Dungeons and Dragons (Again!)

I've been table top rping since I was 11... that's 25 years now, nearly.... maybe its my age, but I just can't play any computer games for more than about ten minutes without becoming very fed up with them.... I've never used a grid for any tt game, and when it comes to D+D we play using a mish mash of rules taken from first edition D+D, AD+D, and anywhere else.... a lot of the rules we use we made up, because they make the game (for us) work.... I doubt if even the great EGG would recognise it now.... we mainly play Call of Cthulhu (both 1920s and Pagan's Delta Green) Alternity, Boot Hill and D+D, but we have been known to dabble with Runequest, Traveller, GURPS, Paranoia, Shadowrun, Malstrom and Tunnels and Trolls (Take that, you fiend!) As an aside, the group we started at School back in the eighties used to hold the record for the longest continuous game by a group of under eighteens.... 53 hours non stop.... and we raised over a grand for charity....

Rifts is so much better than D&D

What the hell is up with people playing D&D and vampire masquerade doing rock paper scissors?

R/P/S is the arbitrator for Live Action (rather than tabletop) Masquerade, that's why. I've never quite been convinced by that...

Incorporating rock paper scissors seems to cut down on advantages your character can obtain.

Well, Live Action is different. Even so, there is more to it than JUST R/P/S... but I still don't like it much.

yeah, i know there is more to it, but seems very limited in range of abilities. I know it is still chance, but atleast with dice, your chance is broad and technical.

Yeah, but in Live Action, the rules are kept to a minimum; it is all about social interaction.

Though in many a tabletop RP, the less you intrude rules in, the better.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Nah, disagree. D&D's combat system is cumbersome and restrictive and very easily reduces the enjoyment of the game for the non-combat whores.

D&D's maxim from square one was "Take a Fighter (though have a Cleric in the group)," and the later versions only made that more imperative.

Unchained from the grid system it becomes more manageable.

😆 That's just too funny. I'm sure you know your DnD, but you're talking a load of bull here. Sure, that was the idea. Get a melee fighter, a thief, a divine magic user and an arcane magic user. That's simply the quintessential team. It's what you're restricted to if you can't think anything else up and are therefore unable to bring something new to the game. And in that case it's better that you don't play, really 😬

The grid system works just fine, it brings some reality to the game like only being able to move THAT much if you're going around a corner, moving only THAT much if you're carrying too much weight, etc.

As for the fighter per se, i dunno WHAT DnD you're playing, but EVERYBODY that knows the game knows that the fighter is one of the most powerful classes in the first levels, and by the time you reach mid levels (6 and above), they're the crappiest class in the game. Which is why most people that know their game won't be taking more than 2 levels of fighter. It's ya know...called....the fighter dip....for...ya know.....a ........REASON....

Originally posted by Ushgarak
As in take the grid out of it and either use no map or at most rough maps. Although the system is calibrated around the grid, using it actually reduces the playing experience; any half-decent DM can quickly adapt to get rid of it.

Still, no great matter, because there is only so far you can take D&D anyway. It's a limited game with a limited scope; there is way better out there. I always thought it worked better as a computer gane, in fact, because a lot of its limitations don't matter a damn there (monster-killing xp chase? Hell yeah!).

Meanwhile... that was just them finding something for Charisma to do. Rather arbitrary.

The grid system works just fine. If you want to use a rough map or no map at all, go right ahead, but that hampers the reality of the game. Sure, it's fantasy, but still, mature gamers appreciate a certain dose of reality in the game. Otherwise, without the grid system rules, it's called munchkinism or overzealousness in rp-ing.

As for the charisma comment, that's completely not true. I've read hundreds of pages on wizards.com involving discussions with the former Sage Skip Williams concerning sorcerers. They're INCREDIBLY underpowered right now. If anything, sorcerers should be MUCH more like Wilders. Don't even get me started on how the masters of metamagic, which always WERE the sorcerers have to take up an entire round to use ONE FREEKIN metamagic feat on a spell......but good ol' wizards can use their cute little rods of metamagic all day long without so much as a problem. Also, don't get me started on clerics and divine metamagicking, or i'll have to show you some character builds that at around level 12 have an AC of 63 (for 12 hours or more for Christ's sake).

So yeah, the sorcerer is underpowered, even though it's one of the coolest classes in the damn game. As for the reason of their existence, Skip Williams has showed and admitted to an INCREDIBLE bias towards wizards (he has a thing bout em), + the name of the feckin company WoTC. It was always intended for Wizards to be very powerful, and for sorcerers to be just backup casters (which is total crap IMO, but oh well...)

~wickerman~

Sorry, disagree with you fundamentally there, Wickerman. And I don't remember saying anything about thieves or Magic-users. In long term play, every class eventually frustrates except the Fighter.

I have played at D&D for over 20 years and my brother since it first came out. I find it limited and not well designed and practical play has found the grid system to be severely wanting; most other RPs are totally superior. You may think I am talking bull but in my opinion if you like these things I do not have a high opinion of your role-playing.

