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

/vt/ is now archived.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 96 KB, 1280x720, maxresdefault (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
76517152 No.76517152 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

What are your unpopular ttrpg opinions /tg/?

Here's mine
> Fate is overrated and not that good of a system.

>> No.76517188

"Charisma" and any related skills are often fucking trash that removes any immersion I could have with a game- fuck these autists that can't roleplay out of a paper bag and rely on their diplomancy to solve everything. Fuck these faggots that make NPCs do extremely unreasonable things because they rolled extremely high. Most of all, fuck these faggot GMs that reduce you to a drooling autistic retard in any social situation that isn't solely with the other players when you have an average score in whatever the social stat is.
inb4 "do you make the barbarian player lift a fridge?" logical fallacy

>> No.76517203 [DELETED] 

being no games and just here for the dopamine is worse than rape

>> No.76517227

I think that D&D has the potential to be turned into a well-constructed system, but never will be due to crooked priorities in the company.

>> No.76517239

Naw, you're pretty based.

It's certainly bad, as it is both an addictive habit and lowers the board quality, but it certainly isn't as bad as rape.

D&D as a bad system is a very common opinion here, one that I think is hyperbolic, but yeah I mostly agree with this. Moreso in the sense that trying to break too much from tradition will actively harm it when it is exactly what is needed.

>> No.76517275

D&D is shit, but it can be good if you use each edition for what it's actually meant for
You go through dungeons. Most of the fun comes through using items or the environment creatively, usually with death as the punishment if you fuck up. It works quite well.
It's shit, but it has the best supplements and lore that you should steal for playing literally any other system
Specifically for fucking about with the rules to make whatever build you want and work with it, that's the main thing it does well.
Combat's really good once you get to paragon tier.
They release fairly competent modules for you to play every so often. Easy pickup game to just grab and run with little effort on anyone's part.

>> No.76517279

Wizards to busy writing rules for how to change into one of the 24 genders

>> No.76517302

Tabletop games should have a concisely written set of basic gameplay mechanics to get people started.
Even if my effort in becoming a DM was somewhat lacking, I couldn't convince my friends to even try reading the 200 page "manual" for DnD.

>> No.76517308


DND is one of the worst gateways to the hobby.

Everyone should GM, not necessarily with a strict rotation but the "fetishization" of the GM, especially the one that happens in games with a prewritten plot, has a bad influence on the groups.

In general people should play differently structured games.

Call of Cthulhu is a terrible game and we should all forget about it.

>> No.76517315 [DELETED] 

>It's certainly bad, as it is both an addictive habit and lowers the board quality, but it certainly isn't as bad as rape.
there are millions of species of animal
only 1 has 'consent'
coincidentally the same stupid fucks also glom on to hobbies the don't actually participate in because they're too gay to do anything else

is it a coincidence? I don't think so.

>> No.76517405

>Call of Cthulhu is a terrible game and we should all forget about it.
I'm interested. Why do you think this?

>> No.76517409

>D&D as a bad system is a very common opinion here, one that I think is hyperbolic

I'm the kind that tries to avoid D&D as possible, but because I think it's just a specialized dungeon crawling' system marketed as the GOAT for any kind of game, and thats where the problem lies. When you try to sell a fork as an spoon, and succed into making the general conciousness believe that you are the classical and undefeated tableware maker, you get to the skub we know and loathe.

>> No.76517438

Give me some medieval fantasy alternatives, preferably simpler games with more freedom.
I can't get my friends to take up the 200 page manual for DnD.

>> No.76517460

>if I call it a fallacy then nobody can argue back!
>checkmate, atheists!

>> No.76517462

3e is balanced just fine but entitled faggots that have never been told no cannot accept that.

>> No.76517477


COC has two venues that it tries to cover.

1) Investigation

2) Lovecraft.

I don't think I have to underline how little it resembles in any form to Lovecraft's stories, but the problem is that it fails miserably at being an investigation game. You don't get a good roll? Woe is you. In practice it's a survival action game of some kind, in which being eaten alive/going insane is "fun".

This is simply a terrible design.

>> No.76517501

Dragon Age rpg, either with the setting or just the Age system. System only requires d6, and almost all rolls are 3d6. Books divided in three boxes by level range and player and dm books, pro being players having relatively little content to read to start playing, gradually increasing as they level up, and reference flyers for the trickier information, namely stunt lists, concentrations and combat options.

Also most d10 systems seem to be fairly easy to learn for new players, I have had a good amount of succeed with Yggdrasil, and Its very easy to seel fantastic-historical viking games to people.

>> No.76517504


To add, there are many "lovecraftian" games that do at least one of these just fine: Cthulhu Dark, Lovecraftesque, Trail of Cthulhu/Gumshoe.

>> No.76517518


On Mighty Thews.

>> No.76517545

Trail is based. You roll when the bad shit happens and still have resources to make the GM sweat.

>> No.76517619

I don't like Bioware and I don't like vikings, but that DA tabletop thing does sound like a good system, I doubt I'll go with that unfortunately.
This sounds like exactly the thing I need, but the player controlled lore will definitely lead to trolling and cheesing.

>> No.76517632
File: 22 KB, 411x507, dog puppy golden wink smallres.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Just homebrew D&D brah. It's easy and you can adapt it to anything.
That's my unpopular opinion

>> No.76517660


You need to select good players to have a good game.

>> No.76517665

>Just homebrew D&D brah
I don't know what you mean by that.
Like take the combat system and simplify it?

>> No.76517685

Unfortunately, I am a very anti-social person, so the friends I have are the friends I get.
Low-commitment is the way to go here.

>> No.76517689

I love exalted 3e and especially its combat system.

>> No.76517710


If you're antisocial you will never play good games (another unpopular truth). To have good games you need different circles of players.

>> No.76517736
File: 361 KB, 2000x1000, rules of nature.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It's mostly a meme. I don't want to derail the thread, but if you like or want to play D&D but don't like something about it, why not just get rid of the things you don't like? Seems simple to me.

>> No.76517739

>I don't like Bioware and I don't like vikings, but that DA tabletop thing does sound like a good system, I doubt I'll go with that unfortunately.

I recommended both mostly because they only require one kind of dice and are very systematic on the rollings, while being competent systems. In my opinion the more streamlined the system, the better. Math beyond simple adds and substracts hinders the flow of the game, specially now since the time of most players being STEM nerds is gone for good.

>> No.76517748

I was always creative and good at being objective, if I'm a good DM who cares whether I have access to 5 people or 50 people?

>> No.76517757

>the time of most players being STEM nerds is gone for good
Really? Why is that the case?

>> No.76517776

Because DnD 5e scared them away

>> No.76517777

I thought it would be very arrogant to change up rules in a game I am not familiar with on a deep level.
I will keep this option in mind.

>> No.76517782

The whole thing should be referee facing, players don't get to see or roll any numbers, their version of the game is entirely impressionable, such as it is in reality. As in, you have the impression that you are intelligent because you are smarter than your peers, not that your intelligence is 4 points higher.

>> No.76517786

What about 5e makes 'STEM nerds' unhappy?

>> No.76517807

>You don't get a good roll? Woe is you
Surely that's down to your characters skill level? A high skill means you mostly pass. And the system has a few mechanisms to make things harder and easier depending on the specific situation.

Beyond that, 'you might fail a roll and mess with things' is a more or less universal RPG issue.

Investigation is more or less down to the GM's ability to create an interesting environment and mystery. That's a lot harder than combat based encounters, but the GM's I've had for it (well, 2/3 anyway) have been goddamn superb at that side of things, and it's firmly cemented CoC as one of my favourites.

>> No.76517817


STEM nerds are fine with it. 3.5 grogs, on the other hand..

>> No.76517826


Because the rest of the world discovered RPGs. Nerd culture assimilated into mainstream society, and the old image of the anti-social bearded STEM nerd is a bit archaic.

