What are some wide-spread /tg/ fallacies?
>>63393788That balance mattersIt doesn't, ttrpgs are cooperative games, if one PC is more powerful than others more power to the party
>>63393849t. someone who never played a PC who's vastly overshadowed in every way, including his supposed area of specialization
>>63393862I once played a human fighter with the highest stat of 14 in strength. He was basically a cheap hireling that had been hired by the party to carry a torch for them in a cave. While he and the party was doing the things in the cave, some mysterious evildoer razed his home village to ashes. My shitty fighter wanted revenge and tagged along the party to find who was behind the destruction of his village and exact some revenge. Because of his shitty stats I played him as an expendable asset. Mysterious magic item? Give it to me for testing. Rouge isn't around to disarm these traps? You guys move away and I'll whack them with a stick to see what happens. Need someone to play the role of a bait? Find me a dress and I'll be your damsel in distress.In the end he died by getting gangbanged by a horde of goblins with sharp sticks. It was a fun little experiment, but would possibly have gotten dull eventually
>>63393849This even more so in the realm of tabletop wargames.Tournament play and "pick up games" seemingly being the majority stifles creativity and fun.
>>63393849If your players aren't backstabbing dickbags, then sure
>>63393849this is true up to a point. past that point though, it's not. if you are playing a rogue and the wizard performs all of your functions better than you you're de facto demoted to an NPC as the wizard achieves everything for you. while this makes the party better, it fucking sucks to be you.
That narrative focused game systems are inherently better than gameplay focused ones, even though they're different niches with different tones and styles that produce different game sessions.
>>63393849thats only half trueits a cooperative game, so when it turns into a one man party because a single character can basically solve so many situations by himself that the entire game begins to revolve around him- you fucked up
The idea that optimization is necessarily bad. Stormwind Fallacy, basically.
>>63393849being a deadweight is not fun you stupid bathrobe fag
>... he's the lover and most trusted servant of the most powerful deity in the world he lives in, ...I like how Greenwood has a contract stating that if WotC ever contradicts him on his setting, they can't use it anymore, yet routinely forgets that Ao and Helm have both dunked on Mystra so hard that she was taught not to be a bitch.
>>63395527Time of Troubles and all that related to it never happened in his games and he thought the concept of it was pretty poor, so it's easy to see how he'd forget about something like that.
>>63393788That 'dissociated mechanics' is anything other than a meaningless buzzword trotted out by a hack to make him saying 'I don't like this thing' sound faux-intellectual.
>>63396155Even if Helm didn't punch a hole in Mystra large enough to make the Forgotten Realms interesting for a little while, he's still apparently forgetting about Ao. The overgod. The head honcho. The man who rolls the dice that all the other gods have to obey. The dude what calls the shots. Mystra says, "But look at all this magic! I have magic forever! Everyone has magic, even the people I don't like! No one can ruin me, as if that were even possible, without ruining magic for everyone! Power without peer!" And Ao can trump that with a quick, "Magic doesn't work today." The whole point of Ao is that he can do whatever, but doesn't, because nothing's on his scale.
>>63393849But this is clearly false. Cooperative games exist in other media and balance is a key factor in designing them. RPG's might not be the same, but in terms of gameplay there are enough common elements it's clearly also the case that a horribly unbalanced cooperative game isn't going to be fun. If you're going the rule zero 'The GM should fix it' route, all you're doing is acknowledging that the problem exists. The GM shouldn't have to balance a wild power disparity when the system could have done a better job and avoided it from the start.
>>63393812This, the slandering of d&d because new friends dont understand shit posting
>>63393788That all homos are pedos, and that all blacks arent people
>>63393788That there is a wrong way to have fun.People get very mad (particularly at new players (and particularly at women)) at people for 'playing the game wrong' because they're not serious enough, or they don't optimise enough, or they're not good enough at tactical combat, or they're too silly or too cliche or they're too gameplay focussed or they optimise too much or they take it too seriously or they don't RP enough.But if they're having fun, they're doing it right. If you think their game is dumb, just don't play with them. Join a game where people like what you like, and let other people like what they like.
>>63396409>>63396446Your first post is just baiting. Your second was a little more thoughtful and actually applied to traditional games. If you'd gone with the second post first and skipped the first one entirely, I'd have been able to offer you a humble 7/10. As it stands, I have no choice but to dock you three points for your initial blunder.
>>63396520Then there are two of you retards patrolling this board, and you both deserve to be shot for you well-intentioned but ultimately naggy attitude. You're both the shitposter equivalent of the writer of that "don't be a racist, sexist, xenophobic dickbag" intro in the Pathfinder 2 playtest, except you're not getting paid for it by a corporate overlord with an HR department to appease. Constantly reinforcing the idea that you think so little of people who share a hobby that you attribute the actions of socially maladjusted weasels doesn't fix anything, it just makes them hate you for rubbing their noses in the foulness of those socially maladjusted weasels. Knock it off.
>>63393788Anything that /tg/ produces which is even slightly new/different/off-beat/two hairs off the norm is essentially wanking material and needs to be banned in order to maintain "board purity".
>>63396632>t. Cheesecake posting wiafufag
>>63396203It's funny because you can hear the hamster wheels spinning whenever you point out to him that spell slots are a disassociated mechanic too.
>>63396520It is impossible to understand the mind of a retard.
