|
I've never played D&D before. I wanna play this with my friends.
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 19:35 |
|
|
Play good games instead
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
Liam Emsa posted:I've never played D&D before. Do any of them know how to play any version of D&D? Because if not there is absolutely no way you'll learn how from these books.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
Rannos22 posted:Do any of them know how to play any version of D&D? Because if not there is absolutely no way you'll learn how from these books.  Oh ok
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
Liam Emsa posted:
Counter point, my friends and I did just that and it's fun. Maybe not a perfect system, but it's fun, and it's new enough that you don't have to slog through 100 books to get all the info.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
That's not a dig at you. This game isn't written with a group of people completely new to RPGs in mind. I'd suggest dungeon world because its lighter and actually tells you how to play it or 13th age because its basically d&d with most of the kinks of the last few versions ironed out and, if I'm remembering right, it really goes into how to play much more (thought its layout is pretty bad in my opinion.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
Gerdalti posted:Counter point, my friends and I did just that and it's fun. Maybe not a perfect system, but it's fun, and it's new enough that you don't have to slog through 100 books to get all the info. Monopoly is also fun.  I'd recommend him Dungeon World or something less fiddly that's not from 2003.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 03:53
|
|
|
Gerdalti posted:Counter point, my friends and I did just that You really didn't though: Gerdalti posted:I'm about to start paying my first d&d game in almost 20 years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
Liam Emsa posted:
That guy is not right just start with the basic rules read it through and try to get a good understanding. It along with the starter set can help new people get in. It explains well how every thing works. But if you are at all interested in 5e. I don't recommend asking here right now, Another forum like ENworld or something like it would probably be better, because not a lot of people in this thread are helpful. Really Pants posted:Play good games instead This is a good game that lots of people including people that never played before like. It's not a perfect game it has flaws. But It is still good. Azran posted:Monopoly is also fun. Or maybe you could try and be helpful. MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 04:08 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:This is a good game that lots of people including people that never played before like. It's not a perfect game it has flaws. But It is still good. Most people enjoy a game because they get to gently caress around with their bros, not because the game itself is actually any good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:09
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Or maybe you could try and be helpful. It's a lot more helpful than telling him to go drop more than $150 on yet another aggressively uninspired set of D&D3.5 house rules.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:16
|
|
|
Not that I think Next is a fantastic system but I'm pretty sure this is what people are talking about when they call this thread aggressively negative. I mean, I'm all for discussing the flaws of the game. I think that's good. Saying, "Don't play, game sucks" isn't really fair. There's a lot to like about Next! It's just regressive compared to a lot of games I'd prefer to play but I mean it's not like I didn't spend a good portion of my youth kicking down doors and punching orcs to death for 1d6+2 damage. The free rules are a good place to start, or the boxed set, if price isn't an object. EDIT: Also I wish people would stop suggesting Dungeon World as an entry point into the hobby. I love Dungeon World and the price is right but it's got low production values and is approached completely backwards from almost every other game on the market. Going from Dungeon World to almost any other game is likely to inspire confusion. To be clear, I'm the guy that thinks Dungeon World should be mandatory reading for anybody who wants to run any game, too. But it's counter-intuitive in a lot of ways if you have no previous RPG experience and even then someone who's played before is an invaluable resource so as not to misunderstand the thing. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 04:23 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
By telling him to play something
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