>> No.76517832

In my experience the mainstreaming of nerd culture has diluted a lot of the playerbase, and even if it goes back to a dedicated playerbase when it stops being trendy it will never be the same as before due to the expansion to other backgrounds. Granted, I have always mainly played with history nerd players (which I think are more based than STEM players), but we were kind of the weird ones in our circles. Now we are just another flavor of the potluck, which I think is a good thing, but it is creating a increasing demand for simpler systems (not that its bad).

>> No.76517836

just get them to use a simpler 40 page system like stay frosty

>> No.76517863

>expecting people to read anything D&D

>> No.76517865

It's not unpopular here but I fucking despise the 'nat 20 means i become god' concept with a burning passion. You cut the orc's head off with a perfect swing, leaving it completely undamaged and frozen in a glare of disbelief, you don't launch it into orbit and explode the body into gibs.

Most of them do, the 200 pages are 90% character creation shit that you only need piecemeal. Search '<whatever system> quick start/basic rules/lite' etc and there'll be a pdf someone made. Worst case just make them roll dice and make up the rules based on the numbers and what you think of their character. As long as you understand whatever bastard ruleset you invented, you can wing it.

>> No.76517889

Will look into that, thanks.

>> No.76517907


You already exposed the problem: you're not gonna try other games and have other experiences.

Also, being a forever DM is bad, bad, bad.

>> No.76517914

Railroading isn't always bad.

The obsessive desire to simplify and streamline is making games mechanically shallow and repetitive to play. This is fine for casual players but it's sad to see for experienced players. 3.5 and GURPS are still the peak of this hobby.

>> No.76517925


Yes. And this leads to stopping investigations.

Which is bad.

The GM fumbling is always bullshit. Imagine applying that idea to board games or sports, we'd rightly call them unplayable.

>> No.76517948


No it doesn't? It just means that a single small element of the investigation is derailed. You try something else. It doesn't stop things no more than a single failed roll can stop any PC venture.

And I'm not talking about fumbling, I'm talking about the GM actually having their shit together. Real life, and good investigation games, are not a series of single buttons and levers you need to pull in sequence.

If you fuck up the pick locks check, you come back with a sledgehammer, or bribe the guard, or sneak in through a side window, or through the roof.

>> No.76517955

Yeah let's just drop the whole this and that are the problems thing.
I am interested, what are the reasons being a forever DM is so bad? I lack the perspective to imagine some as a newbie.

>> No.76517976


Nope, if can fail more and end up in a closed road.

As I said, bad.Investigation should be based on the players' deduction.


You'll never grok the whole experience.

>> No.76517978

To add on the stay frosty thing, When I went through the ruleset to make a character for the chex quest campaign we were doing it only took me five to ten minutes to go through the thing and make a character half of which was spent on me being indecisive if I wanted a tank or not they would have to have unironic brain damage to be intimidated by that system

>> No.76517979

I think any game hits diminishing returns on complexity once the GM can no longer hold the important rules in his head.

5e was a big RETVRN to mechanical simplicity, but with lots of player options that are basically cosmetic. Give the kids a toy steering wheel so they can pretend they're driving.

>> No.76518001

>Nope, if can fail more and end up in a closed road.
Literally the same as any other system. Player systemic or logical failures aren't an obstacle to any game.

>Investigation should be based on the players' deduction.
Yeah, and how do they get the information with which to deduce? They play the game, they make the checks, they attempt the things and succeed or fail, and face the consequences. Like I said, the GM needs to have their shit together as far as playing a non DnD style game is concerned, but that's not exactly a rare quality from my PoV. Same as any RPG in any system with more or less any given challenge.

>> No.76518003

Dm screens are a must. The DM has the duty to make the game as fun and compelling as possible, fudging rolls as necessary. Dice are there to add randomness to the game, or at least the belief of randomness. If a roll threatens the coherency of the scene, just make up the result. Dms that always roll in the open are removing the narrative depth of the game, reducing it to little more than a sandbox.

>> No.76518004

>3.5 and GURPS are still the peak of this hobby

>> No.76518007

>You'll never grok the whole experience.
Can I play a little solo if I have no GMs available other than myself? Wouldn't that do it?

>> No.76518032

Reaction tables are based though and more games should use them. Real people do act VASTLY differently to someone with high charisma than someone with very low before getting to know them.

>> No.76518044 [SPOILER] 
File: 70 KB, 439x595, 1608294720044.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>everyone has an initial reaction to you that is modified by your attractiveness stat
>this is modified by the racism chart

>> No.76518057

If you have no other GMs groom one. Find a ip they like, help them get the tools to run it, and make a support character both to other players and the GM in their first games. If it sticks the rest is gravy.

>> No.76518058


No. Zero and low-prep games don't. Anyway the problem here is not the same of entering the dungeon room with the final boss without having all the resources, so to speak: it's basically a random chance of stalling the story.

>Yeah, and how do they get the information with which to deduce?

In COC unofortunately totally randomly. In other games, not so much.



>> No.76518105

>No. Zero and low-prep games don't.
Sure they do. My first CoC campaign was done out of a book, and the GM being halfway competent, it all went very smoothly. My first real 'investigation' style game, as it happened, it was great fun.

>it's basically a random chance of stalling the story.
That's what I'm saying, I think it's pretty rare for that single chance to actually come up. I can't remember it ever happening in our games. We either passed, or we worked around things. Sometimes there were things we didn't access, but it's like, I guess you could say 'you've got 5 checks, pass at least 2, but try for 5 because it'll help'. Only they're like, scenes/story beats. You were able to find the old case notes, but the witness stonewalled you so you went in without decent warning. You snuck into the cult hideout, but raised the alarm before you got all the way in. You dodged the telekinetically flung table, but got stabbed in the guts by the telekinetically weilded knife.

Competent GMing in this case, is NOT setting the game up like some sort of fucked up Lucasarts style adventure. You need some complexity, and sophistication, and a certain ability to work well with simple everyday settings. Small details can matter, here.

>> No.76518106
File: 1.43 MB, 720x720, I'm grooOOOOMING.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.76518129

Even if you are making fun of my choice of words, I'm thankful to you for sharing that gif. It made my day. Cheers, anon.

>> No.76518147


Even if they're say three wasy to get the info it's still a very real problem.

And it's interesting your examples are action-y and not really sherlock holmes style, as they should be most of the times.

Fumbling is not a solution, it's just pointing out to unworkable flaws in the game.

>> No.76518171

yeah thing that makes my cringe about charisma is apparently being likeable just makes all social faux pas non punishing, different cultures have different social rules, especially in a non globalist world, and what works in the tavern might not endear you to the lord of the land.

>> No.76518180

>it's still a very real problem.
It's a 'problem', but not a particularly real one. No more than a DnD party TKPing to a bunch of bad combat rolls or something. Failure is a possibility, either on a large scale or a small one. That's not a fail state for a game.
Can you explain what you mean by this? Because I don't feel like I'm referring to anything other than elementary GM ability to operate an RPG like an RPG, not a computer game.

>> No.76518181

the system doesn't really matter that much in the end

>> No.76518222

That is why there should be a bunch of skills depending of charisma. Etiquette, carousing, [foreign culture] mannerisms... Charismatics characters should be a whole build, not just a high stat.

>> No.76518231

yeah I can rock with that, like in vtm there is an etiquette stat, specific knowledges, etc

>> No.76518260

I did manage to make my players (around 100) to read my 200 pages book everytime. How ? well first it's not DnD and second it's actually interesting without shitwall texts except where it's excepted to be.

>> No.76518276


Barring the issues you usually get with overly granular skill systems, of course.

>> No.76518284

That makes at least two of us.

Here's mine: I like the Shadowrun setting precisely because it combines scifi with fantasy.

>> No.76518299

Legit good game, and for once, magic is superior to technology.

>> No.76518309

Steampunk is perfect and I love it and I want all my games to be Steampunk

>> No.76518325

Of course, but that is the job to the rulemaker to develop a good synergy between skills and attributes. There is a big difference between being an agreeable guy and a proffesional diplomat or conman, the same way that is not the same being a burly guy and a trained brawler.