>>63396446NO, FUCK YOUthe problem was never "having fun the wrong way" because it is a different from how other groups have fun, but trying to have fun opposing the rest of the people at the tableIf everyone at the table is in a serious mindset with a dramatic rpg then its a lot of fun, if everyone at the table is in a joking laughing mindset with a beer and pretzels rpg then its a lot of funif in a serious group suddendly a fucking faggot with a clown character shows up it ruins the game, if in a dumbass rowdy comedy group a fucking faggot trying to take everything seriously shows up then it ruins the game
>>63393939>Being the team bitch is funCasters everyone. This is what they want for martials and your martial families.
>>63396632wait, what?I don't know if you are defending /tg/ stuff or insulting it>>63396725fuck!
>>63396610>Constantly reinforcing the idea that you think so little of people who share a hobby that you attribute the actions of socially maladjusted weasels doesn't fix anythingWhat?>>63396696Yeah, I know. People should play with people who want to have the same kind of fun as them.I wasn't advocating for the opposite.
>>63396696>>63396758think back to 'If you think their game is dumb, just don't play with them. Join a game where people like what you like, and let other people like what they like.'
>>63393788>My enjoyment of a thing means that thing is good!
>>63396647Are you talking about that one guy who constantly goes on about dnd 4e?Because yeah, what a petty hill to die on.
>>63396798Yeah.Very sad when an anonymous person has a particular brand of autism that identifies them.
>>63396758>What?Refer to >>63396446 , specifically the first part of the first sentence.>People get very mad (particularly at new players (and particularly at women))Don't do that.
>>63396758>I wasn't advocating for the opposite.ah sorry, my mistake thenI will defend, however, that some modicum of table filter is needed. A group shouldn't accept people if they know that they are going to disrupt the dynamics of it.For example, if it is a severely autistic group of Vampire players who have read the lore to anal points then it will only end terribly if they let in a "lol, I'm a nerd girel, don't hit on me silly guys!" girl. And on the opposite way, there will be no fun to be had if a rowdy group lets in a guy with literal autismT. Guy who has had both cases happen and wishes it doesn't happen to anyone else>>63396775I'm now the one in charge of deciding who enters and who doesn't. In any case I agree that those who say "people who do/n't take the game seriously are having fun the wrong way" are the final retards
>>63393849>That balance mattersThis. People who bitch about classes not being balanced need to go back to playing MMOs.
>>63396933There's even less balance there and you can't homebrew it away but ok thanks for the non-contribution
>>63396742Considering how this is a thread is about fallacies and some of the shit I've seen being posted as of late, he's probably on the defense.
>>63396409>That all homos are pedos, and that all blacks arent peopleBoth of these are factually true.
>>63396933It's because they want all the classes to run around together, if everyone was a wizard this wouldn't be an issue
>>63393788GURPS is too difficult to play.
>>63396933Have you never played a cooperative board game before?
>>63396973Wrong opinion. Try again. NEXT!
>>63396973Yeah because you being triggered was great contribution, you imbecile.>>63397040No, what you want is some sort unattainable equality forgetting that will make all classes feel the same.I can tell that both of you are retards who never played any Tabletop tho which is why you are bitching about something that is never an issue unless you have players that are complete niggers and if you have complete niggers as players then balance wasn't your main issue to begin with, right?
>>63397073You have never played an Tabletop, fuck off to /v/ and go watch some Critical Role wondering why no one wants to play with you, you faggot.
>>63397134So you haven't, then, and are likely just some kind of low grade troll.If you had, you'd realise how they're quite comparable to RPG's in some respects, particularly when it comes to providing a mechanical basis for cooperative problem solving.You know what co-op board games teach us? That seriously imbalanced ones fucking suck.The whole point of it is that everyone can contribute to solving a problem. In a board game, this is a specific one posed by the board, in an RPG it's whatever scenario your PC's have currently found themselves in.In both, the same principle applies- Everyone should be able to contribute. Not in the same way, and not every time, but overall everyone should feel equivalently able to help solve problems and improve the situation, and giving them mechanical tools to do so is important.Giving one group more mechanical tools and saying it's fine because the GM can put in the work for the other stuff is just an admission that the problem exists, and that due to bad game design you're putting more work on the GM, rather than reducing their workload in the way a well designed system would.
>>63397134get fucked nigger its clear that you have never played in a table with people and expend most of your time reading the PHB and making builds lonesomely.If you ever appeared in front of an actual group they would be disgusted by your attitude
>>63397184>>63397210So I was right about you two. Yeah that must sting.
>>63397243So you can't actually argue the point? Thanks for acknowledging I'm right.
>>63393788This is the smuggest, cringiest pile of garbage I've seen to justify a self insert that I've ever read, and that's saying something.
>>63397323Low quality bait
>>63397262There is nothing to argue because you have no point. As I said, go play some video games and sperg out about balance. You are clearly wrong on this board.
>>63397356t. Eliminster fan
>>63397370There are multiple points in >>63397184They argue why balance in RPG's is valuable.You have made no statements whatsoever to counter them.If you respond with another insult, I will take it as further admission that you acknowledge that I am correct, given your inability to actually argue against anything I have said.
