|
It's the ultimate expression of the DIY philosophy. If you can just houserule everything to perfection then there's no such thing as a bad rule. It turns out that Rule 0 was the answer all along.
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:53 |
|
|
Littlefinger posted:Except the one true wayism straw man you are busy constructing here in reality consists of 'rules should not get in the way of what a game allegedly set out to do and preferably should not be a vague, nebulous Schrödinger's rulebook that needs constant adjudication'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
Andrast posted:Are you seriously arguing that you can't/shouldn't criticize game design & mechanics to determine if they are bad or good? As for FATAL, I think there is a broad societal consensus that elements like raping people to death is in poor taste. I would start with those types of issues before getting into the overly complicated mechanics. I mean, overly complicated mechanics are definitely a matter of taste. People seemed to enjoy Phoenix Command and Role master.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
Some amusing situations from my 5e game this week. A wild surge story and some pvp. The party rogue scouted out a building, only to get shot by the 5 guys hiding in it. He dropped unconscious. Our wild mage was up next. She walked in, cast Sleep on two of the guys, and rolled a wild surge. Her result was a 65: "Up to three creatures you choose within 30' take 4d10 lightning damage." At level 1 that insta-gibbed those three. She had literally soloed the encounter in one action. As a new D&D player she was ecstatic, but there's an equal chance this post could have been 'tonight our party blew up to the wild mage's fireball'. The other wild surge of the night polymoprhed her into a sheep, but she saved against it. I'm encouraging her to use Tides of Chaos at every opportunity so she triggers more surges. Then we had a pvp situation as an IC argument over how to treat a prisoner came to blows. The party cleric surprise attacked the rogue, but failed. Rogue won initiative and dropped the cleric to 0hp right away. Argument over. But wait! The cleric rolled a 20 on his death save, regained 1HP and stood up. You get your whole turn too when that happens, so he used dragonbreath on the rogue. A CON save, that rogue has no chance! The rogue saved and survived the half damage, but the cleric forgot about the hostage they were arguing over (and that the cleric wanted to live!). He was caught up in the cone area. That guy died horribly. Then the rogue knocked out the cleric, again, and we dragged him back to camp as I reminded him that PvP in D&D is always a terrible idea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
ascendance posted:And honestly, with all the complaining about poor game design in this thread, you would think people would have more faith in their ability to mod the game and continue to have fun. gently caress that. Give me a completed product if you want me to buy it. You can be satisfied with cast offs and laziness. I demand better. ascendance posted:Yeah, and people give a poo poo about this to varying degrees, especially given that people have played Rifts for years and years. Yeah, and this industry, in a sea of nerd industries that have had an incredible sales incline, has stayed at precisely where it started.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:gently caress that. Give me a completed product if you want me to buy it. You can be satisfied with cast offs and laziness. I demand better. Right. So you hate 5e and think it sucks. You're not going to buy it. Why are you wasting your time venting your vitriol about it to those of us around here who think its at least vaguely playable? Go demand better from Mike Mearls, not humble end users like us.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
ascendance posted:And honestly, with all the complaining about poor game design in this thread, you would think people would have more faith in their ability to mod the game and continue to have fun. The question this leads to in my mind is why should I bother modding it when I can just play another game/system? ProfessorCirno posted:Yeah, and this industry, in a sea of nerd industries that have had an incredible sales incline, has stayed at precisely where it started. The comparison between ttrpgs and videos games boggles me when people use it to insult the former, as in "it feels like a video game." I don't understand what that means or how it's supposed to be bad. alarumklok posted:Trip report: Monk is really strong and keeps getting better, your fighter would probably have a better time with a Bard under the Valor college with the sword-bond thing house-ruled on. Warlocks are good and cool.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
ritorix posted:Wild Mages and Prisoner dilemmas. Man we have a wild mage but have only gotten one surge out of like four sessions! I think his beard turned into butterflies or something, may need to follow your example and goad him into using tides of chaos more. One of our GMs tried to drop the Prisoner Dilemma on us last session and we just straight up killed the prisoner. Odd way to learn not one of us is full on good, just varying degrees of neutral assholes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:The question this leads to in my mind is why should I bother modding it when I can just play another game/system?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
ascendance posted:Right. So you hate 5e and think it sucks. You're not going to buy it. Why are you wasting your time venting your vitriol about it to those of us around here who think its at least vaguely playable? Go demand better from Mike Mearls, not humble end users like us. Is it the job of the end user to fix a broken product, or not? Make up your mind. ascendance posted:Because there is no perfect system. Another game system may do some things better, and another things worse. 5e inherits all the problems of previous D&D editions, and does nothing that one of them couldn't do better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
ascendance posted:Because there is no perfect system. Another game system may do some things better, and another things worse. That is an excuse, not a reason.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:Is it the job of the end user to fix a broken product, or not? Make up your mind. As for 5e, there are a number of things I like about it compared to previous editions. I'm kind of fed up arguing about why I like it, so I'm just going to shut up about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Rulebook Heavily posted:That is an excuse, not a reason. I mean, I seriously thought about running ACKS until I took a look at the saving throw tables, and the proficiency system, and I was like, "nope. Not gonna work for me."