>> No.76518352


Personally I think the magic and fantasy blend very easily into the more traditional cyberpunk elements. Thematically they're a great vessel.

>> No.76518561
File: 296 KB, 529x720, Confusion.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Unpopular opinion
>Makes statement about something that's generally agreed upon

>> No.76518598

>I don't think I have to underline how little it resembles in any form to Lovecraft's stories
Um... third of them are about investigation? Have you bothered to read them all, or just the handful of the most famous ones (where the ratio still sticks, and even goes to 50:50)?

>> No.76518613

Also, go play Paranoia. I'm unironically curious what would you think about that game, given its goals and gameplay, along with group interaction.
Because as of now, I'm having the standard "DnDrone out of his comfort zone screetching at things that aren't like modern DnD"

>> No.76518664
File: 1.70 MB, 320x256, o.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

If one is playing or running a fantasy game, or even a mundane one set in fictional world, they should NEVER use any sort of "historical" or "real life" comparisons. Ever. It's a fucking made-up world, it can be whatever the fuck you need it for the sake of the game/plot/group, why would you then drag it down with your misplaced realism?

>Last game
>Action takes place in a desert in a space opera game
>Player and GM end up arguing for half hour about validity of Turkmen references
>Meanwhile me, doing pic related

>> No.76518732

Shadowrun is a system and setting that exist solely because it groomed over the decades a bunch of autistic half-wits to keep playing it and keep making it worse with each edition and expansion. The game is so bad and so poorly managed as a copyright entity, it makes D&D look good by comparison.

>> No.76518773

So, you've never actually read the rulebook, or any scenarios, or play CoC, and are just talking out your ass? Cool.

>> No.76519092

>> Fate is overrated and not that good of a system.
That's not an unpopular opinion; that's the agreed consensus.

>> No.76519323

>It's agreed upon that Fate is overrated
>Meaning that most people know its true worth
>Meaning that most are actually rating it well
>Making it not overrated
>Meaning the consesus is wrong
>Making the game underrated

My head hurts

>> No.76519518

I'm positive about 95% of games played by people have never turned into the absolute state of any of the /pol/ faggorty (trans, blm, lgbt, feminism) arguments that occur on /tg/.

The remaining 5% are about arguing about how shit the rules and are why a new system should be used.

>> No.76519552

>newbies and non-nerds entering the hobby is a good thing

>> No.76519613

I live in a deep blue state with a very, very red rural population in the particular pocket I've found my players in. It is entirely common to see neighbors having conflicts over who's polar-opposite sign is going to be the most prominent. I've played with people who look the stereotype of whatever modern political faction you want to consider, played with groups where I actively dislike every single belief the players at the table have in relation to Current Events, and have had more than my fair share of groups where very different people have sat down to play together.

I can't say you're right, but I can say my anecdotal evidence agrees with you.

>> No.76519651

I've read your posts and concluded that you have probably played one bad session of CoC and now you're eternally butthurt at a system that works perfectly well.

>> No.76520003

Animal companions are fucking gay unless it's an animal you would actually have in real life.
>Pets (dogs, cats, birds, rodents, etc.)
>Hunting companions (hound, falcon, hawk, etc.)
>Riding animal (horse, camel, mule, etc.)
are all acceptable. But people always come in like
>dohoho this is Sprinkles the Pocket Dragon, she burps little puffs of purple smoke that smell like gumdrops and hides in my pocket like a heckin smol bean
>LOL this is Chumble McWumble the bear, he's a big cuddly flump who likes his snoot booped, but don't make him le angry! >:3
>haha my druid rides on a badger he enchanted to be giant and also talk in a British accent, his name is Sir Reginald Badgerton and he wears a dapper top hat and monocle

That shit is gay as fuck and unless you're playing an outright comedic game where everything is fucking stupid and goofy by design it shouldn't be allowed. If everyone else at the table is taking the characters and setting and story even remotely seriously, but you show up with a pet Walrus named Big Chungus, you're an asshole and so is the DM for not telling you no.

>> No.76520049

I don't see what's wrong with such exotic pets as long as they aren't unrealistically intelligent, like that badger.

>> No.76520086

>not keeping the rolls honest, but improvising interesting reasons why rolls failed/succeeded and introducing new elements on the fly to keep things exciting and challenging

>> No.76520125

Sounds like you need better friends.

>> No.76520155

Except most people would not just up and read a 200 page manual for something they have 0 investment in.
Most of the time newbies don't know shit and the DM carries their first playthrough.

>> No.76520189

The big issue is tonal consistency.
Okay yeah the rules say you, as a Druid, can have an animal companion. And say you come from the frozen north, so you ride around on a polar bear.
This can be fine, so long as you and the DM play it appropriately. How does the polar bear function if you're adventuring in a desert biome? Do shopkeepers or townsfolk react at all to a fucking bear walking around sniffing at things?
If you have a bear that may as well be a puppy outside of combat, that's both lazy and immersion-breaking, because it's a fucking bear. If you want a dog that's simple, but bears are complicated, that's why you don't often see people walking around with them. If you want something special you've gotta put in the work.

And even if you account for all those things to make your polar bear work, it still shouldn't be named Keanu Reeves.

>> No.76520211

So it's all in the execution, and you're just irritated that people keep making throwaway mascot anime characters instead of real pets?

>> No.76520236

Magic is way weaker than martials. Every fucking time a thread on this board pops up about how op casters are and then when you talk them into elaborating they spit out "w-well you're right martials deal double the damage casters could ever do b-buh they are good out of combat" oh wow they're useless in half the fucking game and in the other half they can blow their limited resources to do the same thing anyone else could do with a skill check, so good.

On its face, especially in d&d magic is awful, underpowered and by the RAW boring as piss. You really have to stretch the rules and essentially dickride your dm in order to contrive the scenarios and light rule breaks required to make magic good, which of course requires you to go through the trouble of doing something extremely convoluted when your fighter or paladin could've just killed the boss already

>> No.76520288

>lvl 5 Fighter
>Gets 2 attacks at 2d6 dmg to one target
>If lucky can attack 2 targets
>lvl 5 Wizard
>8d6 dmg to an entire room, obliterating every goblin and their entire family in one go

>> No.76520314

>nooooo you can't have a pseudodragon despite warlocks literally having a pact feature to explicitly allow this
Just how stupid are you? Imagine trying to enforce low fantasy mentality on a high fantasy game
>B-buh polar bear
Everybody uses magic, people can fucking teleport, dnd is not 1700s england where travel is restricted to fucking multi year boat rides. You can instantly cross vast distances magically, it's in fact fucking stupid to assume people would be surprised by an animal like a polar bear at all, especially because familiars are common and familiars are already shape shifting spirits

>> No.76520364

>weapons are d8 on fighter or s10
Already lying to complain about magic I see. Anyway the existence of superiority dice already guarantees higher damage than the wizard who can only cast that fireball once because now he has no third level slot, we could also go into all the damage bonuses for each fighter archetype or gwm but I won't bother since you already know you're lying and pretending wizards are actually good in combat or that fire, the most resisted damage type in the game is actually useful

>> No.76520403
File: 28 KB, 720x221, Greatsword 5e.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.76520440

If someone has a dog or a bird, I'm in from the start. Shows they aren't bending over backwards to give themselves something wacky or unique, this is likely a laid-back player who will be a reliable team member. Maybe not, but it's not a red flag.
If someone says they have a wolverine (which functions identically to a dog but it's a quirkier animal) or a cat (but it has batwings and flaps around like a mini Toothless from How To Train Your Dragon and they describe it comedically reacting to everything that happens in great detail by halting the game to play HtTYD memes clips and going "that's him right now") then I need to be won over and convinced this isn't going to be annoying. I've had unorthodox animal companions turn out fine or even great, but it's that initial mindset of "how can I make my character more aesthetically special than a common person" that is often a red flag.