Ederick posted:A handful of pages back someone wanted the playtest packet with the Sorcerer in it. Here you go, page 11. This is the August 13th packet. This packet is interesting for what it shows of the old version of warlock and sorcerer. The 12/17/12 packet on the other hand has an expanded version of the fighter, which seems way better than the current fighter. It also doesn't have Warlock or Sorcerer anymore, would have been nice to see the 20 level breakdown for those classes at the time when Fighter looked like this. Some important points that may have been in the 081717 playtest, or may have been added afterwards and are in the 121712 packet. Martial Damage Dice, aka Expertise Dice, are a once per TURN resource, not per ROUND. This may have changed at some point and is a lot better than the current Expertise Dice that are daily, with a short rest recovery I believe. The Fighter eventually gets up to 6 dice. Another thing is that in this version of the playtest no one got multiple attacks. Various maneuvers, that I think only the Fighter and Monk got in class, others could pick them up with a feat, could grant additional attacks for the cost of a Martial Damage Die. The Martial Damage Dice were otherwise rolled on a hit for additional damage. Monks could pretty much exchange one die for one attack with Flurry, while Fighters could pick up Whirlwind to attack all adjacent, and I believe some other options. Fighters get Combat Surge 1/day at 11th level, it is kind of like Action Surge in that it gives you another Action. This could be bad if you have already used your Martial Damage Dice for that turn, but if you haven't then any Martial Damage Dice spent on that extra Attack have their results doubled. So lets say you attack, and maybe you miss or maybe you hit but didn't feel like spending your dice, then you Combat Surge to attack again and roll 2 Martial Damage Dice and get a 7, instead of adding 7 damage to your hit you would add 14. The only classes in this playtest are Cleric, Fighter, Monk, Rogue, and Wizard. This was before Proficiency and so classes got a Weapon Attack Bonus and/or a Spellcasting Attack Bonus. Cleric was the only one that got both, and the Weapon one was real bad. All the classes except the Wizard got the Martial Damage Dice, as well as a Martial Damage Bonus that was applied to one weapon attack per turn on a hit. The Cleric had a reduced progression for both, maxing out at 4 dice and +5 damage bonus. The other classes, except Wizard that got neither, maxed out at 6 dice, and got +5 damage bonus at 5th level and up to +20 at 17th level. Only the Fighter and Monk got maneuvers as part of their class at this time. The Rogue got some skill tricks instead, that relied on using the skill die that existed at the time. This was a time when no class got extra attacks for a high level, instead it was focused on single more damaging attacks. Though the Monk was good at spreading them out into multiple weaker attacks. Hmm at this time it looks like the Monk could use Flurry of Blows to make one additional attack by spending 1 die, or 2 additional attacks by spending 2 dice. Spending 2 dice at level 17 means 3 attacks that can then use the remaining 4 dice for extra damage or some other maneuver. Rapid Shot allows you to spend a die to make a separate attack against 2 enemies that are within 10 feet of each other. Volley is better you spend dice equal to the number of targets you want to shoot, then roll to hit each of them. Whirlwind Attack is similar for melee against enemies within 5 feet of you. So the Fighter, or someone else who spends a feat to get one of those Maneuvers may be able to make more attacks than the Monk, but the Monk is the only way in this playtest to hit the same target multiple times. Looking at the older playtest I think back then you got both more dice and bigger dice, I may need to check a packet inbetween these two. Also comparing the two, the 081712 packet does not have Parry. Parry is a really nice Fighter ability at 1st level that, if you are willing to spend your reaction, is just great at providing durability. It requires being hit by a melee attack while you are wielding a melee weapon or shield, and you can spend your reaction and as many Martial Damage Dice as you want, add up their results and reduce the damage by that much, if the damage becomes 0 then the hit becomes a miss. Ryuujin fucked around with this message at 04:48 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Not that I think Next is a fantastic system but I'm pretty sure this is what people are talking about when they call this thread aggressively negative. If somebody wants to drop $100+ on Next on a lark then presumably they're going to do that regardless of what people in this thread say. I'm not sure it's "aggressively negative" to say "hey, there are plenty of better and less expensive games out there if you've never played an RPG before, you don't have to start with D&D like it's Elfgaming 101 and this is your required reading." That Next isn't the worst most horrible most awful RPG of all time doesn't mean there isn't better stuff out there, and there's no reason to make it your first foray into rolling tabletop elfs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Not that I think Next is a fantastic system but I'm pretty sure this is what people are talking about when they call this thread aggressively negative. People keep saying there's too much negativity, but they never actually disagree with what's being said.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
Liam Emsa posted:
Here's some more solid advice: ignore everything MonsterEnvy posted:That guy is not right just start with the basic rules read it through and try to get a good understanding. It along with the starter set can help new people get in. It explains well how every thing works. But if you are at all interested in 5e. I don't recommend asking here right now, Another forum like ENworld or something like it would probably be better, because not a lot of people in this thread are helpful. ...this idiot has to say
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
