that more people play than all the other games combined.

And, Fifty Shades of Gray has been almost universally panned by critics, while D&D has had more awards thrown its way than you did the last time you competed in the Special Olympics.

>>55192467
>But the majority of readers don't read Fifty Shades of Gray like the majority of roleplayers play D&D
strong disagree
>awards
Name a single well-respected tabletop roleplaying game critic.

>>55192467
You keep squawking about popularity and awards, but you don't articulate why those things mean anything. Presumably you must believe that 'the people' and the award commitee have their reasons for their views. However, here you're just going around and around without ever actually placing down a concrete reason for DnD's supposed high quality. Your argument has no substance, it's the debate equivalent of a pyramid scheme.

>>55192523
>muh appeal to authority!!!
sorry sweetie, but that's an informal fallacy. It works if they authorities are real authorities ;)

File: pdvtO.jpg (45KB, 394x305px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 394x305px

>>55192584
>>55192523
>>55192496
>>55192467
>>55192405
>>55192317
>>55192267
>>55192240
>>55192233
>>55192228

>>55192496
>Name a single well-respected tabletop roleplaying game critic.

How about all of them? As in, the various D&D editions just about Sweep every single major Game Awards.

Calling it "critically acclaimed" would be an understatement in regards to how well it's received by industry experts.

>>55192622
>How about all of them?
..."no"

File: girls laughing hysterically.jpg (31KB, 400x269px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 400x269px

>>55192622
>he thinks that all tabletop roleplaying game critics are well-respected

>>55192523
Because, we're talking opinions, and nothing is concrete because everyone has a different opinion on what's good and what's bad.

And, before you burst a vein, understand that I know that D&D has flaws, so don't bother listing what you happen to think they are. Just be aware that comparatively, other games tend to be a lot worse in other capacities, and in the end it all comes down to the games trying to appeal to different groups.

You just happen to be in the minority group. Nothing wrong with that, except when you sort of forget that or try to deny that.

File: Screen Shot 2017-09-02 at 12.43.24 PM.png (352KB, 699x407px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 699x407px

>>55192622
>industry experts

>>55192678
>Because, we're talking opinions, and nothing is concrete because everyone has a different opinion on what's good and what's bad.
Yes. So you explain yourself. Other people disagree with you, and explain themselves. Of course it's ultimately irrational, but we all have the same basic brains so we all have the same basic ir/rationality.

You don't point to popularity.

>>55192637
>>55192646
As in, go ahead and name a critic, any critic that is responsible for handing out awards, and you're going to end up with them handing out those awards to D&D. Everything from the ENnies to the Origins Awards, D&D wins every single time.

You think your opinion is worth more than theirs? Mr. Anonymous guy on the internet?

>>55192813
so...name any critic? That is well respected. You have to remember that, anon. Here's a hint: there aren't any.
>You think your opinion is worth more than theirs? Mr. Anonymous guy on the internet?
Obviously.

>>55192778

>Other people disagree with you, and explain themselves.
They're "explaining" their opinions like they think those really matter.
They support all their arguments in a subjective fashions that are not worth even debating, yet they insist on trying to get someone to debate their opinions with them?

No thanks,
I'd much rather just remind them that their opinions are that of a minority and thus can't be used to as substance in their arguments, because they have no real foundation and the majority of people disagree with them.

It's like listening to someone try to explain their "rational" or "objective" reasons for hating chocolate ice cream. Sure, you can come up with a list ten feet long about all the reasons you hate it, but most of it is just going to be tedious bullshit, and calling you out on that bullshit will just encourage you to get more defensive and even more tedious.

All that really needs to be said is "I like chocolate ice cream, and most people do too, so quit expecting everyone to take your opinion as something worthy of debate. You just don't like it."

>>55192813
What exactly are the qualifications for a rpg critic?

>>55192971
Critique RPGs.

>>55192813
>ENnies judges are well-respected critics
They're the winners of a popularity contest on ENworld. Take a look at http://www.ennie-awards.com/blog/2018-judges/ and see the results.

>Origins
A more respected award, but D&D doesn't win anything close to the majority of the RPG categories. They did the double in '14 and '15 and picked up best supplement for Eberron in '05, but those were their only awards from 2003 on. (I don't have access to award history prior to that.) 5 awards out of a possible 30 is not that impressive. If you're just concerned with the new hotness at Origins, it's FFG's Star Wars which swept in '16 and was still fan favourite this year.

>>55193043
So what exactly separates the guys handing out awards from random assholes on the internet.

>>55193048
D&D isn't published every year, you know.

>>55193048
Looking at the judges for the ENnies i'm not really seeing anything that makes them anymore qualified to judge rpgs than your average random blogger.

>>55193107
It's a response to the overblown claim in >>55192622 that:
>the various D&D editions just about Sweep every single major Game Awards.