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
ascendance posted:Its only an excuse because you think my reason is invalid. "Why play 5e?" "NO SYSTEM IS PERFECT IT'S ALL SUBJECTIVE STOP BEING MEAN TO 5E  "
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
NachtSieger posted:"Why play 5e?" You disagree with these assertions?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
"I'm going to shut up about it." *fart*
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Slimnoid posted:"I'm going to shut up about it."
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
ascendance posted:If an end user chooses to fix a broken product, then that's their problem and their choice. In what other medium do consumers have to pay upwards of a hundred dollars for broken, semi-functional product(s) and have to either use them as-is (as my groups have, since the "rules are rules" mindset is present) or have to somehow take it upon themselves to try to fix things without really knowing how to do so without further breaking the system. Why do you keep trying to absolve Mearls and Co. of any responsibility for putting out a product (that requires significant time and money to really enjoy) that is clearly broken and dysfunctional in several areas with no real hope of fixes outside of paying more money for future errata?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
ascendance posted:That's kind of the issue. No system is perfect. There's a lot of subjectivity. Okay, I'll accept that. What does 5e (or 4e, or Pathfinder, or 3/3.5, or whatever) do that I can't do with greater ease in DW? Because that's the system it and any other system is most directly competing with in my group right now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
No one is even claiming that there is a perfect system out there. Your assertions are practically white noise. The lack of a perfect system doesn't mean certain systems can't be better at certain things (or hell, everything) compared to other systems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
ascendance posted:I'd rather spend my vitriol flaming MRAs, Islamophobic atheists, and people who think GamersGate is justified. So why the gently caress do you keep posting in this thread? People have very legit beefs with 5e and you just keep spouting bullshit that people call you out on. You'd think that'd be enough to just I dunno, stop posting here?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
Grimpond posted:In what other medium do consumers have to pay upwards of a hundred dollars for broken, semi-functional product(s) and have to either use them as-is (as my groups have, since the "rules are rules" mindset is present) or have to somehow take it upon themselves to try to fix things without really knowing how to do so without further breaking the system. Spending many hours on something before you have a useable product is basically how a lot of different hobbies function. I'm not here to absolve Mearls of anything. I have a product that I am happy with, and that you are not. It doesn't make me or you a better person to consume this product, or not consume the product. This is like you making fun of me for liking a lovely sports team. I don't go around telling everyone they're idiots for liking the Maple Leafs, even they are also consuming a clearly inferior product. Anyway, Leaf fans are fully capable of articulating how lovely their own team is without my help.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Is Next even getting any vitriol? It's aggressively mediocre, and bad in a lot of places. But aside from two shitstains in the credits, there's really nothing between the covers worth getting mad at.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:Okay, I'll accept that. If DW works for your group, more power to you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
ascendance posted:umm, let's see... Miniatures games. Lots of those come with borked rules, and you have to spend dozens of hours painting your toy soldiers before you can even play the game. Cookbooks. Every loving cookbook lies about how long it takes to caramelize onions, and cooking times are just so dependent on your equipment. Okay, so...cooking (???) Miniature Games (which is still the fault of the creators for not doing their job) and uh, football. I think that's a pretty stupid comparison, because That's pretty loving different then a table-top game. ascendance posted:If an end user chooses to fix a broken product, then that's their problem and their choice. Correct me if I'm wrong, but how is this not an attempt at shifting responsibility to the players and not the creators. e: i assumed you meant foot ball but realized you said sports team. whoops! Grimpond fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Oct 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
ascendance posted:I don't personally like DW's reductionist resolution system. I want my different crunchy bits to be very different. I want spells and swordplay to work in dramatically different ways. and you play a game that uses d20s to resolve every kind of attack