And it IS true about Charisma. In first edition it did nearly nothing so they stuck a load more onto it. There is no logical reason for Sorcerers to use Charisma other than a. to distinguish them and b. to give the stat something to do- same reason they suddenly started basing turning on it as well.

"Sure, it's fantasy, but still, mature gamers appreciate a certain dose of reality in the game. Otherwise, without the grid system rules, it's called munchkinism or overzealousness in rp-ing."

That's shite. I know plenty of mature RPers and they loathe it. We've already heard from Kirk above agreeing with me there on not using it. Furthermore, in my experience, the grid system detracts from reality- time and time again it is simply logically frustrating beyond sense. It's more like a wargame than an RP- if anything, it encourages rule abuse, something D&D is exceptionally prone to in any case. To say removing it encourages munchkinism strikes me as a simply utterly unintelligent comment.

Horrible stuff.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Sorry, disagree with you fundamentally there, Wickerman. And I don't remember saying anything about thieves or Magic-users. In long term play, every class eventually frustrates except the Fighter.

I'm not sure what you mean by "every class eventually frustrates except the fighter". If you mean that the fighter is the most reliable class in the game, that's crap. I mean, sorry, but feel free to go to wizards.com and say that, and let the flamefest begin. The fighter is a good choice for the beginning of the game, but from mid-level on, mostly anything can take out a simple straight fighter. The fighter is (unlike arcane or divine casters) one of those "No reason NOT to take a prestige class or two" sort of classes. Simply going straight fighter is absolutely suicide. Not to mention if the rp-er isn't experienced, it gets quite boring. Going into other classes as well as prestige classes not only makes your character stronger rules-wise, but gives you excellent reasons to explore the characters personality even more, therefore more rp-ing.
If you meant that the fighter is a MUST in a party and you dislike that, that is ALSO crap. The Hexblade, the Swashbuckler, even the Samurai (but less), not to mention the barbarian, can easily match a fighter if well done, not only from a rules-wise PoV but also from a story-wise PoV.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
I have played at D&D for over 20 years and my brother since it first came out. I find it limited and not well designed and practical play has found the grid system to be severely wanting; most other RPs are totally superior. You may think I am talking bull but in my opinion if you like these things I do not have a high opinion of your role-playing.

Cool. I have friends that've been playing the game since it came out. And the reason why i'm a bit baffled is that i've never....i repeat....NEVER heard ANYONE face to face or over the internet, including on wizards.com which is the biggest collection of DnD-ers EVER complain about the current grid system before. As for the game itself being limited and not well designed, that's your opinion, but it has nothing to do with practical play. Everything in the rules is acid-tested, and then errata-ed if something's wrond. There've even been instances where due to a lot of negative/positive fan reactions, some things were changed. How are the other RP's superior? DnD incorporates role-playing in a fantasy world with SO many possibilities, SO many campaign settings, and an infinity of other possibilities that YOU yourself can create by just following a few rules. And yeah, i encourage the usage of most rules, with a few house rules that "overrule" some idiotic stuff. As for the quality of rp-ing, i can see absolutely nothing wrong with it. And i can't get what YOU see wrong with it either.

You have SO many supplemental books, that your character can have more depth and be more complex than you 😂 . You can also CREATE your own prestige classes/ campaign settings/feats/etc. to further this to a practically limitless flow of opportunities. If you simply want to disregard any rules, it either turns into chaos, or LARP-ing.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
And it IS true about Charisma. In first edition it did nearly nothing so they stuck a load more onto it. There is no logical reason for Sorcerers to use Charisma other than a. to distinguish them and b. to give the stat something to do- same reason they suddenly started basing turning on it as well.

That's most likely because you have a misconception of what Charisma means. It's been stated over and over again that it's not good looks, it's overall power to influence others, confidence in self, etc. etc. Just like wisdom isn't just "being wise" it's the degree to which you perceive the outside world. And it made excellent sense, even in 1st ed. If what you're saying were true, they simply wouldn't have added charisma as well, and just left it behind.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
"Sure, it's fantasy, but still, mature gamers appreciate a certain dose of reality in the game. Otherwise, without the grid system rules, it's called munchkinism or overzealousness in rp-ing."

That's shite. I know plenty of mature RPers and they loathe it. We've already heard from Kirk above agreeing with me there on not using it. Furthermore, in my experience, the grid system detracts from reality- time and time again it is simply logically frustrating beyond sense. It's more like a wargame than an RP- if anything, it encourages rule abuse, something D&D is exceptionally prone to in any case. To say removing it encourages munchkinism strikes me as a simply utterly unintelligent comment.

So we've heard from......Kirk.....who is....i have no idea who..... 🤨 as opposed to the let's say....20.000 and more members of the wizards.com boards??? I mean, sorry for invoking that so much, but it just seems weird that i've read a LARGE number of threads and have even made a few on those boards, and i couldn't remember anyone complaining about this, and making any rational points.