>>63397072The trick to getting a group into GURPS is to tell them you're going to run a one-shot. Then guide them through a super-simplified character creation.>Think modern, guys. Write down how old your character is, and what they do for a living. No, it doesn't matter what it is, but we're not going to have millionaires.>Speaking of which, think about your profession and what class that probably puts you in. Garbage collector is probably lower-class, CEO is probably upper-class. And your autonomy status. Garbageman might own his own home, while the CEO might be in debt up to his eyeballs, renting instead of owning. It's up to you.>Cool, now you remember how I told you to write down your age? Write down a number of hobbies, interests, skills, and crap like that. Maybe you're into parasailing. Maybe you like drawing. Maybe you're a gun nut with karate training. Maybe you're good at math. Write it down.And just keep going like that for a while until you have enough to work with for your group, but keep it simple, or you'll never hook them.
>>63396933>People who bitch about classes not being balanced need to go back to playing MMOs.I find it ironic that people bitch about 4th being "too videogamey" but 3.PF is even worse in terms of system-breaking, class tiers, powergaming, minmaxing and "recommended character builds."
>>63397803agree3.PF is the biggest fucking cancer of TRPG worldhowever I have no fucking clue of what you are talking about, nobody has ever complained about 4th being unbalanced as a major criticism. Most people just say that it is impossible to play narratively
>>63397122I knew you'd respond like a punk bitch because you got called out for thinking MMOs have any balance at all. You know you can still kill yourself while you're this blasted away, might do the board a favor
>>63396853>I will defend, however, that some modicum of table filter is neededYeah.Not in a mean way. Just as a way to optimise the enjoyment of everyone involved.People should not invite players they don't want to play with to their own games just as much as people should refuse to join games they don't want to play.It's just the whole 'consensual adults' rule.>>63396843To be fair, there are a lot of maladjusted weasels around these parts.
>>63397885>Most people just say that it is impossible to play narrativelyWhich I'll never understand, since I've always played it narratively and it works great.
>>63397912>and it works great.
>>63397888>To be fair, there are a lot of maladjusted weasels around these parts.Would you say that there are as many, more, or less of them than there are of the non-retards?
>>63397921I mean, if you're ignorant of the game and only know the memes then that might sound sketchy. If you actually understand the system, you know it's great for running pulpy high fantasy action adventure stories. It's far from the only thing it can do, but it's what I use it for when I'm in the mood for that kind of thing.
>>63397952I played the gamewe all stopped because it was like playing a MMORPG, which is to say combat based on cooldown managment, which doesn't work for shit on a trpg, although it could work on a tabletop game like zombicide, just not a roleplaying one
>>63397994But that's a lie. There are no 'cooldowns' in 4e, just per scene and per day refreshes, as is the case in a lot of RPG's, and which has plenty of precedence in other editions of D&D.
>>63398017>as is the case in a lot of RPG'sha ha ha, funny guy, I'll kill you painlessly
>>63398115But it's a statement of fact? Per scene and per day refreshes are really common in a lot of games, D&D derived and otherwise. Everything you're describing already existed in 3.5. You're just describing it using dishonest and inaccurate terminology to paint a false picture of the game which has no relation to how the actual mechanics work in practice.
>>63397457Nah. Ive read half of the first sentence and already knew that reading the rest of the post is a waste if time.If you are already this wrong in the first sentence then you dont have no arguments.But as said, we both know you dont belong here.
>>63398143no, the funniest shit is how you compare the clusterfuck of 4th to other games because in other games there are skills that you can only use daily or per scene when in 4th its EVERY fucking skill
>>63398157So you can't argue the points and were just trying to find a 'clever' way of talking around them. Thanks for acknowledging I'm correct and that you're full of shit.Protip- If you're going to claim I'm wrong, you'll want to be able to articulate why. If you make the claim and provide no evidence, it just makes it clear that you're bullshitting.
>>63398174>when in 4th its EVERY fucking skill...But this is also a blatant lie? And one that you'd know, if you'd ever actually read the game.
>>63393788>He's not my self-insert, he's just a character I created to express all my opinions and vicariously experience my fetishes without anyone being able to question or stop him because he's way more powerful than anyone else and has the love and protection of a major deity too! Oh and I cosplay him too but that's completely unrelated.
>>63393849I partially agree. It is true that there will always be variance in usefulness, and that it's not a big deal. Sure, a player might have a more useful character, but because he don't play against the other (Although, if he do think it's a competition, this is a bad sign, and you should keep an eye on him).But most problem peoples have with balance is not "this guy is more useful than me", it's "Why does this guy is essentially able to do everything, and better than the character that are supposed to be expert at this specific task." On that point, balance is required, so that every character can at least be good at something and fit a singular "niche" in the party. But there is no need for all those niche to be equivalent, some can be very situational, other wider. The point is that there is at least one thing a PC can be good at.
>>63393849Perfect balance is not relevant, because perfect balance is unattainable in an interesting manner.On the other hand, the sense of balance does matter, and it's awful game design to have characters be completely incompetent at what they're supposed to do (3.5 monk) or amazing at what they do, and what everyone else does too (3.5 CoDzilla), to the point where the rest of the players feel like a contingency rather than a party.
>>63393849>Hey bro we're gonna be playing a DBZ campaign, you're fine being yamcha right?
>>63393849Balance itself doesn't matter, but it's important for GMs. The more your party is imbalanced, the more the GM has to tailor challenges and situations towards accomodating the weaker ones and not letting the stronger ones take over the game.Not every GM can handle this, so a balanced game can be used as a crutch for them until they're good to go and by the time they learn the system swapping feels somewhat pointless. On the other hand, an imbalanced system helps you identify problem players easier by their choices, you know the guy who makes a really strong or a really weak character will likely not mix well with the group anyway so you can already keep an eye on them.