Editions came out in 2003 (no Origin award), 2008 (no Origin award), and 2014 (Origin award). There were also D&D supplements printed in all competition years, usually more than the number printed for any other game, but they only won the supplement award three times in fifteen years. This isn't a sweep. It's competitive, but only the most crazed haters are saying that D&D is the worst.

>>55193201
D&D is the worst of the RPGs you're likely to face. Even if I hate Fate much more than D&D, I understand that it's better at doing what it's trying to do -- I just hate what it's trying to do.

>>55193248
Although it's only "better". It still sucks.

>>55192200
But that goes for all campaign oriented RPGs featuring combat, well apart from like paranoia and such where PCs dying is kind of part of the point of playing.
If the PCs die the campaign is usually over or suffers a severe loss of tempo. So everything is designed to make that not happen.

>>55193257
Somewhere along the line, we got this informal roleplaying pact where the players would get to do lots of work making their characters, the GM would get to do lots of work making their story, and the group would meet up for a show and tell once a week in which everyone is meant to avoid messing up one another's stuff. I'm not sure that it's a bad thing, but it's hard to call it a game.

>>55191246
Functional but uninspired. DnD is probably the only popular game that legitimately feels slapped together, with no regard for design principles or knowledge of how far the medium has come since Chainmail.

>>55193257
just roll a new character my dude

>>55193201
3rd came out in 2000 (and won the award http://gama.org/origins-awards/sample-page/origins-awards-winners-the-2000s/the-2000-origins-awards/). Are you sure 3.5 was even eligible for nomination in 2003?

Still, that's definitely critical acclaim, which is the centerpiece of the argument.

4e not winning is a bit of a snub in my opinion, but it's at least a point to show that the editions of D&D that did win didn't win solely on account of them being D&D.

>>55192813
>You think your opinion is worth more than theirs? Mr. Anonymous guy on the internet?

Not him, but by the fact that he is anonymous and cannot be bought or coherced to speak a specific opinion his opinion can matter more than that of a suposed expert.

>>55193340
Yeah but if everyone needs to do that then it's almost like starting a new campaign

>>55193370
Why would all the PCs die?

>>55193324
Think of it this way. Single player video games are almost always literally designed to be beaten. Does that make them not games?

>>55193066
that randos on 4chan aren't paid by the major rpg companies

>>55193375
Maybe the dragon breathed fire on them. What a stupid question, full party wipes can happen.

>>55193401
Not really.

>>55193406
...yes, they really can. Unless the DM specifically prevents it

>>55193425
No, not unless it's a dungeon crawl or something. Otherwise there's always things people can do to ensure some people get out alive.

>>55193436
This is all assuming you haven't done something so big that it is, in fact, the end of the campaign.
>e.g. set off the nuke in the BBEG's lair

>>55193384
>Are you sure 3.5 was even eligible for nomination in 2003?
100%. Origins doesn't have strict eligibility criteria. It's possible that the judges felt that 3.5 wasn't a significant achievement relative to 3.0.

>4e not winning is a bit of a snub in my opinion
You need to acknowledge that you're in the minority on that, so your opinion doesn't have any substance in this argument.

>>55193257
In campaigns like that, the primary stake of each battle should not be "the PCs' lives". But it seems like RPG authors have yet to figure that out.

>>55193436
Not always, no. Especially if the DM actually plays "against" the players, in which case he can kill them all at will at any time.

>>55193467
Oops, meant for >>55193356.

>>55193469
It is not always... But generally, what else could it be? You are facing off against the orcs, the are gonna eat you if you lose.

>>55193467
>100%. Origins doesn't have strict eligibility criteria. It's possible that the judges felt that 3.5 wasn't a significant achievement relative to 3.0.

Regardless of that, 3.0 did win the award.

>You need to acknowledge that you're in the minority on that,

It lost to Mouseguard, which is an okay system, but I really don't think that I'm in the minority when I say that 4e is an overall better system, especially with nearly a decade of hindsight.
In fact, 4e also ended up collecting a fair number of ENnie awards that year, including Product of the Year, Best Game, Best Monster, and Best Rules.

>>55193515
Anything that's important to the PCs, from objects to people to concepts. Of course, if they're murderhobos and the only thing important to them is their own lives, that can't work.

File: d100.jpg (9KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 300x300px

>>55191246
Did 5e step away from binary outcomes for tests?

Nearly any system I've played so far boils down to try to do something -> test to see if you succeeded. Lots of the systems designed in the last 4 years seem to be branching out to tertiary results like succeed-with-cost or the snowballing problems you see in PbtA games.

>>55193598
Ok, but i am talking about the essence of combat between small groups of people, especially when the NPC side is immoral evil monsters, which often entails that you die if you lose. Entirely regardless of whether the PCs have other things to care about, they will of course value their lives, which also are the thing that most generally will be jeopardized.

>>55193646
There's been systems with degree of success for many years

>>55193696
Not surprising. What were some of the older ones?

