[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.17325645 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Merry Christmas Eve, /tg/

Why do people still play 4e? I mean look at this book they're coming out with. Its such for gamist rollplayers.

See this video for more truth:

>> No.17325673

>Only singling 4th edition D&D out as being terrible

>> No.17325698

Why do people still FUCK YOU

>> No.17325703

Because I am an attractive and intelligent person.

>> No.17325709

Either way, chill out. Life will be much better for all of use when people like you can just let people enjoy the editions they enjoy and stop being dicks about it.

>> No.17325718

>mfw that's a WotC April Fool's joke from a few years back

>> No.17325723

Seriously OP? This was an old April Fool's joke they did a few years back.

Then again, you're just trying to troll up views for your youtube channel.

>> No.17325743


I'd fuck you

>> No.17325755

>Nothing to imagine


>> No.17325769

For bad GMs. We all know there are plenty of those around

>> No.17325781


OP don't know about the far superior Realms of Atlantasia

>> No.17325816


>You can order it from Barnes & Noble.

>> No.17325881

>Unnecessary Game Core Rules
>Authors include Worth Les
>"There've never been D&D rules like this before. Mainly because you don't need them."
ITT /tg/ cannot into humor.

Have Il's mom poppin some Japs for your troubles. It is also completely serious.

>> No.17325895

>gamist rollplayers.

That is any edition of DnD bro. Hate to tell you. That is why it is so popular.

Hell I have seen people play that way with WoD, GURPS, RIFTS, Star Wars, Wild Talents, and even Call of Cthulhu. It is purely user error on part of the player(s).

>> No.17325900


>Dat pic
>It feels good to be a gangsta

>> No.17325931

>2012 AD
>implying gamism is bad

Ish faggot op ddt

>> No.17325949

Just saying, /tg/, 3.5 is a much more open and customizable game. Also 4e you start out as fucking gods. Seriously. Minions? "lol u get caught in a desert storm and you die instantly" Also getting rid of save or dies was dumb.

Don't give me that Pathfinder bullshit, either, it just pissed on a good game.

>> No.17326116


>> No.17326128

Probably a little bit of column a and a little bit of column b.

>> No.17326161

Lindybeige is a know-it-all faggot who doesn't actually know all that much.

>> No.17326393

Sure is 4rry in here.

Yiff yiff dragon tits.

>> No.17326427

What's gamist? On phone delerious with flu and I MUST KNOW

>> No.17326436

I dislike 4e because it's too simplified. It's nurfed to hell and I don't like that.
I don't like that Cleave is a power only fighters can take, or that multi-classing is basically non-existent. I don't like that they wraped about 5 skills up into just "thievery".
Not do I like the over all feel of the game. 3.5 you start out pretty weak and EARN your way to godliness, 4e you're capable of these insane super-human feats at first level and then you just get broken by end game.

People like 4e because it's simple and easy to play, and requires almost no thinking to be done what so ever. If you like 4e good for you, imo its akin to preferring American beer to a good shot of hard liquor.

>> No.17326441

>only dragons

>> No.17326442


>and requires almost no thinking to be done what so ever

Has never actually played. Parties flat out die if they don't plan their moves at least two turns in advance with a challenging DM.

>> No.17326447

"gamist" means you treat it like it's a game. Ignoring the RP in RPG you just meta game the hell out of it and just concentrate on making the best build you can. You don't look to the story line or character depth, you just play a game that might as well be another shallow PvP experience.

>> No.17326460

>brokenly powerful

Pick one you asshole

>> No.17326465

>Preferring Liquor to Beer

Have fun with your alchoholism.

>> No.17326468

I have both played and DM'd 4e, I believe you just have poor players. Give me 3.5, 2.0, Call of C'thullu, Shadowrun, GURPS, et.c I can decimate my players if they don't come up with some brilliant shit. 4e they walk over any challenge that isn't a straight up boss fight/ a DM FUCK YOU situation.

Run into a band of 6 gnolls at first level
3.5: "Crap, we gotta think of something."
4e: "Oh gnolls? 1hp? No problem!"