>>63393788Fucking loads, and usually their opposites tooThe existence of house-rules to fix broken mechanics makes those mechanics not brokenEnjoying a game makes it not badly designedA badly designed game is impossible to enjoyYou can only optimise/minmax/powergame in some systems instead of literally any system with rulesOlder games are inherently better designedNewer games are inherently better designedTaking the "game" component of "role playing game" even slightly seriously makes you [insult]Taking the "role playing" component of "role playing game" even slightly seriously makes you [insult]Popularity = qualityPopularity = shittyPlay D&D for everythingDon't ever play D&D for anythingAny game can be played in any system just fineYou can never bend a system to do anything differentBad RPG is better than no RPGCalling someone else on /tg/ autistic when you are also on /tg/
>>63399424I think calling it a 'crutch' is stupid. The challenge of having to deal with an imbalanced party isn't interesting or fun, it's just extra busywork and strain on a GM, preventing them from focusing more on the bits of the game that actually matter. At least, in my experience. There might be GM's out there who love tha, but I've never met or talked to one.Even then, having a balanced system to start with is still better, because it lets you know precisely how unbalanced things are if you choose to play a game of that type.> On the other hand, an imbalanced system helps you identify problem players easier by their choices, you know the guy who makes a really strong or a really weak character will likely not mix well with the group anyway so you can already keep an eye on them....What? I have no idea what this has to do with system balance. Even in a balanced game there's still option variety, and you can still tell if someone is building an overpowered character. An unbalanced system makes it easier to do so by accident, so if anything you're more likely to flag up false positives, while in a balanced system you know it's purely people's choices.
>>63399449You've pretty much summarised up the most common bullshit I see on /tg/. Well done anon, that's spot on.
>>63399657>>63399424Do you have any examples of balanced systems?
>>63399791D&D 4e, excluding Essentials, Seeker, Assassin and Vampire.
>>63395468Is anyone else sick and tired of martialcucks whining? I was talking to some guy I know about Pathfinder 2e and he was complaining about the critical fail table and how "don't martials get fucked over enough?" It's funny talking to martialcucks because they literally cannot separate themselves from the caster v.s. martial debate. They see EVERYTHING within that framework. You try to criticize something they like and they scream at you because they think you are trying to make them worse than casters and take away their toys, even though you simply think their class abilities are garbage and make the game fucking stupid. They are like blacks, they have a persecution complex that permeates every facet of their being. They can't even make up their minds what they want. Half of them want to be full anime/capeshit Hercules by level 2, which is fucking retarded and will never happen in D&D or most other fantasy RPGs for that matter. They want to be able to cut through rock and throw boulders and chop spells in half and do other shit that makes no fucking sense, but their minds have been addled by years of watching shitty anime and buying Captain America bobbleheads so they think they are entitled to be bad-asses. D&D was never about superheroes, it was never a "fantasy superheroes" game and that term never appears in the rulebooks save for Gygax's level 10 fighter title in the old game booklets, in which case it had a completely different meaning. Stop with your "we are literal fantasy superheroes gibs now pls" attitude, it's not happening. You got Battlemaster in 5e, and you whined. Hell, you whine about the 4e fighter. What the hell do you fucking faggots want? I'll answer for you, since you're too fucking confused to know: you want a reason to bitch and complain because you don't actually enjoy TTRPGs, you enjoy having a victim complex because you are tumblrites spoiled rotten by of anime and capeshit.
>>63396446>But if they're having fun, they're doing it right.Wrong. You can have an orgy at your game table and have "fun" but you're still playing the game wrong. And if people show up to D&D night and they are greeted by a bunch of fat sweaty mongoloids in towels ready to get greasy, they have every right to be pissed off. To a lesser extent, if they show up to a D&D game and it turns into cringy lol-random improv night, their playstyle is wrong. There is a cultural expectation of what you get when you show up to a D&D game. Just because you want to loosen that cultural restriction, does not mean it doesn't exist. Fuck off with your post-modernist garbage. Stop thinking "fun" is all that matters. You are anti-art, anti-beauty, and anti-thought. No, you are playing the game wrong. In every possible fashion. Doesn't mean you have to be strict about playstyle, but apparently if we're not strict enough we end up with retards like you.
>>63400026Your 'point' isn't an argument for the existence of badwrongfun, it's an illustration that properly communicating expectations is important. You make an arrogant assumption about what the experience will be and fail to take the action to clarify, so you end up wasting an evening on something you don't enjoy. Nobody is at fault in this situation but you, and possibly the GM or whoever introduced you for not properly conveying the kind of game you were being invited to.It's why things like session zero are a great idea, they make it very easy to always know what you're getting into, and to back out if it isn't your time of game.By the way, you're an asshole. Every playstyle you don't share is just as valid as your own, and your attempt to claim that the way you play games is the one true way just makes you look like an arrogant cunt.
>>63397885>>63397803Actually the only way to play 4e is narratively, with the players aware of their status as vidya characters fighting their way through "boss" and "miniboss" encounters with their cooldown abilities, which are never given any justification besides "muh narrative." So actually no 4e is far more narrative than any other edition of D&D. It's also a hit-point-bloated mess, with math that didn't get fixed until MM3, and the character creation is so boring and self-contained that it actually does feel like you're playing a vidya with skill trees, but that's fine. Any game has "recommended builds" but at least 3rd you could have fun making your character, even though it was a shit system.