Its not "aggressively negative" to say that your first TTRPG experience probably shouldn't be the equivalent of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. video games. Sure you can have fun with it but you might also be scared off by its jankiness if you're new to the whole experience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
Isn't there a "What game should I play?" thread? That would actually be helpful, but I can't find it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:36
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:If somebody wants to drop $100+ on Next on a lark then presumably they're going to do that regardless of what people in this thread say. I'm not sure it's "aggressively negative" to say "hey, there are plenty of better and less expensive games out there if you've never played an RPG before, you don't have to start with D&D like it's Elfgaming 101 and this is your required reading." Really? Really Pants posted:Play good games instead This. This is aggressively negative. Also the whole point of 'try the free rules' is so they don't have to drop a hundred plus dollars on Next. I agree you don't have to tick off D&D like it's some kind of checkmark on your 'road to nerdgames' check list but you also don't have to push somebody off the railroad just because they said, "me and my friends want to play this game." That's how this discussion started. Somebody expressed a desire without any qualification and people immediately started making assumptions about their motivations instead of offering something as simple as, "try the free rules." I get that everybody's disappointed in Next for being a mediocre game with no real innovation over 3.5 but I think it's time to call a ceasefire from the endless parade of unqualified distaste. The bar set in the thread is, "if you like Next, tell a good story about it or explain why." Drive by shitposting should probably demand the same level of explanation, don't you think? To be clear: There's absolutely nothing wrong with discussing all the poo poo that's broken or that you don't like. I just think, "You shouldn't want this game, you should want things that are good instead" isn't helpful, it's pejorative. Explain why if you feel the need to jump down somebody's throat. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 04:40 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:38
|
|
|
Also, a lot of people spent their early forays into RPGs kicking down doors and punching orcs for 1d6+whatever because their choices were a lot more limited. Your choices aren't nearly so limited these days. There are many, many more RPGs available out there than there used to be 20 or 30 years ago many of which are cheaper and more self-contained than Next, entire websites devoted to selling you both print and digital copies thereof, and you have all the benefits of the internet and social networking to help you put a likeminded, interested gaming group together to play what you'd like to play rather than sticking with D&D "because it's all my friends can agree on." D&D continues to get by largely on being D&D because a lot of people don't know other RPGs exist and can't be bothered to care. Someone posting to the Traditional Games forum of Something Awful dot com is presumably not one of those people, and might find it useful to know that there are many more, frequently better options available.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Also, a lot of people spent their early forays into RPGs kicking down doors and punching orcs for 1d6+whatever because their choices were a lot more limited. Your choices aren't nearly so limited these days. There are many, many more RPGs available out there than there used to be 20 or 30 years ago many of which are cheaper and more self-contained than Next, entire websites devoted to selling you both print and digital copies thereof, and you have all the benefits of the internet and social networking to help you put a likeminded, interested gaming group together to play what you'd like to play rather than sticking with D&D "because it's all my friends can agree on." I don't even disagree with you! That's what actual discussion is for. Hell, just link to your posts or whatever if you get tired of explaining yourself. I mean there's definately something different about the DnD thread. If I go over to the 40K thread and say, "I'm just starting out, me and my friends want to play this, what should I do?" do you think the first response would be, "but why would you want to play this poo poo game?" Fake Edit: Okay, maybe it would be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
Liam Emsa posted:
The free rules only include 4 classes; 2 of them (Fighter and Rogue) are pretty awful even with the PHB, but the free ruleset only has the Champion Fighter (which is aggressively horrible) and the Thief Rogue (which is pretty bad). Just fyi if you go to try them out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:I don't even disagree with you! That's what actual discussion is for. Hell, just link to your posts or whatever if you get tired of explaining yourself. The problem there is that even with Games Workshop's domination of the market, Warhammer and wargaming is not synonymous in the same way that D&D and TTRPG's are. You can be reasonably certain that an outsider just getting into the hobby will not think that the only wargame on the market is some version of Warhammer and might even not have heard of Warhammer before entering the hobby. Whereas D&D = table top, pen-and-paper roleplaying games in many people's minds, even to those that have been active in the hobby for years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