There's a character in my current campaign who has a little skeleton cat that runs around. But it acts just like a normal cat, doesn't have a stupid name, and his character's culture revolves around honoring the dead and performing necromancy as funerary rights. So it doesn't really stand out in an obnoxious way, he didn't give himself this cat so he'd have a shiny toy to add to his HeroForge mini, it blends in with the setting and adds more depth to his character. Bonus, it's insanely useful in gameplay, as he can have it deliver healing items and scout ahead for better visibility.
But if the cat was named "Spoopy McSkeletonpants", had no connection to his character's backstory or culture, and was just an excuse to make skeleton puns, it would clash really badly with the more serious elements of the story and serve no purpose beyond being annoying. A lot of unorthodox animal companions have that kind of theater kid "look at me" energy.

>> No.76520474

Yeah, he can cast that spell and do 8d6 damage... once.

Then he has 5-7 more fights to get through without it. So while he did a great job in cleaning up that one group, or its weaker members at least, he's now diminished until he can recharge. The fighter can do his damage all day long, with each swing just as strong as the one before it.

People that complain 5e didn't help with caster supremacy only do one fight a day that lets the casters blow every spell they have as quick as they can. By the time they set up camp, a group should have faced at least 6 deadly encounters or 10 hard ones, as the game should be, and then people will stop whining that casters are too powerful.

>> No.76520483

This is weapons grade copium

>> No.76520510

>"if you try to bring goofy high fantasy shit into a low fantasy setting you're a gay prick"

>> No.76520518

DMs who don't lie to their players are weak and are generally shit

>> No.76520558

Lying is fine so long as you're honest about it. Lying by omission or being intentionally vague or misleading is fine. Pulling a Heavy Rain to preserve a twist is a cope for bad DMs.

>> No.76520561

> 6 deadly encounters or 10 hard ones, as the game should be

Shit, that's more encounters than I give them per 4 sessions.
Combat in d&d is so tediously slow I can't stand more than 3 encounters per session max.

>> No.76520585

That's right dungeons and dragons is high fantasy, if you want to be an incel and play an incel game go ahead but dnd is not it. Especially when you're telling players they can't have pets that the RAW explicitly gives to them lmao

>> No.76520594

D&D 5e and Forgotten Realms are actually the best rpg system and setting.

>> No.76520613

(you) need to go back

>> No.76520634

Yeah you're no visionary. Fate and GURPS are mediocre at best. Not even savage worlds levels

>> No.76520682
File: 2.97 MB, 500x640, 1577637526202.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

90% of players are dogshit at roleplay and the vast majority of the time you're better off playing a game that has zero roleplay in it, like boardgames or wargames.

>> No.76520701

Then don't complain about the casters being stronger than the martials.

And why the fuck is it slow? Are you a bunch of tards that have to redo all your math every time you pick up a die instead of having it already written down like someone with at least two braincells?

>> No.76520852

Just how bad are you at casters???? Wtf?

>> No.76520855

I enjoy playing Pathfinder

>> No.76520892

DnD is good, actually. Which is why 90% of /tg/ still plays it exclusively despite trashing it all the time.

>> No.76520903

The game itself even tells you and encourages you to make your own rules if your group doesn't like something. Most tabletop games are just frameworks of rules for your games, but they are games of imagination and you can bend, break, and create anew as much as you want to best suite your story and your groups need.

This goes for a TTRPGs not just dnd. I like fantasy craft for example but dont ever use the fame/renown system in it

>> No.76520919

Totally right. Also, fuck Fred Hicks. I'm glad I pissed him off once.

>> No.76520943

encounters take like 10 minutes wtf is wrong with you

>> No.76520951

take your own advice, nogames

>> No.76520963

The way you describe these pets destroy your argument. Your first part is no soul, the second part is SOUL.

>> No.76520967

casters are simply bad mathematically

>> No.76521007

Have you tried casting Heat Metal

>> No.76521038

Charisma as a stat is good. Having skills like "diplomacy" and "disable device" is cancer, though.

>> No.76521061

>have you tried casting *spell that is useless against non humanoids*

>> No.76521063

Magic in 5E is now just one tool in a party's repertoire, instead of 3.5's universal 'I win' button.

Thanks to the loss of buff stacking, no longer able to fish for overpowered summons that can invalidate entire classes, and the bounded accuracy, magic can no longer dominate the game.

Where it still shines is in versatility and utility. A wizard is still capable of contributing in far more areas than a martial, but they can no longer do everything at once nor can they do better than a specialist in their niche.

>> No.76521093

Aren't all martials humanoids..?

>> No.76521108

casters are good at cc
martials are better at damage, it's that simple
you aren't fighting other players in an rpg are you anon? no, you're all fighting the iron golem

>> No.76521126

Not him, but there is difference between a TPK and failed investigation though. A stalled investigation leaves the party spinning in place with no clear (or in some cases ANY) way forward. Of course they can always just abandon the investigation, suffering the appropriate SAN loss from fucking up. As for fumbling or fudging or failing forward, which I believe is what he means it comes down to the age old question: If the GM will make it so we succeed no matter what, why bother rolling dice?
I am at least of the opinion that if a piece of information is mandatory to succeed it should be presented without a roll. What the players deduce from that or choose to do with it is another matter.

>> No.76521129

>Ivory tower game design
>Balanced just fine
Pick one and only one.

>> No.76521138

Bards shouldn't exist.
Ability points shouldn't change after character creation.
Cantrips were a mistake.

>> No.76521148

As it should be, each side has their role.

>> No.76521156

>Ability points shouldn't change after character creation

>> No.76521163

Five Torches Deep
Old-School Essentials
Mork Borg
Sharp Swords and Sinister Spells
Shadow of the Demon Lord
Forbidden Lands

>> No.76521178

why can't martials parry spells with their sword like the witcher

>> No.76521196

It's cause a lot of builds are at the least somewhat unoptimal which isn't going to get you killed. In 3.5 having an unoptimal build could be the difference between life and death so the game became more about chargen system mastery then actually playing the game since you had to squeeze as much optimization out of your build. Pathfinder exasperated this to the point suboptimal was a literal death sentence and you were expected to make a min-maxed character.

>> No.76521309

Currently in 2 campaigns and DMing one of my own.
I'll give you an upvote for effort.

>> No.76521331

out of interest, what percentage of your average session is combat

>> No.76521355

>currently in no games and lying about it on a mongolian basket weaving forum

>> No.76521366

we do 8 encounters a day so the vast majority

>> No.76521498

Can you stop sucking so much dick? It's embarrassing.

>> No.76521520

once again, take your own advice, we get it, you don't play the game, now stop shitting up the thread

>> No.76521550

A. I'm not him. B. The "no game" argument is the biggest cope on this board and only weenies spam it. It's pathetic.
>Oh yeah? Well YOU have no game!
I'm preparing for tomorrow's session as I type this.

>> No.76521567

>I-I'm not him!!!
lol why do people try to pull this shit, who do you think you're fooling

>> No.76521594

I don't need to fool you when you're so stupid that you're fooling yourself. Now can you attack my argument instead of running in circles like a spastic?

>> No.76521636

In reality, being attractive can make up for a lot of social ineptitude. This isn't just some incel rant -- I've got away with a lot because of my looks, and I've also seen people act very differently to me since I grew my hair and beard. Also, tall CEOs, women with rape fantasies but only if the guy's hot, attractive people more often seen as good intentioned &ccc. Also, people with brain damage that causes them understand what's being said but not the way it's said hated Raegan, but people who only pick up on the tone and not the content loved him (as a politician).
So charisma is whatever Raegan had -- it lets you succeed in spite of what you're actually saying.

>> No.76521646

>Also, fuck Fred Hicks. I'm glad I pissed him off once.
I'd like to hear more about this, please.

>> No.76521651

>more bait

>> No.76521703

Did it really take you more than a minute to barf up that vomit of a post?

>> No.76521719

>I don't think I have to underline how little it resembles in any form to Lovecraft's stories
I think you do.

>> No.76521817

>Leddit maymays is SOUL

>> No.76521861

>still baiting
this is just sad

>> No.76521910

My unpopular /tg/ opinion is that underage reddit refugees need to go back and stop shitting up our hobby

>> No.76521927 [DELETED] 

He isn't lmao>>76521703

>> No.76521956

so then when are you going back, faggot?