>>63400026>You can have an orgy at your game table and have "fun" but you're still playing the game wrongIf they all consent to and enjoy the orgy then it doesn't really matter if they're playing the game wrong. They're doing what they want to do and what best suits them.>To a lesser extent, if they show up to a D&D game and it turns into cringy lol-random improv nightI'm sorry that other people like things that you don't like, but they are fully entitled to like things that you don't like. I would say that they should still do what they can to clarify what they like and what kind of fun they intend on having, as you should ask what kind of fun they're planning on having, so that you can decide not to play with people you don't want to play with.
>>63400083Virtually everything you said is an outright lie with absolutely no basis in reality, and is so scattershot and unfocused I can't tell if you were even trying to make a coherent point, or just shit on the game as much as possible in as few words as you could manage.
>>63400026For example, if other people want to play D&D 4e and just fight orcs and get treasure, that's perfectly fine. If you don't want that, and you want a serious RP with no combat, then just don't play with the people who want something else.If that's all they want to do, and they're doing it, and they aren't forcing anything on you (which they aren't), then you have no right to try to stop them, because you believe it's not the right way to enjoy something.
>>63398143>Per scene and per day refreshes are really common in a lot of games, D&D derived and otherwise.Yeah and so are a lot of other shit mechanics.>Everything you're describing already existed in 3.5.At a lesser level and being one of the worst aspects of the system. At least shit like Barbarian rage was based on someone actually being tired after flying into a rage, and they were fatigued afterward to represent that.In 4e half the dailies are some cool maneuver that doesn't seem tiring at all. >b-b-b-but muh muscle strain>b-b-b-but muh equipment damage>b-b-b-but muh opportunity to use itNone of those are represented mechanically in any consistent way. They are applied to justify the mechanic, not the other way around. The rest of the game honestly isn't that different from 5e, shit like minions are an arbitrary distinction that really doesn't matter in practice and only makes the game look stupid when it can't even make up its mind what the average member of a goblin horde looks like. Are they minions? Is the average commoner a minion? If an NPC goes off screen and fights a goblin is he gonna die cause he's a 1 hp minion? The low-bookeeping shit was already solved in every other edition with 1 hit die monsters that didn't die from literally any attack but as a player's damage increased at higher levels they were basically one-shotting them anyway. Therefore the same creature served two different purposes at low and high level without the need for a different stat block. And honestly if minions had 5 hp in 4th ed instead of 1 hp it would have made little difference anyway, without them being insta-gibbed by a 10 foot fall.
>>63400094>If they all consent to and enjoy the orgy then it doesn't really matter if they're playing the game wrong. They're doing what they want to do and what best suits them.But they aren't playing D&D.>I'm sorry that other people like things that you don't like, but they are fully entitled to like things that you don't like.That's not what I am talking about you stupid fucking cunt. I am talking about them labeling a shitshow of cringey faggotry as "D&D" then inviting people to it as "D&D" when it isn't goddamn D&D. This is the post-modernism I am talking about.
>>63400175But you've completely abandoned the original point and have just skewed off into the same ignorant, fallacious criticisms that always get trotted out, with the added bonus of pre-emptively dismissing the actual explanations so you can keep complaining without any actual goal or point to make.If you're going to maintain your wilful ignorance and refuse to acknowledge the logic by which the system functions, there isn't really any response to you other than 'Okay, keep being wrong I guess'.
>>63400107>I can't prove anything he said wrong so I'll just dismiss it all as lies.>>63400161If you invite people to a D&D game there is a reasonable expectation that D&D will be played. Not muh lol nat20 improv that smacks of a Cards Against Humanity game. You make me sympathize with hardcore rules lawyers, which is disgusting because they make broken builds and use ridiculous glitches in the rules to achieve the same effect.
>>63393788People in this board can't seem to recognize what is a shitpost or what isn't anymore. Either that or we have too many newfags.
>>63400175>The low-bookeeping shit was already solved in every other edition with 1 hit die monstersNo it wasn't. Low HD enemies were completely useless in every edition but 5E and they're an incredible pain in the ass to manage compared to minions.
>>63400193>But they aren't playing D&DIf they're all happy to play what they're playing then it doesn't matter if it fits a definition of D&D. It is what it is.>I am talking about them labeling a shitshow of cringey faggotry as >>63400234>If you invite people to a D&D game there is a reasonable expectation that D&D will be played."D&D" then inviting people to it as "D&D" when it isn't goddamn D&D. Sure, they should clearly communicate their intentions that they want to play a certain thing in a certain way, so that other people know whether or not they will be interested.I was just arguing that there's nothing wrong with enjoying whatever they're enjoying as long as everyone is on board.Clearly, you are worried that *not* everyone (as in, you) will be on board, to which the solution is simply a clear explanation of intentions, so that you can avoid joining games that you don't want to play.