>>55193580
Disregarding your irrelevant opinions, are we to understand that the definition of D&D sweeping the Origins awards - and there really isn't anything else worth talking about - is wins for 3rd, 5th, and Eberron?

>hindsight
Ignoring your irrelevant opinions and only dealing with matters of fact, I refer you to the Origins Hall of Fame. 0D&D and AD&D are in it, nothing D&D afterwards. Other HoF RPGs are Call of Cthulu, Traveller, Pendragon, and Amber Diceless.

>ENnies
The ENnies are awarded by amateur judges selected by the denizens of a D&D fansite. They're about as relevant to this discussion as the Indie RPG awards.

>>55193823
Eeeeeeh shadowrun I think?

>>55193889
>there really isn't anything else worth talking about

That's your opinion, and one that attempts to disregard every other game awards and to pretend that the Origins is the end-all-be-all (which D&D still managed to secure wins for their major releases outside of the black sheep of the family).

>Ignoring your irrelevant opinions and only dealing with matters of fact

I get that you're trying to be funny, but you're dealing with matter of opinions as well.

And, EN World, like Gen Con, started as D&D centric because D&D really was the only game with enough of a following. It has expanded over the years, to the point where recent ENnies were sponsored by Indie game publishers.

I get a feeling that you're kind of just trying to get everyone distracted from the main point, and the main point is that D&D isn't just popular, but critically acclaimed. Dramatically critically acclaimed as well if you decide not to dismiss everything except Origins.

>>55191246
6/10. D&D provides a decent framework for what it's designed to do (provide wargame rules for fantasy adventures) but it's not even the best option for what it does. If you honestly need me to name names, you're a newfag.

It's one of the worst introductions to the hobby, though.

>>55194245
> If you honestly need me to name names, you're a newfag.

You sound scared.

>>55194148
the think is that this so called "critics" are worth shit. Nothing ensures that this people are actually qualified for the task.
And popularity is worth shit also, because it's a fact that the majority of people don't like actually good movies, music or books.

>>55194245
NB4 "Just run Burning Wheel, bro. Weeds out the bad players."

>>55194371
BW is the best system for my least favourite kind of game.

>>55194403
That's, what? Like a solid 6/10?

>>55194148
>pretend that the Origins is the end-all-be-all
The reason that Origins is pretty much it is because there aren't very many RPG game awards and most of them are given by fan sites. If you had other respectable awards to call up you'd have mentioned them rather than pretending that the ENnies are anything serious.

>you're trying to be funny
Actually, I'm just trying to be scornful. If it's entertaining people as well, I consider that a bonus.

>>55194409
You can't rank things in numbers you barbarian. It is what I said it is; the best system for the sort of narratively-driven game where narrative pieces slot together to form the campaign (I don't like that).

>>55194473
> You can't rank things in numbers you barbarian.
7/10 diss

>>55191246

I like DND because it actually feels like an RPG as opposed to a group improv session.

>>55193395
"rpg critics" aren't paid by anyone either

>>55194868
how unprofessional

>>55194868
they are paid in some kind of manner, maybe not with money, but they are definitely paid

File: 1500819612015.jpg (5KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 225x225px

>>55191246
Better than GURPS

>>55194997
No, we're not.

It's not a profession. It's a hobby. Critics are hobbyists too. Some of us have written and designed other RPGs. That's all.

>>55195016
Everyone's a critic.

>>55194999
I grace the insides of my toilet bowl with shit that's better than GURPs.

>>55194428
Trying to be funny ain't the same as actually being funny. In your case, it's as far from it as possible.

>>55194357
So, I guess all that's left is taking anonymous contrarian haters' opinions from an anime image board, right?

Man, get over yourself.

>>55191246
I can compare it to Shadowrun 5e. D&D wins hands down the mechanics, ease of play, how fast combat goes, how fun it is. Shadowrun for me is the best setting, it's such a crazy good cyberpunk world, the lore is crazy fascinating. D&D on the other hand is a generic fantasy setting but nothing super exciting imo.

>>55195109
all that is left is using your critical thinking to arrive to your own conclusions instead of following what the majority or "the experts" say.
And You can still discuss and argue and make points over subjective matters, like everyone does with every other medium. Most people don't end their discussions about how good or bad is a movie based on how many people watched it or how many Oscars it won.

>>55195109
Is this all you have left?

>>55192377
No, you're thinking of the Holy Bible.

>>55195444
Unfortunately, I am not.

>>55195168
Can you really say D&D is generic fantasy when it pratically invented the fantasy that became generic?

>>55195767
I got into D&D couple months ago with 5e, so yes. I'm fresh blood into D&D but have seen LOTR, Conan, Xena warrior princess, etc... so D&D is "generic" for me

>>55195767
>it pratically invented the fantasy that became generic
it's like you've never heard of 'Appendix N'

>>55195358
>all that is left is using your critical thinking

And the first step of that is knowing when some guys have nothing but bias and hate fueling their opinions.