>> No.17326473

Gamism is what we in pretentious indie-speak call a "creative agenda". Basically it's a way certain roleplaying games are designed, where the goal for the players is to win through their decisions.

Compare that to simulationism, which is all about simulating a setting or a genre and have the players explore it, and narrativism, which is all about the players creating a story.

So yeah, it's about where the players have impact: Gamism is on their own success, simulationism is on the setting, and narrativism is on the story. Note that in pretty much any system there is an overlap. D&D, all editions, are all pretty firmly rooted in gamism/simulationism

>> No.17326475


>4e: "Oh gnolls? 1hp? No problem!"

Looks like some nigger didn't figure out how to use the monter builder software to create higher/lower level and different role versions of monsters. It takes literally 10 minutes to do.

>> No.17326478

nurfed here meaning simplified and causing the players to be overpowered. Learn the proper definition of said word and context.

Weak rebuttal, nice. American beer is swill, ask anybody who's had a real drink 12 year old.

>> No.17326484

I played a game myself. Warlock was stupid simple, move 10 feet every round so I ALWAYS have concealment, because fuck having to stand still and focus to call hellfire on your enemy. I nearly had the defensive power of the tanky fighter just wearing robes and mainlining Con like no ones business. Never mind the fact that having that much defense is pointless as a level 2 fighter can mechanically keep aggro on everything.

>> No.17326492

Where do you live that doesn't have quality local brews?

>> No.17326505


Then your DM goes to easy on you. I have 4 players who made such broken shit in 3.5 I switch to 4e because it reach the point I didn't want to bother anymore. I mean party of Wizard, Psion, Druid and Cleric power builds here. In 4e I still regularly cause "oh shit, we gunna die if we don't get our shit together" moments because I am a competent DM who knowns how to design dangerous encounters.

>> No.17326517

Hating on me because I punched logical holes in their game. Despite the fact I ended saying if you like 4th edition then that's up to you, I just don't like it.

Getting a tad bit defensive are we? Here, let me be the bigger man.

3.5 has it's problems yes, it has a few to many supplements and is occasionally more complex than it needs to be. See no version is perfect. I happen to dislike 4e and gave my reasons for it in a calm, sensible manner. And you raged. You were just trolled when no one was trolling you. Congratulations.

>> No.17326531


>claims to have punched logical holes threw the game.

>did not bother to learn how to use the monster builder software to make monsters better suited for fighting their own specific party

>will either not respond at all or will claim that's to much effort without realizing it isn't

>> No.17326536

I have the opposite problem. My players can break 3.5 like no ones business, when they try to I break it right back and send them crying to their mothers. 4e I can't seem to build a proper challenge UNLESS I break the game right out of the gate.

Note I am not this guy. >>17326484

>> No.17326545

>getting mad at someone for not using fucking computer software for a pen-and-paper game

>> No.17326546

The lowest level monster gnolls are level 3 and they are described as "scavengers"

They are also not minions, so they in fact have a good amount of HP.

6 of them vs a party of 4 would be a pretty difficult fight.

>> No.17326549

The only things I have against 4e is that combat is slow as hell and and that d20 in general kind of sucks
Lately I've been been doing a 3.5 game that has been intentional lethal as hell, and I have to say just throwing balanced encounter design aside and having everything go all on your players can be pretty fun
But that probably only works because it's an e6 game, so no matter what they make they can never really break anything too hard

>> No.17326556

>Epic 6
There is no other way to play 3.5 Edition.

>> No.17326558


When you are building encounters make sure that there is a lot of terrain, particularly things that have effects. Also only use a few monsters of the party's level. You a bunch of monsters 1 or 2 levels lower and a few 1 or 2 levels higher. I know the anti-4e crowd will jump over this next statement but I'm serious about it: When making a force of monsters in 4e treat it like building a list in a wargame. Make sure you have a leader, a good mix of appropriate roles to challenge the party, some fodder/road block units and pay close attention to how you deploy. There I said it. Note this doesn't mean you can't roleplay, it just mean you need to treat combat like a war game, not a story.