>>63400229>added bonus of pre-emptively dismissing the actual explanations so you can keep complaining without any actual goal or point to make.Because the explanation is bullshit. I can justify FATAL's rape mechanics with "well the game is about rape so there's a lot of rape in it." But that doesn't change the fact that the base assumption is stupid shit. 3.5 D&D had Ivory Tower Design as a justification for its horse-shit, but that didn't change the fact that it was horse-shit. >If you're going to maintain your wilful ignorance and refuse to acknowledge the logic by which the system functionsI acknowledge it. I also reject it, because it's stupid and has little-to-nothing to do with an actual narrative. It's about encounter pacing, which other editions had as well. That is it. So unless your "narrative" consists entirely of slaying varying-size packs of orcs and other monsters, calling it a narrative game is in fact disingenuous and stupid. It's a gamist conceit meant to compel a certain style of play. Why D&D designers in the 00s and beyond felt the need to so carefully restrict encounter pacing is beyond me, because older games had encounter pacing just fine, and in fact one that encouraged a less-steep power curve, because getting damaged actually meant something. But that's not up to me, I don't design the game, which has instead been marketed toward idiots who can't experience tension unless they are near 0 hp in every fight.
>>63393788That GURPS should be played for any reason
whoops, meant to format as >I am talking about them labeling a shitshow of cringey faggotry as "D&D" then inviting people to it as "D&D" when it isn't goddamn D&D. >>63400234>If you invite people to a D&D game there is a reasonable expectation that D&D will be played.Sure, they should clearly communicate their intentions that they want to play a certain thing in a certain way, so that other people know whether or not they will be interested.I was just arguing that there's nothing wrong with enjoying whatever they're enjoying as long as everyone is on board.Clearly, you are worried that *not* everyone (as in, you) will be on board, to which the solution is simply a clear explanation of intentions, so that you can avoid joining games that you don't want to play.
>>63400234Empty statements without evidence do not constitute an argument. When they're as blatantly false as that post, there's no reason not to call them lies.In brief, though, to satisfy your autism.>Actually the only way to play 4e is narratively4e can be played in other ways.>with the players aware of their status as vidya charactersThis has no basis in the rules and what 'vidya characters' means is never specified, making it entirely meaningless.>cooldown abilitiesAs has previously been noted, calling per day and per scene refresh abilities 'cooldowns' is nonsensical.>which are never given any justification besides "muh narrativeThis is an odd way to say 'which are elegantly justified by narrative pacing', but it is actually true despite your attempt to phrase it as though it's invalid.>So actually no 4e is far more narrative than any other edition of D&DActually true, although you failed to express most of the actual reasons why>It's also a hit-point-bloated messUntrue in its current state, and you even acknowledge it in your next line, making mentioning the bloat a bit strange.>and the character creation is so boring and self-contained that it actually does feel like you're playing a vidya with skill treesThe 4e character creation is incredibly broad, with more things to choose than in most other editions. While in other editions you had a linear progression of features with some choices and selecting feats, in 4e you have Powers, Feats and Theme/Paragon Path/Epic Destiny giving you plenty of options and allowing a huge diversity of character creation. Your point is based in pure ignorance.
>>63400298>they're an incredible pain in the ass to manage compared to minions.No they aren't.They either work as a group of enemies at low levels, or die in one hit at higher levels.The outcome is literally the same.Even in 5e the 2 HD mooks usually die in one hit anyway when GWM and Sharpshooter come into play. >every edition except 5eWow so you never played anything before 3.5 and you think that means no one else did either. Holy shit you're retarded.
>>63400310>I was just arguing that there's nothing wrong with enjoying whatever they're enjoying as long as everyone is on board.Except it isn't D&D, therefore they are literally playing the game wrong.
>>63400314It's really quite funny. It's clear by now that you do understand how 4e works as a narrative focused fantasy adventure game, you just keep bending over backwards to find reasons to reject it, because acknowledging that it's a game that works perfectly well for its audience while not appealing to you doesn't fit with your narrative.The arguments haven't changed, they're perfectly consistent and your lack of any ability to directly argue against them, instead reduced to trying to talk around them or dismiss them out of hand, is actually quite amusing.
>>63400314>older games had encounter pacing just fineI dunno, it ran into the issue where your power was effectively determined by how frequently you can sleep, so it really messed with your incentives when you'd end up going to bed after every fight to keep using your best abilities.With 4e you get plenty of at-wills and encounters to tide you over>>63400352I never said that there isn't a wrong way to play D&D, I said that there wasn't a wrong way to have fun.If they are, then, playing the game 'wrong', but are still having fun, then it doesn't really matter if it's 'wrong'.Perhaps 'wrong' is the wrong word. It's more like, if they are playing the game wrong, but are having fun, then it isn't *bad*, and it doesn't require fixing.
>>63400314Can you actually explain the FATAL analogy? It doesn't seem to make any sense. Could you describe both arguments in detail, and go over how they're similar? I just don't see it.
>>63400327>4e can be played in other ways.What ways.>This has no basis in the rules and what 'vidya characters' means is never specified, making it entirely meaningless.Nor does any claims of 4e's AEDU being a "narrative" mechanic.>As has previously been noted, calling per day and per scene refresh abilities 'cooldowns' is nonsensical.No it isn't. They cool down with a rest that can only be taken once every 24 hours. It's such a subtle difference it isn't even worth nothing, because it's just as nonsensical either way.>This is an odd way to say 'which are elegantly justified by narrative pacing', Oh really, as opposed to most action movies where fight after fight takes place? Please show me any fiction that fits the 4e structure at all. It's based on real-world-time, not anything resembling narrative pacing. It's a legacy mechanic from earlier editions that got turned into an actual mechanic for the game.>Actually true, although you failed to express most of the actual reasons whyI didn't need to because it's self-evident because the game has nothing in common with actual narrative games.>Untrue in its current state, and you even acknowledge it in your next line, making mentioning the bloat a bit strange.Not everyone own the Monster Manual III. Releasing a set of core books that don't work is criticism by itself even if it's errata'd later.>The 4e character creation is incredibly broad, with more things to choose than in most other editions. That's probably objectively incorrect.>While in other editions you had a linear progression of features with some choices and selecting featsThere were 1000s of feats and PrCs, even if only 10% of them were valid choices that still leaves it on par with 4e at the very worst.>muh epic destinyWho cares? You got to pick from a few based on your class. 3.5 had thousands of prestige classes.