If they're trying to lead a discussion with a conclusion that's as far off the mark as "D&D is the worst game ever" or something as demonstrably incorrect as "D&D can only do dungeon crawls", you know that they're going to be whipping out some outrageous opinions to try and support their extremist claims, up to and including opinions that just push the goal posts deep into the realm of subjectivity to protect their already predetermined conclusions.

First it's "D&D can't do Horror," and when you prove it can, they then go to "D&D can't do horror as well as other systems", and when you show evidence that it can, they resort to "Well, I don't think so, so my opinion negates your argument."

That's why they hate being reminded that their opinions are those of a small minority. It whips the floor out from underneath them, because when they push the argument into the realm of subjectivity when they think it suits them, that's when fun things like popularity and critical opinion makes it clear that their personal opinions only hold true for a small percentage of roleplayers.

It changes their argument from "D&D can't do Horror" to "I'm going to ignore the groups that run successful Horror games using D&D, the supplements and adventures built around Horror designed for D&D, the widespread and popular use of D&D for horror games, the mechanical components specifically designed to facilitate and enable horror games, the impressive storytimes detailing the use of D&D for horror games, and submit that in my personal opinion, I don't like using D&D for horror because I genuinely don't know how to despite a wealth of resources including official sources explaining how to do so."

And, they can then be educated out of their ignorant opinion, humbled by the fact that popular opinion is against them.

>>55191870
Did you honestly think those are his books and not just from a google search?

>>55191246
It's fine for non dungeon crawls if you want it for d&d ip and settings. I want to try running faerun in gurps some time though. Just need more d&d ip converted to gurps 4e to do it.

>>55196083
No, you're the one who's biased for D&D.

>>55198241
Then explain how. This faggot has a full page of plausible-sounding smug backing his shit up, you've got a NO U. Given that, I know who I'm going to tend to assume knows their shit.

>>55191423
That's a party good description of how I feel. If add classes to levels as far as mechanics I don't enjoy.

>>55198297
D&D boils down to rolling the default attack over and over, being tricked into thinking that you don't have to do that and then getting blindsided by feat requirements or shitty/nonexistent rules and traps options, it has a skill system that can be summed up as "roll dice and figure it out yourself", and it can't make up its mind on whether it wants to emulate video games or resemble real life, arbitrarily borrowing from both and pleasing nobody as a result.

If you really believe that D&D can do something better than a specialized system, or if you really believe that D&D is a good generalist system, you need to broaden your horizons and play more games.

File: situation.jpg (62KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 1280x720px

>>55194999
Better than Rolemaster

File: rolemaster arms law.jpg (1MB, 2542x3300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2542x3300px

>>55199677
Excel the RPG might have been a clunky system, but the setting books (Robin Hood, Vikings, Ancient Egypt, etc.) were fantastic.

>>55198297
>This faggot has a full page of plausible-sounding smug backing his shit up, you've got a NO U.
Quality > Quantity.

>>55191638
>All those Eberron Books.

My nigga. That setting is really what keeps me coming back to D&D

>>55198423
If you're entire argument relies entirely on exaggerations and memes, you might want to just give up, especially if your closing statement is just a vague ad hominem against anyone that plays the system.

You might want to try broadening your own horizons, because you'd then be able to realize just how comparatively good D&D really is. But, then again, your bias probably would continue to get in the way of making anything resembling a fair evaluation.

>>55201186
>m-memes!
>ad hominem!
>biased!
the absolute state of D&D fanatics

>>55194245
>provide wargame rules for fantasy adventures
>4e is the only edition of D&D

>>55201257
ignoramus

>>55198423
>and pleasing nobody as a result.
How is the majority of roleplayers nobody? You really need to stop projecting your inaccurate interpretations onto anyone except yourself. In general, your vague complaints are all demonstrably false, and rely on an extremely biased and silly "well, if you strip the game of everything I don't want to admit exists, it can only do what my ignorant ass says it can" argument.

>>55201186
I don't know, those complaints seem pretty specific to me.

>>55191246
D&D works on a few levels

>many know the rules
>tons of material
>It can range from OSR gamist to near simulation play.

I happen to prefer the simple versions of it, (OSR player) but what I love is I can grab 4-5 people and get a game going in 10 minutes.

Pathfinder is grand, but combat takes forever. A combat with 10 orcs will take a hour in pathfinder as people do all their nifty abilities, while in D&D in 15 minutes the blood has been shed and its time to loot.

>>55201339
Then demonstrate, anon. Everything you say is has no content. Simply saying something doesn't make it so.

>>55195444
Holy Bible is actually good though. Feels like it was written by multiple people though

>>55191246
Thanks for at least not being an obvious bait thread

>>55202096
>Everything you say is has no content

>Simply saying something doesn't make it so.

The fucking irony.

>>55202096
There's only one guy who defends D&D. He's just delusional, don't bother with him.