>> No.76522139

This is a cool concept honestly. Would be neat if it was a skill or dependent on a certain type of metal.

>> No.76522159

>Bards shouldn't exist.
>Cantrips were a mistake.
Curious about these two

>> No.76522303

You think there are only 24 genders? You Nazi.

>> No.76522344

So I can have a le ebin maymay animal companion as long as I have a sufficiently serious backstory to justify it?

Because I had one of those.

>> No.76522346

>a specialized dungeon crawling' system
but fivee barely has any crawling rules tho

>> No.76522477

>Bards shouldn't exist.
I just find bards unfitting to the context of most adventures... I know I'm a boring fuck, but really, you're gonna bring a guitar in the dungeon?
When bards are experts of culture rather that musicians and morale boosters, then I find that role can be covered just as well by wizards.
So yeah, most of the times, I don't see their necessity.

>Cantrips were a mistake.
Referring here to 5E cantrips, or more generally, the videogamey tendency of some modern systems to have spellcasters emit blasts of magical energy every fucking round. In my opinion, it completly breaks immersion, and it makes magic mundane and common. And we're supposed to believe a medieval society can function where a subset of the population can just shoot firebolts and spray poison at will? And it doesn't show on people's face whether or not they can do this?

>> No.76522597

Are you an asshole about it?
Cause that's really the core of what I'm saying. It's not so much about having a weird animal as it is respecting your DM enough to not introduce stuff that clashes tonally with the setting and respecting your fellow players to not constantly try steal the spotlight with a funny animal.

>> No.76522659

Those are reasonable. I love my cantrips but I get what you're saying.

And same for bards desu. It's one thing if it's an enchanted instrument or if they're explicitly magical (just musically inclined), but the literal mundane "you play the trumpet so well anyone who hears it can be stabbed an extra time" is kinda lame.

>> No.76522682

GURPS is in fact not burps, but a good system toolbox if you're willing to put in a little legwork as a GM.

>> No.76522835

Most games do have a quickstart guide usually. Literally play almost anything other than D&D and it will often have one.

>> No.76522890

I am probably the asshole, then.
It was a giant (read: boar sized) cockroach named Horse. I made it because the party needed a frontline flank buddy and giant roaches have crazy AC/HP in Pathfinder, though their damage is awful. I named it Horse purely for the memes because Geralt of Rivia from The Witcher has a horse named Roach. It never came up in play because I was only guesting in the group for a quest, but I did have a thorough backstory for it.

>> No.76522935
File: 209 KB, 1280x720, 67660CB6-12C4-4B97-BEA2-85B9369D3304.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>LOL this is Chumble McWumble the bear, he's a big cuddly flump who likes his snoot booped, but don't make him le angry! >:3
Shut the fuck up, nigger. I love these fat fucks

>> No.76523196

GMing should be actively discouraged. Only certain people should GM: the rest aren't suited to it and just make boring games and/or burn out quick.

Solo/solitaire gaming should be the main focus of RPGs: it removes the problem of needing to find other people who want to play the same game.

>> No.76523205

>In COC unofortunately totally randomly.
please read the book before attempting to play a game.

>> No.76523234

>and we're supposed to believe a society can just function where a subset of the population can whip out a gun at will and gun people down? And it doesn't show on people's face whether or not they can do it?

>> No.76523398

You're a brainlet, and you play with other brainlets.

>> No.76523401

That doesn't sound that terrible, desu. I can think of a lot worse things than a giant bug. Especially if it fit your character's aesthetic and ESPECIALLY if you're just a guest character. The name works because it's not like someone who doesn't pick up the reference would be like "what the fuck is that supposed to mean".

I'm more talking about stuff like that infamous screencap where that Twitter girl joined the session her dad was running for his friends. They were all 50-something grown men with relatively serious characters and in comes the DM's daughter with a tiefling literally named like Flappy McBurgerpants or something and every discussion is now about gender roles. Animal companions aren't even the issue so much as it is people who can't read a room and insist on dominating the focus of the table.

There's having a giant roach in a European fantasy setting with a subtle Witcher reference for a name, and there's having a giant roach in a European fantasy setting who is named "La Cucaroacha" and he has a big cartoon mustache and sombrero and plays a different mariachi instrument with each set of legs and also he only eats tacos so I'm gonna take the next 20 minutes to scour the marketplace for taco ingredients just for the sake of maintaining this joke.

>> No.76523423

>studying magic should be as simple and mundane as pulling a trigger
I get what you're saying and you're almost right but come on

>> No.76523685

hey, operating a car would be like learning magic to a medieval pleb, magic really isn't that different, low level magic IS mundane and a stand-in for technology
it's high level magic that's rare and why its' limited to slots

>> No.76523906

If you can't separate the player from the character, that's your own fault.

>> No.76523966

>stop repeating bullshit you read in an e-article by faggots for faggots as if it does anything other than mark you as a faggot
pick my cock and suck it

>> No.76524020

That's just a normal opinion,

>> No.76524034

This would explain the popularity of DnD.

>> No.76524046

No, not really. A medieval pleb still knew how to operate a number of technological devices, including guns, and how to build wells and whatnot. And shooting a ray of freeze from your palm is still beyond any technology from today.

>> No.76524060

The best tabletop experience is with one GM and one player.

>> No.76524147

>I am retarded

>> No.76524152
File: 622 KB, 1000x563, 1601546618705.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Call of Cthulhu is a terrible game and we should all forget about it.

>> No.76524183

>I am retarded

>> No.76524202

At least you admit it, but that's besides the point

>> No.76524225
File: 59 KB, 940x627, 1422720527158.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Gatekeeping is bad, and people who REEE about it being necessary are missing the bigger picture. The hobby doesn't need gatekeeping, it needs containment.

Gatekeeping stops new blood from entering the hobby and eventually causes it to become stagnant and die. New blood is essential to have the hobby thriving, evolving and developing. It keeps the companies that make your tg crack of choice in business.

With containment the objectionable parts of the hobby are kept in isolation from the bulk of the hobby, meaning you get all of the benefits (new people), but they don't wreck anything because they're stuck in their little circle jerks with others of their kind. You know how powergaming faggots always end up playing against each other as the community as a whole refuses to play then? It's like that.

>> No.76524269

If by "technological devices" you mean simple machines (as a type of machine, rather than the complexity of it as such), aka the only machines viable, then you are self-defeating your own point.

>> No.76524280
File: 42 KB, 427x515, 1528980300709.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>No, not really. A medieval pleb still knew how to operate a number of technological devices, including guns, and how to build wells and whatnot. And shooting a ray of freeze from your palm is still beyond any technology from today.

>> No.76524299

So what you're actually telling me is that both of you are stupider than medieval plebs

>> No.76524300

What happend to his eye?

>> No.76524308

I enjoy sci-fi RPGs more than Fantasy RPGs.
I just wish there was a good popular system for it. No one around me wants to play shadowrun, GURPS, any of the star wars or 40k systems, or Starfinder.

>> No.76524322
File: 74 KB, 1024x595, 1510070487850.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.76524333

Neither of those, but here is something to consider for at least a second:
In my native, there is a specific job, that roughtly translates to "well digger". And it doesn't mean "unqualified labourer that simply digs holes to get to water", but "a qualified specialist to build a functional well that won't end up contaminated or simply collapse due to erosion". They even had their guilds.
So here goes your "pleb knew how to build wells and whatnot".
Pleb by default knows nothing, medieval or not, you fucking moron.

>> No.76524348

A medieval serf knew more than you do right now you mongoloid

>> No.76524351

reminder that the internet canonically exists in dnd it's just magic, literally the forgotten realms is just the 1920s with magic instead of technology

>> No.76524378

I'd only call 3e balanced if your group has a concrete foundation (and I mean actual knowledge of what does and doesn't break the system) and do not intentionally try to destroy the game
It's the idea of having a massive playground and a massive set of toys that you can use that always brings me back to 3.5

>> No.76524395

>mfw I'm a pharmacist from farmer family
I sincerely doubt your claim, moron, since it would imply bounds and leaps to common knowledge, not just today, but centuries ago.