>> No.17326562

Raging again I see. I'd like to point out that i've responded to all of those except the very last one. Second no, I'm not going to go use a whole software program to improve monsters for 4e when every other edition of D&D and almost every other tabletop RPG out there provides rules for how to do so IN THEIR BASIC HANDBOOKS. Or the methods of upgrading them are easy enough that a dunce could learn it. So what's the point of using a program to do what I should be able to do with pen and paper?

>> No.17326564


Combat is only slow when you have players who don't know the rules. Maybe 3.5 was just much slower but my group can finish a battle with 10 enemies inside of 30 minutes, in 3.5 it would be 2 hours.

>> No.17326573

Nope I am.

Also, that was a massive joke of a DMG. Its less useful tools like loot tables, random encounter tables, weather effects, ways to kit out your BBEG to make him cooler than players, just stock "how to DM" shit. Huge waste of my money. And before you ask about prereading, the only vendor had it fucking plastic wrapped.

>> No.17326581

Wanna know how to upgrade a 4e monster?

+1 to attack rolls per level increase
+1 to defenses per level increase
+1 damage on most attacks per level increase
+5-8 hp per level increase

Me, I can literally do it in my head, on the fly. And yes, these rules are IN THE BASIC HANDBOOK.

>> No.17326583


>Make sure you have a leader, a good mix of appropriate roles to challenge the party, some fodder/road block units and pay close attention to how you deploy. There I said it. Note this doesn't mean you can't roleplay, it just mean you need to treat combat like a war game, not a story.

There are to many people out there who shouldn't be playing D&D but won't learn new systems who favour more narrative story driven combat. To most people this shit needs to be explained, also most people need to learn to play games appropriate to their style.

>> No.17326585

Hm, if I decide to give 4e another go I'll keep that in mind. Granted this plays into my disliking of 4e's general feel. I prefer a game based around building a story. If I want my players to be delayed by bandits I don't feel like I should have to marshal a small military squadron. That's just me though.

>> No.17326593

Well, isn't a unit of bandits really a disorganized paramilitary group? Just throw 8 mook bandits, 2 bandit archers, and a bandit chief. BAM, done.

>> No.17326595


4e players pretending to hate 4e and play 3.5 to make the other side look bad.

3.5 players pretending to hate 3.5 and play 4e to make the other side look bad.

>> No.17326597


In other words, same as every edition war thread ever. Faggots gonna fag.

>> No.17326599


I can accept you have a different play style but in 4e you really do need to marshal a small military squadron for combat to work as intended.

>> No.17326601

Well then I learned something today and you actually successfully countered a point well. +1 Internets to you good sir.

Not that it changes my opinion of 4e at all but.

>> No.17326603


And the party will not be effectively challenged.

>> No.17326605

So a DMG that is all about how to be a good DM when you have had no experience doing so is BAD?
Do you people honestly realize how elitist you sound?

>> No.17326606

>leave nothing to your imagination

Gary Gygax is up there cursing these people.

>> No.17326615

Yes, thats a good point but if it's a bandit group why is the entire band of bandits out there with their leader? Granted a stupid bandit group would do that, so instead one can ask "Why is this bandit group so big? It takes like 4 or five guys irl to hold up a merchant.

>> No.17326619

No, I expect a "core rule book" to contain, you know, fucking rules. I cant think of a single one. Just a bunch of pussyfooting suggestions.

>> No.17326626

Core 4e DMG contained monster creation, monster altering (templates, etc.), and rules regarding encounter building, trap/hazard creation, as well as wealth dispensation.

>> No.17326627

Ok, in this I must agree with >>17326605 here. DMG stands for Dungeon Masters Guide you know, all of the things in the DMG, 3.5, 4e, 2.0/whatever all do exactly that: provide a giude on how to DM.

>> No.17326630

Look, lets be honest. If a kid needs a manual to dm he probably shouldn't be behind the screen in the first place. All I need from my dmg is stats, damage suggestions, and basic environmental rules. And most of this is on my DM Screen btw.

After that, why bother cracking it?