>>55204059
>only one guy defends the most popular game series, the game that 80%+ of all roleplayers play, complete with critical acclaim and enduring popularity

>delusional

The fucking irony.

>>55204835
>Reddit spacing

>>55196083
>He thinks Dnd can do horror

>>55191638
Why do people keep treating D&D as a universal/generic system?

>>55191246
>Am I missing something about the system?
It's more gamist than the aforementioned system, although Deathwatch RPG can be kinda gamey too.

>How would you compare or rate D&D's mechanics to other tabletop systems?
So to answer this question you need to think of your preferences and the game's design in the GNS spectrum (or whatever nomenclature for that you prefer).

>>55205136
Why do people insist it can only do one thing?

There's a pretty big range between "Generic System" and "can only do Dungeon Crawls", so you're best off not strawmanning.

>>55191864
>Would you rather me explain why the WH RPGs are all shit that only sell because of WH fans
I have played more than 30 systems, including D&D, and the 40K RPG systems are quite solid, being based on the WFRP system which was widely popular and his still many fans today (for an OOP game). When someone asks for alternatives to D&D, it gets suggested frequently.

Furthermore, the games are a successful transition of a fantasy game to modern/sci-fi/sci-fantasy, settings with full auto firearms. Something D20 has not managed to do so far.

So I can't really take you seriously here.

>>55195767
it generalized the genre. so: yes.

>>55200058
the table lookups weren't so bad. the bad parts were the percentages of your round's action applied to you skill bonus and shit.

>>55205224
Look at all the debates raging about the default D&D classes here. Obviously balancing classes is super-difficult.

And now you want to transplant d20 to your own setting (let's say sci-fi with lasers and shit) and you either got to set up new classes yourself or have to rely on someone else's homebrew. Both being semi-professional or amateurish efforts in nature.

Results are likely to be even more dissatisfying than in default D&D.

>>55193646
Yes and no. DMs generally just set a success rate DC for a skill check. Depending on how close or far away from it determines how much you've succeeded/failed at doing x. I don't believe there is any rule for it but from what I've seen that's what DMs do. In combat it's different though. There it's binary.

>>55192622
Awards are not a measure of quality. They are a measure of how many friends in high places the author has.

>>55204879
kys

>>55205378
>Awards are not a measure of quality
How come you don't have any then?

I think it can manage more than dungeon crawls just fine. It can't really do things much outside of the fantasy genre but I don't think it has to be just dungeon crawls.
Most of the d&d campaigns I've played have not been just dungeon crawls. A lot of things are geared towards combat though, but I've played many sessions where absolutely no combat occured.

>>55196083
>something as demonstrably incorrect as "D&D can only do dungeon crawls"
>the widespread and popular use of D&D for horror games
bwahahaha. yeah, I can't remember a single horror thread on /tg/ in which d20 didn't get suggested as a viable system because it's on everyone's mind all the time when you hear the term 'horror RPG'.

same with cyberpunk threads. you hardly hear of such obscure games such as cp2020 or shadowrun. nah, it's d20, d20, d20 all day, e'ry day. i'm so sick of it.

or investigatove games. one would think games such as gumshoe games or coc would at least find occasional recommendation. but nah, it's always "run it in d20, anon" "yeah, d20 is best for investigations".

well, you got me convinced for one: d&d is truly AMAZING for all kinds of games.

>>55205240
They're games that are extremely dependent on their IP for their popularity, and their mechanics really come off as a hodge-podge assortment of ideas slapped together with things like Fate Points to try and cover up the cracks in the seams. The combat in particular is janky and ends up being heavily dependent on meta-concerns (and the major strategy tends to just be to focus group fire and hope your character is built right for the fight), while also suffering tremendously from mechanics that echo their not-so-distant roots of a miniature war game.

They are games primarily for Warhammer fans. They do a great job of diving into the lore and expanding it, but mechanically it's just an okay game with plenty of awkward and clunky mechanics, with Narrative caulking to keep it from falling apart.

>>55191246
Can you give specifics? Also skills and attributes don't actually overlap. There is no rule for example (at least in 5e) that a persuasion check HAS to be based on charisma. It defaults to charisma most of the time but your DM could ask for an intelligence based persuasion check if needed.

I don't know I've never really encountered these problems (especially in 5e when basically the book tells you GM ruling trumps everything)

>>55205517
>such obscure games such as cp2020 or shadowrun

I'll grudingly give you Cyberpunk 2020 which hasn't been a major player since... what, Cyber Generation? But Shadowrun? I think it's the most widespread (and long-lived) cyberpunk of all time. If you want an obscure cyberpunk RPG, try ICE's Cyberspace. I don't think GURPS Cyberpunk's that visible either, after the "the game that The Man tried to shut down!" fever went down.

>>55192178
And Bruno Mars is the greatest musician in human history

>>55205517
It's generally assumed that if someone is asking about systems, they've already heard about d20. Recommending it at this point is like suggesting to a chef, who is asking what they should add to a spaghetti dish, that they should add spaghetti.