>> No.76524426

A medieval serf (note the use of word serf, not freeman) couldn't read.
That by default makes your statement false.

>> No.76524756
File: 115 KB, 768x960, 1575961436383.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Confusing /tg/ and wasteful past-times as knowledge
>Confusing accumulated knowledge that one possesses but does not act upon as benefical and superior.
>Actually believing the "masses are illiterate" meme of the victorian era.
>Failing to realize they are the first generation in history that doesn't rely on memorizing facts.
>Failing to check their own hubris.

This would be a bad time to remind everyone that books were expensive, and the masses used carved runes, stone stacking, paint and knotted ropes to convey information, most of which were lost to us with Gutenburg huh?

>> No.76525370

>Rules heavy systems and lots of rolls discourage roleplay and slow down the pace of the game.
>Less crunchy and rules light systems encourage character interaction and roleplay, without falling prey to the bullshit of freeform. Rules light is the perfect way to run a game.

>> No.76525485

People bitching about weebs, weebshit, anime, etc. at the table are invariably more insufferable and easy removes than actual 2006-era weeaboos. I would take a full playgroup of actual Inuyasha LARPers in cosplay eating pocky and talking about their gay ship or whatever faggotry they get into over literally one person who feels the need to interject every four minutes with his highly original "take" on katanas beings hit weapons or how X is vaguely similar to anime and therefore extremely gay and how he'd prefer if it wasn't in the setting at all, or the absolute worst being actively antagonizing others at the table for being weebs completely ooc and making personal issues for everybody over it.

>> No.76526135

a) I wasn't the one you responded to.
b) even the most basic combats take hours. Usually it's because people don't think about their turn, their character or need to look up spells and their effects or just look up rules, etc...
Most combat encounters take about an hour minimum.

>> No.76527354
File: 242 KB, 1000x1294, ecology_deathknight.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Death Knight should be a player class.

>> No.76528065


>> No.76528189
File: 68 KB, 1200x630, Little Big Shrug.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Not him, but why not?

>> No.76528221

Death Knights are antagonists.

>> No.76528253

Parties can be evil. This is a roleplaying game after all.

>> No.76528281

You are going to play a Dork Knight.

>> No.76528839

>Ability points shouldn't change after character creation

Care to expand on that? Not shitting on you, just curious.

>> No.76528859

Completely based. Let the tards have their own circles and have fun, have your own circle and have fun in that. Even if companies pander to one of the groups you don't like, the best thing about RPGs is that the rulebooks are just a suggestion and anything can be easily ignored.

>> No.76528899
File: 10 KB, 272x185, 1602519501780.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


ERP made me a better roleplayer.

>> No.76528995

Well explained, anon. I personally don't mind bards in a more light-hearted game. As for cantrips, I completely agree. In general I hate how everyone and their grandma has some sort of magic. Makes it feel a lot less special.

>> No.76529331

Then play FATAL.
Go on. We'll wait.

>> No.76529366

Anon, are you okay? Did you have a stroke and forget out to write?
But in all seriousness, that comes from over a decade of first hand experience with 3.pf.

>> No.76529388

Honestly this. Especially if you go the route of RPG+ERP with a solid DM who knows their stuff you'll come out the other side with a keener understanding of interactions and descriptive narrative writing.

>> No.76529408

>Fate is overrated and not that good of a system.
That’s not an unpopular opinion.

>> No.76529963


The weird thing is, it vastly improved my male characters by getting me out of the habit of making generic shonen protagonists because I found that wasn't what people wanted.

>> No.76530141

5e is at best a lateral from 3rd, an improvement from 4, but still inferior to 1 and 2ed.

>> No.76530165

Making /qst/ a separate board was a huge blow to /tg/'s creativity that it'll likely never recover from

>> No.76530303


This and generals, plus jannies banning anything remotely provocative or critical.

>> No.76530325

I would agree that FATE is pretty weak from my experience, but maybe it was just the campaign I played. But here's your skub:

>'canon' settings in games only matter if the game is designed around one in particular, like the 40k RPGs
>90% of dumb RPG hypotheticals are solved in ten seconds by the GM (or players in some cases) saying "no that's retarded"
>Every edition of D&D except 3.pf is playable at worst with minimal homebrew or 'system mastery'
>'system mastery' is all 3.x is good for
>realism is less important than internal consistency in any case other than "we're running a historical game in GURPS"
>/tg/'s relative percentage of nogames has increased over the years, despite it being easier than ever to play a game, and this makes it continually more difficult to actually talk about games
>Dungeon World is vapid wank that discards all the good parts of -World games for all the worst sacred cows of D&D (is this even still relevant?)

>> No.76530935

>tfw part of the 10%
I don't care if people like D&D but I do care that the board gets flooded with shit that belongs in a general. stuff about 40k belongs in the 40k general, stuff about D&D belongs in the general appropriate to its edition, and so on.

>> No.76531712

If you have a good DM, and bad players, you will have a bad game. The DM's ability to make the game good, is just the ability to eject bad players from the game.

>> No.76531723

We tried that, there's a reason that we gave up on it.

>> No.76531737

CoC's adventure design is normally too fragile: If you miss even a single clue, you won't have enough information to conclude the mystery. If you miss even a single die roll, you won't be able to get that clue. I once played a game of CoC where, because we all failed a pick locks roll, we were trapped in a dead end and died.

>> No.76531766

Too many CoC adventures rely on such a constrained state (in terms of materials or time) to create tension that if you fuck up a roll you have fucked up the game irreparably. Didn't pick that lock? The Bad Guy got away, and he never appears again in this printed adventure. Let the players know they lost.

>> No.76531787

The DM should not feel pressured to fake die rolls to cover up fiat: if it's really so crucial that you need to rely on fraud, you can just rely on declaration instead.

>> No.76531806

The experience you need to capture is the experience of how another human being treats you when they are the DM.

>> No.76531825

And what we're telling you is that if the DM has to bring that shit, because it wasn't implicit in the adventure design, then the adventure was badly designed and you DM had to go in and fix it. If your DM had to fix it, that means it was broken.

>> No.76531832

Shadowrun becomes a amazing system the moment all players at the table read the rulebook once.

>> No.76531833

What game do you play?

>> No.76531899

>you aren't fighting other players in an rpg are you anon
All real men engage in PvP as a matter of course.

>> No.76531904

How many days do you cover in one session, or how many sessions does it take to play one day?

>> No.76531939

That's the thing: The Bard legends come from a culture in which all spells had to be songs or poems to work. Every bard is supposed to be Orpheus, singing so good that stones will come to life and dance around his feet.

>> No.76531988

>Dungeon World is vapid wank that discards all the good parts of -World games for all the worst sacred cows of D&D (is this even still relevant?)
It definitely does that, but to be completely honest it does an excellent job of being what people who don't play D&D think D&D is. To the point where there are multiple normies who only play a game of D&D once or twice a year (at our annual campouts or after the Christmas party) who think that Dungeon World is Dungeons and Dragons. Because when they ask to play D&D, I just take out Dungeon World, and they don't know the difference.

>> No.76532021

a decade of doing it wrong because "build" and "dip" were in your vocabulary, a decade of treating an rpg like a video game and wondering why it's "glitching", a decade of treating class abilities, spells, & feats like magic the gathering cards you can cherry pick together soley for the effects that occur when stacked up, X button is mashed, and a nutless DM who can't into DM because of his entitled idiot players pretends to adjudicate all of it strictly by the text with computer logic. In other words a decade of not really playing D&D at all. Kill your self.

>> No.76532037
File: 63 KB, 1280x720, gamenight.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

stahp anon, I can only get so erect..

>> No.76532363

I agree that charisma should not be used as a total crutch because it demolishes the roleplaying from a roleplaying game, but it's still a legit attribute that a person can have that can boost their ability to succeed dimplomatically.