How more exactly, does it detract from reality-time? Just tell me how. Because it takes longer to run around a corner? Or because your dwarf runs slower? Or how? THAT's the shite my friend, right there. As for it being logically frustrating beyond sense, WHAT IS FRUSTRATING ABOUT IT??? Give me rational points saying "I don't like it because it does this: E.G.: .....etc. etc. " and it'll be easier to describe what happens. And you're making a HUGE mistake of assuming the grid system is there to turn the game into a wargame. It's there JUST SO YOU CAN USE IT DURING BATTLES and keep a level of reality involved in the game. I mean, nobody is supposed to use it during the entire game like "You move from here to here, then left, then here then there, then move your figures there, and ......you've reached the market". NO! You use it during battle time so that the whole episode doesn't turn into a fiasco of "I hit it first! No no, i'm more suave and dexterous, i hit it first. But i hit it harder!!!!! But you weren't even there!! Yes i was, i jumped down. FROM WHERE??? " and other such stuff. And THAT is why i said that removing it strikes me as munchkinism, because it's a blatant show of ignoring the rules, and just doing things the way YOU want it. It also hampers the DM's power a bit, making sure that there's no "special preference" which is always a good thing as well.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Horrible stuff.

I REALLY don't see what's so horrible about it. without the grid system, and skirmishing rules you have two options:

1. no battles whatsoever. This reeks of idiocy in a fantasy game...i mean sure, ro-based experience points are encouraged, being original is encouraged, etc. etc. But having no fighting AT ALL only goes to show that the DM is a writer-wannabe that enjoys "railroading" (if you don't know this term, i'll explain it, but i bet you do).

2. the battles that do exist are a chaotic blob of "i hit it, no I hit it, cause i gots da ninja skillz yo!". 🤨

~wickerman~

Or not..
You want an example of non-grid fighting? Look at some if the Matrix games here, or the Star Wars ones, but The Matrix ones are more fighting oriented...

I've Never really played D&D, just Ush's games here and elsewhere. But I find no problem in it.

What is Rifts?

another kind of table top RPGs

I agree with ush on the fact that they are forcing the grid system down the throath of the players. It gives the game far too much of a wargame feeling. I dislike it very much eventho it is very easy, quite a few rules don't work without the grid, or atleast not as they should. Still in all the games I master I don't use a grid, except in very special combat sequences where environment matters a great deal. Tho I'm thinking of quiting the use of grids all together.

Rough maps will generally do. If you can't have a decent combat without using a grid, I fear you aren't a very good RPer. what did people do when they played ADnD that game never relied on grids and it worked out perfectly.

DnD is indeed not the best quality RPG there is there are far better ones. However DnD was my first RPG and even tho the game has limitations (SEVER LIMITATIONS) I still enjoy it the most. I like the setting, I know the rules fairly well and I enjoy DMing it.

I still feel that if you make sure the game doesn't turn into a hack'n' slash or a dungeoncrawling fest it has a nice potential. Too bad those dudes at wizards don't get that too often. A lot of the most memorable sessions of DnD I played involved almost no rolls and NO COMBAT.

Now all that talk about classes being under and overpowered, does it really matter????? Sure it would be fun if things were balanced and so on but in a game as DnD with such a load of official and unofficial extra rules, classes, prestige classes, feats and so on......Why keep nagging about it??? If your DM is atleast half as smart as a normal person he will hold his party in balance and make sure powerplaying is looked down up on.

I personally love playing a fighter, I usually play it pure, no multiclassing maybe one prestige class but nothing else. I know this has severe limitations and severe weaknesses but I generally don't give a damn. I play a fighter because I like the concept.

I always remember what my first DM ever told me: "Don't look at the stats, the rules, the abilities, the numbers..... Just take what you think is cool". That's the guide line I give all my players and that's IMO the way someone should play any RPG.

I play World of Warcraft and have almost lost my current friends over playing that game.

If I played D&D my friends would dis-own me and I would need to go out and find new friends.

what kinda BS friends are that

Originally posted by Linkalicious
I play World of Warcraft and have almost lost my current friends over playing that game.

If I played D&D my friends would dis-own me and I would need to go out and find new friends.

Fortunately, one plays EQ2 and GW, while another used to play AC...so they can't attack me too much 🙂.

Originally posted by Fire
what kinda BS friends are that

The kind of BS friends that want me to work out with them at the gym everyday.

The ones that want me to go out to the beach most afternoons.

The ones that want me dating more and playing games less.

When I stop defending games and step back and look at my BS friends.....I'm damn glad I have them.

If they're willing to stop being your friend because you play video games more then they want, then they obviously aren't very good friends.

Originally posted by Linkalicious
The kind of BS friends that want me to work out with them at the gym everyday.

The ones that want me to go out to the beach most afternoons.

The ones that want me dating more and playing games less.

When I stop defending games and step back and look at my BS friends.....I'm damn glad I have them.

My friends try that...and I always get fried.

There is a difference between wanting you to go out more, go to the gym with them go dating more and stop being your friend because you play games, IMO that's a big difference