>well, you got me convinced for one: d&d is truly AMAZING for all kinds of games.

That seems to be the consensus for everyone except a few contrarians. Glad you're finally coming around.

>>55205614
He's trying to say that nobody suggests d20 for anything. It's sarcasm.

>>55191246
5e is extreme intuitive, I don't know what you're talking about. I've used it to introduce completely new people to the hobby, and they picked up on it with ease.
Yes, you need to look up (or write down) spells, but that's pretty much it. Modifier calculation is easy. Proficiency and advantage/disadvantage is simple. Hit die and recovery is simple. Class abilities and combat actions are pretty reasonable.

As for your other comments, yes DnD is designed for dungeon crawling. It shines in dungeon crawling. But it works reasonably well for other campaigns, too. (Even if there are better alternatives).

What makes it a nice system is how easily you can use it for all kinds of adventuring situations.

>>55205402
No friends in high places I imagine.

>>55205517
People do suggest 5e for game ideas that may have a horror lean, and on occasion people do come here and ask how to run horror in 5e games. Same thing with investigation and the like, with common advice being to look back into the advice from 3rd edition books like Heroes of Horror or Elder Evils since a lot of the help and guidelines are roughly compatible.

Your post generally comes off as you being somewhat upset about this. I understand that you'd like other games to share some of the limelight that 5e is slowly monopolizing, but it's not very effective of you to try and lie about what the system can and can't do. At best, you can suggest that other games are out-of-the-box ready for Horror, but if people are asking about how to run a horror-themed adventure in 5e, lying and saying D&D can't do horror is just going to make people distrust anything else you would try to convince them of, because there's even published Horror adventures for 5e already.

>>55203703
Oh wow anon, you sure le btfo him!

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

245KB, 900x851px

The lone D&Dfag invades every thread about D&D and uses literally the same argument in defense of his system every single time (popularity) and then repeats it over and over again until the thread ends. Just ignore him.

>>55205763
>Adventures
This is a key word. DnD is really good at running adventures. Taking people from low level backgrounds to high levels and conquering something. DnD is built around this. It's not simple dungeon crawls.
Even in horror adventures generally the PCs will end up defeating or dealing with the horror.

>>55205763
>and on occasion people do come here and ask how to run horror in 5e games
You can't use that as a metric, because you have retards asking "how do I run Pokemon or [inset popular series here] in D&D?", especially where D&D doesn't even fit. Why the flying fuck would you be using D&D for a fucking pokemon game? How the fuck do you use D&D for a Naruto setting? The rules for the setting and the system are not compatible at all.

>>55205554
>their mechanics really come off as a hodge-podge assortment of ideas slapped together
Unsubstantiated claim.

>Fate Points to try and cover up the cracks in the seams.
The only seam they cover up is the lethality of games and it's a pretty good way of calibrating lethality: make the basic game deadly give a single central mechanic into the hands of the GM to adjust lethality.

>The combat in particular is janky and ends up being heavily dependent on meta-concerns
Unsubstantiated.

> (and the major strategy tends to just be to focus group fire and hope your character is built right for the fight)
The game allows for quite nasty melee characters and focus-firing is no more an issue than in D&D.

>while also suffering tremendously from mechanics that echo their not-so-distant roots of a miniature war game.
Unsubstantiated.

In short: you're all talk, no substance.

>>55195767
>What is Appendix N
It's generic.

File: 1422555673203.jpg (36KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 720x540px

>>55205928
>lethality
>40k RPGs
>when the average gun does 1d10+3 damage and 8 DR is trivial to obtain for any type of character
>when even the weakest mooks have at least 5 hit points and PCs have a lot more
>when hit point damage doesn't do anything until it goes below 0
>when Dodge is available to literally everyone, is easy to stack up, and completely disregards your opponent's skill

File: draper-laugh.jpg (18KB, 409x393px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 409x393px

>>55205631
>It's generally assumed that if someone is asking about systems, they've already heard about d20
ahahaha, you truly are a gift that keeps on giving, aren't ya?

>>55205763
>Your post generally comes off as you being somewhat upset about this.
i am rather kinda amused that you have been reduced to bald-faced lying. does d20 occasionally recommended? sure. is it frequent or even often the case? hell, no.
also, you should coordinate with the other d&d shill >>55205640 to get your stories straight (it doesn't get mentioned because everyone knows it versus it gets suggested a lot).

also:
>5e is slowly monopolizing
wtf i love D&D now. topkek.

>>55206033
>you should coordinate with the other d&d shill
There's only one of them.

>>55205880
>Why the flying fuck would you be using D&D for a fucking pokemon game?

Aside from 4e being a fairly good fit and there's a decent unofficial hack for it?

>How the fuck do you use D&D for a Naruto setting?

There's actually a Naruto d20, which is in part considered a joke because it's over 1000 pages long and was built from the maligned d20 modern, but the core idea of how to do it is there, even if the execution was fairly amateur and it could definitely use a lot of playtesting and revisions.