At work if this really cool guy I know asks me to sweep, I will do it immediately because I like and trust him. If my fat cunt boss asks me to do the same thing I will do everything in my power barring bald-faced disobedience to do it as shittily and unenthusiastically as possible. They're asking the same thing, but depending on how much I like them my reaction is different.

Charisma is the tangible attribute that allows you to get people to listen to you, and do so quickly and easily. Yes, the Fighter should be able to make the same arguments as the Bard, but fuckers are going to enjoy talking with the Sammy Smooth-Tongue the Bard (Who seems to have an earnest gleam in his eye thanks to the halo effect, despite the fact that he literally only gives a shit about himself.) more than they will enjoy talking to Johnny 8-CHA the Fighter, who people assume is a cold psycho until they learn that he nearly laid down his life saving their city twice for no reward.

Among allies and friends who are all in the know, I seldom have players roll charisma checks, but when it's a crisis situation or a first impression, I do expect them to wheel out the Bard because he's just flat out better at it. But that fucker is still going to have to roleplay, he just has a lot more wiggle room in how bad he can fuck up.

>> No.76532442

Is that unpopular? I thought it was the whole appeal.

>> No.76532534

I think rules and stats aren't needed, a opinion that has been formed from playing in a "system" with neither of those.
The system is basically a roll opposing dices, i give you a modifier based on how much more/less likely you are to succeed then your opponent. Example, a swole guy armwrestling a skinny guy would be a +4 on a opposed d6 roll or something of that callibre.
The system forces a much more descriptive playstyle and promotes out of box thinking and a much more cinematic combat then the "roll to hit" and has just about 0 numbercrunching or rules lawyering, mostly because our GM doesnt tell us the modifiers.

>> No.76532572

just like a fighter that needs to decide on his weapon, equipment, what abilities to use and what enemy to prioritize, a party face needs to come up with arguments

>> No.76533404
File: 80 KB, 600x751, f41.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Congrats, you had a shit keeper. The keeper should always have something to keep the investigation going, no crucial clue should get walled behind a roll, only side clues. If the players are too retarded to deduce from the clues they gathered, there's the idea roll. Also, the players should take initiative like >>76517948 said.
>Didn't pick that lock? The Bad Guy got away, and he never appears again in this printed adventure.
People who play modules to only follow it to the letter are retarded, game masters or players. Have some fucking creativity, modules are just a structure, you're not supposed to play it like a script in a play. But if you did took initiative and your keeper kept blocking you because "it's not in the book" then they really were shit.

>> No.76533618

Search that poketchulhu free pdf. That was a rpg launched on start of the 2000, it's a parody of pokemon where the monsters are really multidimensional monsters from the lovecraft's myths.

That game is only 30-40 pages long and has a small adventure. Combat system, rules to create new monsters to capture or fight, etc...

It's easy enough to learn in 1 hour, your players can understand it fast, and the author made it public for everyone so they can read it beforehand.

>> No.76533641
File: 365 KB, 848x480, vlcsnap-2020-12-01-01h26m46s095.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

My big one; Your 'fun' is meaningless if everyone else at the table is bored out of their minds.

A good system is more than just an easy to pick up and play manual of make believe. In the same vein; just because you can play a game requiring the reading comprehension of a 10 year old doesn't mean it's accessible.
Diversity should be a genuine choices not illusions of 'This is the class that does fire damage and has a bonus to athletics, and this class does cold damage and has a bonus to barter...', looking at you 5e.
D&D 4e is good. Most people that hate it do so because either they were told to, or because they didn't like the shift to combat focus (Streetwise is a shit skill as written though, will admit).
I'd much rather play with a dude that is super fresh and willing to learn, than a dude that's played for 20 years and has a fucking ego about how someone should play or run a game.
People that make characters that are children or women, when they're grown ass men. Like seriously, just castrate yourself at that point. Admitting your fetishes through the characters your RPing with your group mates is cringe as fuck.

Stealing tropes from anime, in an otherwise serious setting. Why do that when based Toku exists :^).
Name your characters using examples names, rather than diving into what makes a name.

Dwarves fucking suck. Not a fault of them by design, but by their reddit level perception of "Lol, beards and beer the race"
I've had a player play the same character 4 times now and I'm honestly fucking sick of it being seen as an okay thing.
>Inb4 elf fag
Yeah. Elves are fine since the gaudiness is pretty much the point. I've seen people do more with Elves than done with Humans in some settings.
The majority of players """""""""RP""""""""" dwarves by either a overdone-scottish accents or John Rhys Davies impressions. Dwarves are almost always exclusively underground or mountainous faring folk.

>> No.76533714

>Sir Reginald Badgerton with a dapper top hat and monocle
Sir Reginald sounds cool go fuck yourself

>> No.76533722

>d&d is best played with hirelings

>> No.76533727

Fate is only a tool, like dnd5 is other, a d pathfinder is other. And as a tool it's designed to do something. That means: no minis, no classes, etc ... It's for narrative games and nothing more. If you try to insert that, it works as good as trying to adapt 5e to Naruto.

It's overrated? Yes. It's bad? What it's designed to do, it does good. Short games/one shots, scenarios designed by the players, a few stats and all that. Think of it as a tool to make a history with x characters instead of as a game.

>> No.76533733

Are you retarded? It’s a fucking great sword or a maul, dipshit.

>> No.76534468
File: 57 KB, 682x342, faggot.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

This is why we hate you:
>Tell that to my dragonborn war drummer bard >beating out Skyrim themes, or my friend's >earth genasi bardbarian chanting maori haka >as he grapples anything and everything into >bloody submission with athletics expertise >and advantage on strength checks. We are >the testosterone of our party.

>> No.76534476
File: 54 KB, 661x328, faggots2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.76534487
File: 84 KB, 675x473, retardfaggots.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

you've actually never played D&D. you should suicide immediately. look at this shit, it is not D&D...NOT fucking D&D.

>> No.76534521
File: 116 KB, 768x768, CtZwqyHWYAAf-Rq.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

i'm a multiclass doctor/physician guise!

i'm a multiclass rapist/virgin guise!

>> No.76534628
File: 90 KB, 736x1056, 5f99f93d691587951a6bcc8d287ee273.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You're making the assumption that an antagonist must antagonize /everything/. This isn't the case. A Death Knight may have a purpose to see to that doesn't conflict with the party's.

>> No.76535142

>Your 'fun' is meaningless if everyone else at the table is bored out of their minds.
This guy fucking gets it.

>> No.76535212

>tabletop games are a waste of time

>> No.76535313

Gatekeeping is fine in moderation. Its real purpose is to maintain the identity of particularly cliques and niches within the broader community, like how artists keep making up new genres that have only six members and viciously fight amongst themselves.

>> No.76535449

I agree with this to an extent where I'm called an asshole.

Using the garden analogy
>A case of unreasonable Gatekeeping within a gardeners community; if you didn't bring your own trowel, you'd be left at the gate by choice of whoever was operating the gate to the garden at the time. You're by all means a gardener and very aware of your skill level in the trader/hobby, you just don't happen to have a trowel on you.

But instead of trowel, they bring a pizza cutter and wear a chef's uniform. And the gatekeepers not an asshole because Pizza Pasta isn't going to help get Mrs Pots dirty.

>> No.76535563

Which one?

>> No.76535757

Well I don't find any of it particularly unpopular, except maybe for "no playing children" if that includes teenagers. I can see the appeal to play a wide-eyed youngling or a child soldier and see how he develops.

>> No.76536011

>The NuGrog cries as he attacks you.

>> No.76536019

>the metatard thinks assassin/paladin is just fine

>> No.76536058
File: 11 KB, 261x191, 5f0c3e22.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>DnDrones flexing each other which one is more brain-damaged

>> No.76536076

Which edition?

>> No.76536105

3rd obviously. SR never recovered from wireless technology.