>>63400366Because it isn't an argument. There are no narrative mechanics in 4e. Again I can easily justify any game based on a set of assumptions made up after the fact by fanboys. That's easy. What's hard is showing how those mechanics actually contribute to what you claim they contribute to.
>>63400334A low HD monster can't touch a mid level PC in every single edition right up until 4E.
>>63400418>I just don't see it.That's because you're retarded and you don't like the fact that your justification of 4e is entirely subjective. You can't give any reason why it's actually good so you justify it with "narrative pacing" when you are yet to explain how it does that well. In reality, the goal of AEDU was encounter pacing for the sake of encounter pacing which is what 3.5 had as well, the devs just underestimated CLW wands and similar shit. Encounters aren't even scenes, they just mean "you need to short rest before doing this again." Okay? That's not a scene. That's not a narrative definition any more than it's a vague attempt at some strange brand of heroic realism, or else based on the justification that "I need to rest because that maneuver tired me out." Neither of those are narrative.
>>63400430Purely mechanically, for one, and a single example proves you incorrect.Since you can't argue the point, I'll take that as acknowledgement you know it's a lie and move on.Except that has no relation to MMO style cooldowns, which is what you're trying to compare them to by using the terminology. So once again, you're acknowledging it's not actually true. Thanks.This has been gone into in previous threads, in great detail, and if I'm going to do it again it'll take its own post. Given how much I've seen this explained, though, I get the feeling you're just going to reject it out of hand regardless.But that's false? It has a lot in common with a lot of narrative games, and you failed to provide any evidence or argument there.I agree the criticism is valid, but nobody plays 4e from the books anymore. It's all done via cbloader, funin.space and pdf's, plus pic related, which can let you fix the math with just that.>That's probably objectively incorrect.Prove it. I listed all the different options 4e characters get to choose from, and noted that it's more choices than you get in other editions. Can you really prove that wrong?I'm not talking about total amount of content (although 4e still has a lot), I'm talking about how many choices you get to make each time you level up. 4e, IMO, has more overall.Ahh, and you're dismissing it out of hand because you can't actually argue against it. Thanks for proving my point.
>>63400416>I dunno, it ran into the issue where your power was effectively determined by how frequently you can sleep, so it really messed with your incentives when you'd end up going to bed after every fight to keep using your best abilities.This isn't 3.5. Either you are referring to some shit in 2nd Ed (which I admittedly barely played) or you are misremembering things from earlier editions than that.
>>63400416>when you'd end up going to bed after every fight to keep using your best abilities.Did your GM ever have the stones to tell you to fuck off with that shit? Using the spell memorisation times and wandering monster checks also helps discourage that.
>>63400416If a group enjoys shitting in each other's mouths, no amount of calling that activity "Dungeons and Dragons" makes it so. If people say "hey we want to play D&D" and then proceed to do lolrandom nadral twenny shitty improv comedy, they are literally not playing D&D. Names have meanings, and no amount of calling something by a name makes it that thing
>>63400451But it is an argument, and it's one you can't argue with. All you can do is dismiss it and insult the people who argue it, because by existing it torpedoes your point. 4e makes perfect sense, and its internal logic is entirely consistent. That you dislike the basis for it is basically irrelevant.By the way, 4e does have some outright and explicit narrative mechanics, too. Just look at the Artifact rules, where narrative justifications and roleplay actions directly tie into mechanical advantages. And those are in the DMG. Almost as if the system was built on those principles.
>>63393788Are any of the various DnD books worth reading?
>>63400514So you can't actually give a detailed, clarified account of the comparison? That's what I was asking about, so I'm not sure why you gave such an entirely irrelevant reply.
>>63400460>A low HD monster can't touch a mid level PC in every single edition right up until 4E.Flat out wrong. Even without you actually saying what "low HD" and "midlevel" mean, you're only correct in referring to 3rd edition (even then, not exactly true, but it's close enough that you are right). Notice the 3rd next to 3rd edition? That means it's the third edition. Not the first or second. Which weren't even the first and second editions of the game themselves. I'll assume by touch you mean hit. This was easily achievable in 1st and 2nd edition by low HD monsters. And 4e doesn't have hit dice anyway so the comparison is stupid. Anyway as for hit points, the difference is still moot which is what I was originally talking about anyway.
>>63400352Like, do you even know what the point is that I am making that you are arguing against? I feel like there's a miscommunication going onI feel like a lot of people are desperate to have a particular kind of argument against a particular viewpoint that they hate, that I'm not even arguing for.>>63400540Yeah, after a while, but it'd be better if the system wasn't quite so reliant on the GM coming up with time restrictions. Like, we could never have a situation where a lot of things happen during a single day, because the casters would just run out of spells and become useless, and if we ever managed to have spare time, such as during travel, the casters could use their high level slots freely, being really overpowered.It'd be better if it didn't need so much artificial manipulation to prevent the problems that the system has from bubbling up.