At it's core, d20 is pretty basic, with a simple core mechanic that's readily adaptable. The underlying system for 5e is actually several steps more adaptable, and can easily serve as the foundation for just about any kind of game.

It's the sort of thing where it almost sounds like all that we need is an actually good 5e Modern, which really wouldn't be too hard to create, to end many of these arguments for good.

>>55205763
>Lies! Lies! It's all lies!
yeah but it's not ALL lies is it

come on there's a grain of truth in there, admit it

>>55206063
Jesus christ you are delusional.
You're that same asshole from a few months back who thinks d20 is synonymous with D&D too.

>>55205928
>give me an essay

For fuck's sake, there's a 2,000 character limit. Go and read an online review if you want someone to explain all of the system's problems.

>>55206090
>makes a clear distinction between d20 and other versions of D&D
>you must think they're the same!

?

File: 1379202259766s.jpg (6KB, 250x187px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 250x187px

>>55206095
>you don't have arguments
>well, go read an online review if you want some!

>>55206008
Okay, this is bait but I got nothing better to do right now.

>when the average gun does 1d10+3 damage and 8 DR is trivial to obtain for any type of character
Every NPC has only a Lasgun. Stop ignoring ROF and bring some Pen into play.
>when hit point damage doesn't do anything until it goes below 0
The moment you have lost more than 6 or 8 Wounds you are fucked, unless it's the last encounter in the adventure.
>when Dodge is available to literally everyone, is easy to stack up, and completely disregards your opponent's skill
One reaction per turn, at a disadvantage against full auto weapons.

Yeah, it's pretty lethal. You have your (you), now run along, be a good boy.

>>55206291
>provide general statements about something as large as an entire set of systems, none of which are unreasonable if you are familiar with the system
>NO! GIBME POINTLESS SPECIFICS SO WE CAN ARGUE

Whew lad.

>>55206331
>Every NPC has only a Lasgun. Stop ignoring ROF and bring some Pen into play.
If the average gun can't easily kill someone in a game, then it's not a high lethality game.
>The moment you have lost more than 6 or 8 Wounds you are fucked
No, if you have 7 or 9 wounds, literally nothing changes and you're still at 100% functionality.
>One reaction per turn at a disadvantage against full auto weapons.
The game is so lethal you need to outnumber the PCs two to one or they'll dodge it all. Wow, how lethal. The disadvantage against full auto is negligible by the way.

You have literally no idea what you're talking about.

>>55206575
Lasguns arent deadly. Autoguns are. And they are on the lower end of weapons you'll see.

>No, if you have 7 or 9 wounds, literally nothing changes and you're still at 100% functionality.
You don't recover wounds easily anymore, which means if you take 7 or 9 wounds again in the next fight, you're in critical damage territory.

>The game is so lethal you need to outnumber the PCs two to one or they'll dodge it all.
You're dodging a successful attack no more than 50% of the time. 33% is more realistic.

>The disadvantage against full auto is negligible by the way.
The difference is 2 bullets that just hit you. Good luck.

You've never played the game and are reading the PDF inbetween replies, right? It kinda shows.

>>55206956
>You're dodging a successful attack no more than 50% of the time. 33% is more realistic.
>50% chance to dodge attacks is fine and high lethality
>when the hit chances rarely go above 50% to begin with

>The difference is 2 bullets that just hit you. Good luck.
>having to literally rely on 3 DoS rolls in your favor (read: unlikely rolls) because your argument has no merit otherwise
How embarrassing.

>>55191246
which edition?

>>55207123
You seem frustrated, anon. Is there a reason for that?

>>55207123
2 DoS are 3 hits, noob. Also, Short Range and Full Auto add up, giving a substantial advantage to the attacker. And Emperor forbid getting shot at Point Blank Range.

File: 1421197293875.gif (79KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 600x450px

>>55206564
>This mechanics is bad because I say it is, and I won't explain why.
>However, if you do the same with D&D, I will say that you are an anonymous little shit on 4chan who know nothing and can't back up his shit with arguments

>>55205763
>there's published horror adventures
>therefore, d&d is a good system for horror
What?

>>55208149
>"the mechanics are bad because of reasons you'd understand if you've played the game"
>"NO. WASTE TIME TALKING ABOUT THE BASIC RULES."

Go read the rules online if you're not familiar with the system.

>>55205554
>They're games that are extremely dependent on their IP for their popularity, and their mechanics really come off as a hodge-podge assortment of ideas slapped together with things like Fate Points to try and cover up the cracks in the seams. The combat in particular is janky and ends up being heavily dependent on meta-concerns (and the major strategy tends to just be to focus group fire and hope your character is built right for the fight), while also suffering tremendously from mechanics that echo their not-so-distant roots of a miniature war game.

Are you talking about D&D?