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
First comparing it to RIFTS, then the Maple Leafs. Next's biggest proponents in this thread are doing a better job of selling people off of it then the people bagging on it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
ascendance posted:I want my different crunchy bits to be very different. I want spells and swordplay to work in dramatically different ways. I'm not sure I understand how D&D achieves this while DW does not. Like, compare Wizards & Fighters in both: In 5e/4e, the wizard selects his spell and rolls 1d20+mods to determine success. The fighter chooses his maneuver and rolls 1d20+mods to determine success. In DW, the wizard selects his spell and rolls 2d6+mods to determine success. The fighter chooses his move and rolls 2d6+mods to determine success.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:In 5e/4e, the wizard selects his spell and rolls 1d20+mods to determine success. In 5e, the wizard can just have things happen or just make other things roll the d20. Meanwhile the fighter can only ever work through the d20.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
NachtSieger posted:In 5e, the wizard can just have things happen or just make other things roll the d20. Well, yes. The point is the resolution still boils down to a 1d20+mods, except in the cases where no roll is required (4e had stuff like this too).
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
ascendance posted:That's kind of the issue. No system is perfect. There's a lot of subjectivity. I forgot to reply to this! I don't disagree with you, sort of, but I have things to air. First off, gently caress off no one is asking or even mentioning a perfect system, and secondly, while systems being subjective is actually a thing and rules can be viewed in different lights by different people "but the rules are subjective!" shouldn't be used as a club to beat down or dismiss dissenting opinions. EDIT: quote is not reply, gently caress Generic Octopus posted:Well, yes. The point is the resolution still boils down to a 1d20+mods, except in the cases where no roll is required (4e had stuff like this too). 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
ascendance posted:Anyway, Leaf fans are fully capable of articulating how lovely their own team is without my help. Do any of them start wringing their hands about the MORASS OF NEGATIVITY if anybody agrees with them? Or are there any Leafs fans who insist the Leafs are the only real hockey team, and every other team is just an MMO? Hwurmp fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Oct 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Being a fan of a lovely sports team is vastly more economical both in a money and a time sense given that most sports games don't take up six hours of your Saturday or require you to buy a series of $50 textbooks in order to drink beer and yell at your television. What I'm saying is that the Maple Leafs are actually more entertaining than Next is and they should be proud of that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Also your town won't have dozens of better, cheaper teams in the same league.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
So go post in the threads for those better, cheaper RPGs rather than in the 5e thread?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:So go post in the threads for those better, cheaper RPGs rather than in the 5e thread? Turns out you can do both.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:So go post in the threads for those better, cheaper RPGs rather than in the 5e thread? Why would I post about 5e in those threads? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
I would like everyone to tell me why they're so negative about this game, but I would like it if everyone could avoid negativity while they do that, because being negative about a game that you can houserule is dumb and better systems exist anyway so why aren't you playing those? Also this game is like a lovely sports team but not like a lovely MMO and oh god I've forgotten what I was trying to say.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
At the end of the day I think most people just want the new edition of the gateway / big dog game of the hobby to not be...whatever 5E is, whether you actually like it or not. (My huge personal beef with it as being primarily a DM is the Monster Design, I can live with the rest of it's flaws but that one just really gets to me).
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:53 |
|
|
Like, people don't hate that you like the game. I like plenty of bad or flawed games. 4e has a lot of flaws. Shadowrun is mechanically bad. The catch is that the Shadowrun thread has Shadowrun fans acknowledging the bad, blaming the developers and producers for it, and then talking about either fixes to the system or alternate systems you can use. At no point are the bad mechanics just washed over with "They aren't REALLY bad, you can fix it." You aren't doing that. You're getting upset at stage one: admitting the game has flaws.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 23:26
|
|