>> No.76536171

>no games drinks his own come and types out a post on /tg/ thinking no one will notice what kind of nogames faggot it is

>> No.76536211

What am I supposed to see here? Multiclassing bad? DnD is not DnD because it's no longer single class restricted?

>> No.76536220

>idiot that without reading comprehension thinks I ever talked about multiclassing.

>blind idiot implying I play DnD by trying to flex his nondnd nutbrain.

>> No.76536261

We call that 5e

>> No.76536287

False. 5e is the distillation of what made 4e trash mixed with the shit that made 3e annoying.

>> No.76536324
File: 144 KB, 320x320, Salty dance.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Cope, seethe, etc

>> No.76536338

>If you din't play DnD, you should kill yourself
DnDrone on cope patrol

>> No.76536617
File: 355 KB, 810x583, 1574397723823.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I actually play tabletop games, and I like it!

>> No.76536660

Was that a joke, lad?

>> No.76536834

you seriously do not see? really?
paladin, paragon of virtue, righteous holy warrior (LG) also an assassin (evil)?

Cleric, priest of a god and also druid, nature priest/priest of nature god (and depending on setting possibly two different or even opposed gods)
Sorc/warfag, two arcane caster classes...

You don't see a problem?

its not roleplay its just mechanical interactions; its all just different cards in magic/yuhgio ...

that outlook, that mindset, thats not dnd. at all.

>> No.76536850

>being this oblivious

>> No.76536888

absolutely based pokethulhu poster

>> No.76537753
File: 433 KB, 848x676, smugness.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>You don't see a problem?
Not that anon, but here is a shocking news: not everyone is an autismo with a rebar rod up in his ass

>> No.76537805

yeah i know some people are faggots, that's not big news faggot

>> No.76538014

I'd say the faggots are the ones with the rebar rod up their ass.

>> No.76538047

Power fantasies are gay.

>> No.76538057

thats exactly what a faggot would say, faggot.

>> No.76538121
File: 9 KB, 795x81, Fag.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.76538131

Only people who GM for others, deserve to get to play.

People who actually enjoy GMing are weird.

Games are better with more preparation, and GMs who fly by the seat of their pants are pretty much always fart-huffers whose games are shit and whose players are retarded morons who'll lap up anything.

>> No.76538225



Only in necromancy, too. There's so many spells that just outright end people, which damage can't do.

>> No.76538231

In some games, they can.

>> No.76539180
File: 109 KB, 1022x1024, 1602698791222.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


You can have minis in Fate. Hell, you can do a lot with the system because it's a toolkit; it's most appealing to those that need a base ruleset. I think the FUDGE distribution keeps things simple but sufficiently granular. And many settings have been "powered" by the game then subsequently published.
So, I do like playing campaigns with Fate but under the pretense setting-relevant features and mechanics have been added. Otherwise, it is very much like eating unseasoned food.

>> No.76539374

You're a fucking retarded nogamer.

>> No.76539577

>New people entering the hobby is a good thing.

>> No.76541569

A medieval serf factually does not know more than me. If they did, they would have invented langstroth hives, as they are do-able once you have basic carpentry down as long as you know the secret of bee space.

We could have made them at like 5,000 BC from fucking carved stone, really.

>> No.76541701

Anon, friendly reminder that Hellenic period Greek states had bee keeping on par with mid 19th century. Their main problem wasn't wrong type of bee hives (they knew and used Dzierzon-style frames), but utter inability to grasp how bee hive operates, along with bee biology.
Then things got fucked once Rome entered its decline and bee-keeping reverted to "no clue, let's just climb trees or something" barbarism and idiocy.

>> No.76541717

Anon, I hate to break it to you, but the medieval era was during the "no clue, just climb trees or something" barbarism period.

>> No.76541743

Also I'm having a very hard time finding any ancient greek designs that incorporate the idea of bee space.
Most just being pots that allow bees to free-build comb.

>> No.76541777

... which is my point, so not sure what you are trying to break here.
I'm just pointing out that things did roll out more or less as we did - bee-keeping was understood as far down as at least 1100 BC, at least the bee hive construction. And the average medieval serf was too big moron to make any use of that knowledge or even fucking TRY figuring anything out. It's just mind-numbing how much time it took to recreate basics of bee-keeping and how it was essentially done by two guys who did it as a hobby, being respectively a Catholic priest and a Protestant pastor bored out of their minds on two ends of the world and doing things on their own.

>> No.76541793

All right, excuse me I'm a bit argumentative today.
Though for real, can you find any examples of ancient hives that use bar and frame technology? Even the contemporary egyptians didn't do that shit.

>> No.76541842

The point of those pots was to space them to each other and the boards used to align them rather than simply use them as artificial hives. So the end result was achieving the spaces accidently and without understanding the fuck is going on, but still reliably replicating the effect.
By medieval, the concept got reduced to "just use clay jars, bro" and that assuming areas where it wasn't simply "just cut the part of the tree with natural hive, bro".

>> No.76541857

I've got it in my apiary textbook, but I honestly doubt you read Czech

>> No.76541872

Oh. So no bars nor frames then? That's disappointing.
Though I am interested in these coincidentally spaced jars and would like a more specific rundown.

Goddamn czech. Does it have an english translation?
Or at least fucking latin?

>> No.76542004

Disappointing or not, still far more efficient and applicable than "let's just take wild honey". As far as the description provided goes, it's the realisation that if the clay pots are kept in a shed and stacked close enough, the bees will rather try to build their combs outside the pots, rather than inside. Then probably by trial and error just putting planks inside jars at trial and error distances. Supposedly there is at least one text in Greek describing it that survived to this day, stored in the Marciana Library, in Venice. It's all just a footnote in a prologue, discussing the history of apiary as a science and trade and the regress from even such primitive understanding to the generally "dunno" type of deal during medieval and following centuries, since bee-keeping didn't move an inch forward till late 17th century, and did so at a crawling speed.
Nah, it's a local textbook used in agriculture schools if you choose to study for apiarist.

>> No.76542022

Dang, that's a shame. We got this goddamn 4th edition beekeeper's handbook over here that is more light on the ancient history, and focuses more on post-langstroth.

>> No.76543542

You're at the right answer, but you don't know how you got there, so you don't know how to fix the issue. The problem is the fact that there is a skill system.

>> No.76543812

ars magica is the best game ever

>> No.76544876

>What are your unpopular ttrpg opinions /tg/?
RPGs seem to ever be moving in the rules light, theatre of the mind, RP heavy direction, when what I really want is more of a dungeon crawl or hex crawl with a group of friends.

Yes, I like wargames. I would also like my RPGs to be tactical small-scale combat focused teamwork-centric games interlaced with puzzle solving and a background story, stretched over multiple sessions, and with a bit of GM arbitration when things don't go as expected or outside of the scope of the mechanics.

Not "Yo dude make-believe that you're wooing this other guy across from you at the table who is pretending to be a barmaid, 'cause I'm trying to be an author/actor and therefore this is the only correct way to play. if you don't like it go play vidya as if someone has already made a game that can act as substitute for GM arbitration. This is a club for pseudo-actors only if you don't like it get out."

But it is, so I got out.

>> No.76544926

I don't think this is an unpopular opinion. Isn't this the foundation of OSR?

>> No.76546040

As terrible as Palladium is, I do enjoy how that's baked into their system.
They have an Affinity stat to show your way with words, empathy, charisma, whatever you want to call it.
Then they have a Beauty stat to reflect your physical attractiveness, modified by wearing nice clothes, generally taking care of your health, being fashion conscience, using make-up, etc.

Initial reactions check the Beauty stat and are modified based on racism/RP angles.
Then Affinity is mostly a background stat to keep in mind for RP, since very few situations actually require rolls related to it.

>> No.76546513

If the best you can come up with for your grand fantastical setting is elves dwarves and orcs, you should just have varied cultures of humans. You don’t NEED any fantasy races, and having the same three usual suspects with surface level differences shows an unbelievable lack of imagination. At that point you’re just having them for their own sake and not because you think it’d be cool or interesting.

>> No.76546567

This might be the bravest thing I've ever seen in text

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