To try to address Liam Emsa's inquiry directly: D&D Next is the simplest D&D this side of the original Red Box set, but the books (including the basic rules) themselves do a bad job of explaining how the game is supposed to flow on a fundamental level. Read through the OP. I tried to break down the base elements of the system as much as I could. If you have an idea of what you want to get out of an RPG, or out of this game specifically, or if you have any questions, ask, and we'll help. =========================== EDIT: You could run a free-form game using just the attributes + proficiency, even. "Whenever you want to do A Thing, add the relevant attribute modifier to your d20 roll. If it's something that your character would be good at because of their class, background, core competency, etc., also add your proficiency bonus to your d20 roll. DM sets the number you have to beat" gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 04:54 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
Liam Emsa posted:I've never played D&D before. Try giving the What system should I use thread a read, and if none of the systems already mentioned jump out at you, just make a post saying you're looking for a good system for a group that's all new to tabletop RPGs. Hopefully it will save you and your friends some money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:I don't even disagree with you! That's what actual discussion is for. Hell, just link to your posts or whatever if you get tired of explaining yourself. You'd probably get some of that in the Pathfinder thread, Shadowrun too. The 4E thread is full of people who'll talk your ear off about 4E's flaws. You also absolutely should not get into Warhammer 40K if we're talking the wargame, and I guarantee you that plenty of posters will be happy to direct you to one of a half-dozen alternate choices to scratch your armymans itch. On the other hand I think it says something when this forum has a productive Pathfinder/3E thread, 4E thread, Dungeon World thread, and an OSR retroclone thread, all of which are active, all of which have regular constructive discussion going on, and the Next thread has, essentially, MonsterEnvy and then a bunch of people going "well Next isn't GREAT but it's, y'know, okay I guess if you absolutely HAVE to play a game called D&D and won't play any of the other games called D&D." I think if Next had anything to offer beyond a warmed-over rehash of D&Ds gone by, if it wasn't relentlessly mediocre in pretty much every respect, that you would actually see more of that reflected in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
Liam Emsa posted:I've never played D&D before. If you never played D&D before and your friends play D&D, then just start playing with them. The best way to learn to play D&D is to find a group that's playing it, and get them to show you how it works. If you and your friends have never played D&D before but have played other RPGs for a while, then I'm sure you'll be fine working the kinks out of this one on your own! If you and your friends have never played D&D or any other RPG before, please look into a simpler system because this one sucks at teaching you how to play. To be clear - this is a game you can have fun with, no doubt. It's also awful at teaching you how to play, and it's got lots of weird rules or rules interactions that are going to require you to figure something out on your own if you don't already know "how D&D does it" (or if you played a different version of D&D from the one that rule was partly copy/pasted from). The lead designer, on twitter, has in the past responded to rules questions with the equivalents of "just do whatever" or "I would personally <do opposite of what rule says>", so don't expect the stupid parts to get official fixes. Yes, you can ignore and/or houserule and/or rewrite all the stupid, bad, and weird parts until the game works fine. You might even have fun finding the faults and making the changes, like some people posting here do. I doubt that you will enjoy that if you've never ever played D&D before. MonsterEnvy posted:It explains well how every thing works. The "starter set" does nothing of the sort. The "basic" rules do nothing of the sort. Both are just cut down versions of the full rules. Neither is easier to learn in any way. Neither has simplified rules in any way. All they do is exclude certain character build options. MonsterEnvy posted:...not a lot of people in this thread are helpful. You're right, and since lying to potential new players is the opposite of helpful, you're not one of the helpful ones. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 05:42 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:This. This is aggressively negative. I don't buy this. If someone came into the 3.5 thread and started asking 'my friends want to play original 3.0', it wouldn't be aggressively negative to tell them to play something better like 3.P. Yeah, content-less is not great, but the half a dozen posts before and after had other suggestions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
Thanks for the advice, everyone. Sorry for the derail. I'll make a post in the "What System Should I Play?" thread!