I feel like d&d has actually gotten worse for dungeon crawling with newer editions.
The way the turn mechanics, resource management with lighting, movement, time tracking, gold=xp, hirelings, reaction rolls, etc. all interface with each other makes for a fairly interesting exploration based game. 5e feels like a combat sim with little real gameplay outside of that.

>>55210675
>combat sim with little real gameplay outside of that.
How? What can't you do?

>>55210719
It's not a matter of "can you do it" since even in the simplest system, you could handle everything with ability score rolls.
I'm talking about having gameplay, risks/rewards, resource management, strategic thinking like in combat. There's little actual "game" to it other than rolling a dice sometimes.

If we separate Systemic Mechanics from System Content, DnD is a serviceable game. This is why games of 3.5 that ban core and use supplements like Weeb Fighting Magic, and enforce party compositions of same tier or Within-2 Tiers works. Because at its core, 1d20+Modifier to reach DC, with six attributes, HP, AC as ability to avoid hits, and three saves works fine. It's simply that 3.X had monstrously terrible core content. This is why certain DnD-Derivatives are more enjoyable than core DnD, like Fantasy Craft. While Fantasy Craft has flaws of its own, it solves almost all of 3.Xs problems not by completely throwing the system out, but largely by throwing out the core content; no more fighters, no more clerics, rogues, what have you; new unique classes, more enjoyable feats, more balanced spell library, etc.

If we do not separate System Mechanics from System Content, DnD is garbage. Terrible class, spell, gear, monster balance, etc. A struggle to put together parties that have members that all contribute. A struggle to put together combats that meaningfully challenge everyone, instead of being solved by just one character. Etc.

Most people who hate DnD, I think, do not actually hate DnD as a system, but hate DnDs content. And for most, this is not a distinction that matters; without GMs who will take the steps to police content access and bring in higher quality homebrew, supplement choice, or DnD clones that have more interesting, balanced classes, it doesn't matter what the source of their problem is, because they'll still have the problem.

>>55210768
But all of those things are present so you're wrong.

>>55210782
I find this analysis very insightful and very useless at the same time.

>>55210812
Where are rules for tracking turns out of combat in 5e? Movement speed while in the dungeon doesn't even interface with anything else. Where are reaction roll rules? Minutes are a shit way of tracking time out of combat.

How do you square having out of combat gameplay when the ranger completely invalidates any challenge to wilderness adventuring by level 5? The distances given for movement mean that tons of calculations have to be done if you're to translate it into a hex grid or whatnot. There's no real procedure laid out for handling the gameplay of wilderness exploration.

>>55210896
I shall preempt the possible counterarguments by summarizing them:

>Rule Zero
>You don't NEED rules for that
>I won't tell you where the rules are for that, because I don't know where they are or if they exist, but I will insinuate that you are too stupid or to lazy to read the book instead

>>55210893
It's not helpful on its own; I'd have expanded more with an actual thesis, but that 2000 character limit. I use FC as my example because I'm someone who loathed 3.X with every fiber of my being. It was the one tabletop game I refused to play, and it made all d20 derivatives poison to me. It took playing 4E DnD and particularily Fantasy Craft for me to realize that what I really hated about DnD was the martial/caster imbalance, the boring nature of Attack/Full Attack combat for martials, and a spell suite that let you ignore 99% of all problems. Since I discovered that, I've been more open to trying d20 derivatives. Shadow of the Demon Lord, for one, has a fun career path system.

It's pretty low tier. The mechanics are just holdovers that the game preserves to keep its identity (Read: Sacred cows). Other systems have moved on and actually inovated.

>>55193823
Talislanta.

>>55194510
Actually funny retort.

8/10 in a 4/10 thread.

>>55210893
So /tg/?

>>55191638
I have all those books and more. Holy fuck what is wrong with me.

I see it's 2017 and we are still witnessing 3.5's edition wars.

5e is pretty good, and far above average. It's not my favorite, but it works better than anything FFG put out for sure. I would say Apocalypse World was the best advancement of the D&D mechanic, which is why 5e used fixed difficulty classes across all levels. In terms of my preference I like RuneQuest 6/Mythras both from the way it plays and from a standard of quality from a publisher since all their content is at a high level.

>>55214560
No, /tg/ as a whole is not insightful. It's more like... unfiltered mental diarrhea?

>>55214991
>I would say Apocalypse World was the best advancement of the D&D mechanic, which is why 5e used fixed difficulty classes across all levels.
What.

>>55191246
It's the founder effect. D&D was the first and it was absolutely huge, so it has a huge recognition bonus over all competitors. People try D&D because they've heard of D&D, which leads to more people playing D&D, which leads to more people hearing about it, and so on.

>>55217302
He means that a DC 15 is always "hard" in 5e, like how you always need 7+ to succeed in PbtA.

I think that correlation is a bit ofa stretch though.

>>55217581
I know what "fixed difficulty classes across all levels" means. It's the entire rest of the sentence that I take issue with.