>>63400522>reddit spacing>any system can be played purely mechanically >analogies don't matter if I don't think the link is close enough>I read every single thread where 4rry's rabidly defend their dead edition>I say it has things in common with narrative games without listing any of those things>people on /tg/ don't use the books cause they are poorfags so therefore no one does>Can you really prove that wrong?No, but you can't prove it's correct, either.>I'm not talking about total amount of content (although 4e still has a lot), I'm talking about how many choices you get to make each time you level up.Literally thousands in 3.5, even though a lot of them are shit, but the factor it outweighs 4e by is still quite substantial. >4e, IMO, has more overall.That's not even an opinion.>Ahh, and you're dismissing it out of hand because you can't actually argue against itYou haven't backed up anything you said beyond raw assertion. I don't blame you, because it would involve a shitload of counting and math and would probably take you all day. But that doesn't make it true. Stop thinking that you get to make claims without evidence.
>>63400559It's not an argument because no one shows how it is narrative. They just say it is. Whether or not I dislike it is irrelevant. If you are going to make a game design choice, you should be able to justify it. >Just look at the Artifact rules, where narrative justifications and roleplay actions directly tie into mechanical advantages. Looks like the 3.5 organization rules for some of them. Was that narrative, too?
>>63400643>Literally thousands in 3.5, even though a lot of them are shit, but the factor it outweighs 4e by is still quite substantial.I think he meant more like, when you reach level 4, your choices are that you pick a skill to put ranks in, and you pick a feat, and you pick a particular class feature, and you might pick a different class to take.Not how many classes there are to choose, or how many feats there are to choose, or whatever. More like how many times you get to choose.Like, in pf, every even level, there are thousands of feats to pick from, but you can only take one.
>>63400598>This was easily achievable in 1st and 2nd edition by low HD monsters.Fuck no it wasn't. The basic magical gear you'll get just from treasure rolls puts you well out of their ability to hit often. AC 0 or better is not hard to get even before mid levels and low HD monsters don't hit AC 0 often.
>>63396790It does if you're not ruining anybody's life by enjoying it.
>>63400643So you're abandoning all your initial points? Thanks for acknowledging they were lies.I'm not talking about breadth of content. I'm talking about number of choices per level. In 3.5/5e, for non-spellcasters, this is a linear progression of features with occasional choices, ASI's/Feats and... I think that's basically it? In 4e you have your multiple different kinds of Powers, Feats, Theme, Paragon Path and Epic Destiny. Caster classes in 3.5/5e might swing that further, since they also pick spells etc, but on average I'd still say 4e ends up with more, especially if you directly compare martial characters.
>>63400671But people have shown how it's narrative, multiple times, by explaining it as a function of fight scene pacing and illustrating how the mechanic works in that context. And that's all they need to do to torpedo the point that 'it doesn't make sense', because they've shown a way it makes perfect sense.And probably? Most RPG's include some kind of narrative mechanic.
>>63400643>calling normal spacing reddit spacing because you're retarded
>>63400552>If a group enjoys shitting in each other's mouths, no amount of calling that activity "Dungeons and Dragons" makes it so. If people say "hey we want to play D&D" and then proceed to do lolrandom nadral twenny shitty improv comedy, they are literally not playing D&D. Names have meanings, and no amount of calling something by a name makes it that thingI'm literally not disagreeing with anything you're saying, and you're not actually disagreeing with anything that I'm saying. We're seeing exactly the same facts, but I think I'm just speaking in a tone of voice which you assume is contrary to yours. I would like to think that I'm speaking very clearly.Could you say, exactly, what it is that I have said, that you disagree with, and double check that it is indeed actually saying something you disagree with? And that it doesn't just use a few of the same words or speech patterns as someone who you'd usually disagree with?
>>63397039t. nigger that likes sticking his tiny dick in tiny buttholes
>>63399994I 100% unironically agree with this.
>>63402416>t. wizardfag buttmad that other people want to play too
>>63399449>Bad RPG is better than no RPGIsn't it usually the opposite that's said?Because I can't remember a single post saying that playing in a bad game is better than not playing at all
>>63393793>the TSR Code of Ethics prevented me from showing the Zhentarim as really competentWere TSR really the pearl-clutching moralist fags that this portrays them as?
>>63403076I actually exclusively play martials. He's just right.
>>63404385>t. wizardfag mad that he can't cast Dominate Party at-will
>>63404414I bet you really like AOS
>>63396790You and your friends are playing a game, man. Enjoyment is the entire purpose.
>>63393939I bet you're european
>>63393788That our moderators actually give a shit about this board.
>>63405470I wish they'd ban liarfag already, that faggot should get a trip already
>>63400026Yes, because we are totally at fault for failing to meet your expectations for our game nights. What can we say besides that we are so sorry that we are not playing this game in the way you want us to play. Man, shame on us really...
>>63400193Define D&D then.
>>63399449All of them are true and all of them are invoked constantly
>>63404050No. Lorraine Williams was.
>>63396446there are right and wrong ways to have fun, and it is the job of those who know better to educate the inexperienced.
>>63396790well you certainly wouldn't think something you don't enjoy is good.
>>63397122equality won't make all the classes feel the same
>>63400076Wrong, your playstyle is invalid.
>>63400582The original dungeon masters guide.
>>63396274Mystra wasn’t a goddess when Helm slapped her shit.