>> No.17326633

I've noticed that people who can't into small scale tactics flounder the hardest with 4e.
To me, a good battle should ALWAYS encompass the things a stock battle group in 4e does, unless you are trying to make a specialized encounter that requires more wits than brute force. Imo, the people who aren't good at taking a battlefield situation are poor both at running the game and playing it, even more so because 4e lacks the "here is table for everything and rules for your roleplaying" approach prior editions have, leaving it up to the DM entirely.
I prefer this approach, gives me the DM more power to run my game to my choosing without a rules lawyer trying to undermine me. Granted, it doesn't work for everyone.

>> No.17326638

That's the thing, though. D&D Used to be STORY based, not strategy-detail based.

You kids aren't playing roles anymore, you're playing video games on the table top.

>> No.17326640

> i am an elitist
And then you get stagnation, and death.

>> No.17326650

That's entirely up to the DM and the party. I've had a 4e campaign where we've gone entire sessions without fights, but the ones we've had were tactically intense and interesting. I've had 3e campaigns that have been relentless mindless dungeon crawls populated by CoDzillas.

In other words this is stupid.

>> No.17326651

I'm not an elitist, I'm just talking about a better way to do this thing called roleplaying games. Are you an elitist for espousing your views? Of course not.

>> No.17326655

Because in a group of people, there is ALWAYS an alpha, the guy that has the strength, personality and/or experience to be looked up to. He isn't wearing a hat that calls him LEADER. Hell, I prefer to disguise the archetypes, taking defenders and giving them leader properties, or strikers with controller abilities so the players can't snipe the enemy linchpin.
Because it takes more than NUMBERS to be a good GM, and not everyone already has the knowledge or experience in what makes a properly good GM due to birth or fucking osmosis you elitist cunt.

>> No.17326656

Seriously? That is such bullshit. I tremble to think of how poorly put together your games are.

Yeah you can DM like that, I used to. Then I read the DMG and got fucking leagues better. Thing of it was, I didn't even realize how poorly I had been DM until then. Some people can just DM on the fly like that as well, perhaps you are one of them and my initial statement is incorrect but to call it a pointless book is simply wrong sir.

>> No.17326662

It did live up to its main title well, Ill give it that. It did NOT live up to its subtitle, core rule book. By and large I could have bought the PHB and MM and played without the DMG. The words Core Rule Book make me think Im going to need to re3fer to it while playing, not occasionally thumb through it between games.

>> No.17326667

Yeah you're right, you're not an elitist.

You're just so fucking retarded I can't believe you remember how to breathe or know the basics of social interaction.

>> No.17326676

And before Hickman, D&D was about exploration and adventure. Not saying I like where the game has gone after Hickman, either, just grumbling the facts straight.

>> No.17326677

Oh nice, so very mature. Merry Christmas to you as well, you saint of a human being.

>> No.17326681

Seeing as it had the basic rules for monster crafting, DC checks and running skill challenges, it's pretty handy, unless you knew how to scale monsters up and down by rote or crunched out the mathematics of the system.

>> No.17326684

Hey. Hey /tg/.


Merry Christmas.

Your gift?

This thread. Deleted.

>> No.17326685

Oh calm down, I run con games and players seek me out every single year. <yawn>

What do YOU use your 'guide' for, friend?

>> No.17326700

> Same here, and I run 4e. Your point?

>> No.17326705

I don't believe in Christmas.

So joke's on you.

>> No.17326707

My point? Why my question, which you somehow overlooked.

Would you.... would you like me to retype it or can you locate it within my two sentence post? It's near the bottom.... if you want me to link it just say so!

>> No.17326712

You don't believe that Christmas exists? But son, that's fucking stupid. I think, what your ass means to say is "My lazy broke ass has no money for presents so I'm going to be a ridiculous grinch and piss all over the place in public"

>> No.17326717

See I preferred these style of play.
You sound like a friend of mine. The tables don't really tell you how to roleplay, at most they offer suggestions.
Well yes, there is always the alpha male true, but again why is he out there risking his neck? Again he could just be stupid, but that still doesn't answer why it's taking ten thugs to waylay simple merchants, most of which can't afford body guards. It's as though they are prepared to fight the players who are well equipped battle hardened heroes. Now either they are REALLY paranoid bandits or people like the players are common, which means powerful heroes are a common every day thing and that goes back into the over all feel of the game, which I don't like.