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
The irony is that explaining the shortcomings of 5e is content, and bitching about negativity is white noise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 05:50
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:
I said try the Free Rules. This was one of the responses I got First Bass posted:Here's some more solid advice: ignore everything Azran posted:By telling him to play something Generic Octopus posted:The free rules only include 4 classes; 2 of them (Fighter and Rogue) are pretty awful even with the PHB, but the free ruleset only has the Champion Fighter (which is aggressively horrible) and the Thief Rogue (which is pretty bad). Just fyi if you go to try them out. This is not even true. The worst of those is the Champion fighter and even then it's not a bad class it's just really simple. MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 06:47 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 06:44
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:This is not even true. The worst of those is the Champion fighter and even then it's not a bad class it's just really simple. A class that already doesn't do anything outside of the standard combat actions might at least be passively strong, but it's not even going to be able to outdamage a Battle Master unless you're throwing in dozen-round encounters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:
When my 10 year old and 12 year old cousin can read the starter set rules with out my input and have an understanding. (Not a flawless understanding, but very little systems have people 100% understand it first readthrough.) I think it's been explained pretty well. gradenko_2000 posted:A class that already doesn't do anything outside of the standard combat actions might at least be passively strong, but it's not even going to be able to outdamage a Battle Master unless you're throwing in dozen-round encounters. Probably not unless you get really lucky. It's not as good as the Battle Master, but for people that just want a very simple hit things class it's fills it's role fine. MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 06:57 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 06:54
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:When my 10 year old and 12 year old cousin can read the starter set rules with out my input and have an understanding. (Not a flawless understanding, but very little systems have people 100% understand it first readthrough.) I think it's been explained pretty well. Would you say their understanding of the game's rules is as good as yours? Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 07:37 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 07:32
|
|
|
Liam Emsa posted:I've never played D&D before. If you're set on playing something like D&D but no one in your group has played D&D before, I'd recommend playing Microlite20 instead. It's much closer to D&D and is a bit simpler to DM (imo) than more free-form games like FATE and Dungeon World. That said, if you're 100% set on D&D, as long as you and your friends aren't dicks, you'll have a fine time putzing around playing Next even without knowing all the rules. It's not a great system but you could do worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 08:10
|
|
|
Sometimes this thread acts like Next is a crime but I dunno, this forum isn't RPG.net or anything. It's not like in general it's a front face of the hobby, it's mostly a place for 20 people to repeatedly say that D&D is slanted in favor of wizards and Dungeon World is really good.
Lightning Lord fucked around with this message at 08:20 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 08:12
|
|
|
goatface posted:lots of "hand out membership to this wide-ranging organisation" as rewards so your RP isn't 'wasted' if you switch groups. yea this was kind of a weird thing. I've literally never run a published adventure before and I wondered if it was a normal thing for adventurers to get guild invites in pnp games... everybody posted:fighters are bad this makes me sad. i love playing fighty and melee guys in general. I felt really badass and validated in 4e when i could do cool poo poo like threaten, push nerds around, and generally be a presence on the battlefield. why did they make fighters bad? ugh
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 08:18
|
|
|
I just think 5e is the most aggressively boring thing I've seen since Essentials. Also 4e's cosmology is way better  Sanzuo posted:this makes me sad. i love playing fighty and melee guys in general. I felt really badass and validated in 4e when i could do cool poo poo like threaten, push nerds around, and generally be a presence on the battlefield. why did they make fighters bad? ugh Fighters were okay in the playtest documents and then they got worse and worse progressively. Then between the playtest ending and the final product they got even worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 08:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 19:35 |
|
|
We didn't even get a proper 4e video game before it got axed. At least 3e got IWD2 and Temple of Elemental Evil.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 08:32
|
|