>> No.17326723

Aside from general advice, I use it for monster creation, encounter building guidelines, and determining treasure allotment. It also contains traps and environmental hazards, very nice for building fights that arent blank white fields.

And frankly, I like not needing to reference a book every 15 minutes. Lets me *run my game more*.

>> No.17326734

Oh, yeah see we just always used our imagination when writing adventures. That's cool though, enjoy your text book dude. It tells you how to do all the stuff we did for decades :)

Also, I am amazed your players stick to your linear encounter regimen. What, with the predictable loot, experience and encounter level it's hardly even scary or thrilling. But hey, graduated encounter scales are so progressive.

>> No.17326735

>The tables don't really tell you how to roleplay, at most they offer suggestions
And a whole lot of people seem to think they must be followed verbatim, none more than fledgling DMs who don't know you can disregard rules at any point.
>again why is he out there risking his neck
Because the alpha guy in the group is not necessarily the leader of this band on bandits as a whole, but the guy who is most likely to throw his muscle around.
Dude, don't you know how groups of guys work? Especially in a fight?

>> No.17326739

A guide. Duh. Am I talking to a third grader here?
Guide (noun): A mark, tab, or the like, to catch the eye and thus provide quick reference. a book, pamphlet, etc., giving information, instructions, or advice; handbook: an investment guide.

>> No.17326742

Yeah, too bad you're not creative. But hey, they even made a guide for you so that you can play to, even with the handicap!

>> No.17326750

Right, so your a grognard elitist. Glad that's been settled.
> relying on charts, stats, rules, and massive crunch
> "creative"

>> No.17326754

>get called uncreative
>call them uncreative back
>like a bitch

>> No.17326760

> also has no argument left
Looks like a Mexican standoff, boys.

>> No.17326767

I'm amazed your players stick with your bullshit.
I free-hand shit all the time but I still refer to the DMG to make sure it's run fucking right. If I throw my player into a pit of spike I want to make sure I'm dolling our proper damage and treasure as defined by the guys who spent years of hard work designing this game so that we could play it. That does not mean I follow it verbatim, if I decide that the books says a spike-pit trap does 2d6 damage is too much or not enough then I increase or decrease as necessary using logic. Not my whims as a DM. Then again I'm not a raging cunt.
I've had those players before, and eventually weened them off of it. It's like a pirate's code "more like guidelines really" but some people do not seem to understand it. And I do understand how groups work but again why is that one guy is so much more powerful? Yeah he's that particular groups lieutenant or whatever but that's just because he was assigned that by the groups leader and that's why they listen to him, it doesn't mean he gets a power boost for it.. It's story over gaming, I see where you're coming from, I do BUT we have very different styles of play.

>> No.17326780

>massive crunch
>old school gaming


>> No.17326781

I am the "gamist" of my group, and probably the "that guy" as well, since I'm the only one who clams up during the long parts that the narrativists in my group like.

What I don't understand, though, is where the hate for people who mainly enjoy the combat comes from.

Now, I don't meta-game. I make the character decisions that my Warlord would make, but I refuse to speak as my character. Instead, describing his intent and then rolling. Why this has always been regarded as a "lesser" form of gaming is beyond me.

I don't need to live vicariously as a fictional superhuman to have a good time, though I'm not such an asshole that I'll go out of my way to pity those who do.

>> No.17326790

So all monsters advance at the same rate? That's boring as hell.

>> No.17326798

Indeed I am uncreative. Yes that must be SO true because I you know, refer to guidelines for help oh yes. Never mind my settings being massive and expansive, never mind that I've redefined the games fluff so many times I've lost count, oh yeah never mind that I've enraptured players who've been at this since I was a wee babe with my characters back stories, campaign story lines and more oh yes.

>follows rules? uncreative
>claims that creativity is defined by rules rather than fluff
Honestly I don't believe a word you say when the DM's who taught me had been playing 20 years and still referred to the DMG to help them on occasion. You sir, are full of shit.

>> No.17326801

Always believe in Christmas.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.