|
Fruity20 posted:more or less, the skyrim of the dnd franchise? it's basically begging to be homebrewed. but how is it that pathfinder is unplayable? it looks pretty good and a few friends of mine loved the game. though, i can understand the rule heavy system isn't to everyone's taste. i'm more rules medium to light kind of gal. may I introduce u to dungeon world 
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 17:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
Pollyanna posted:Fantasy miko, i.e. a fantastical and non-realistic version of a Japanese shrine maiden. Some sort of Taoist/Shinto syncretism is what I’m thinking of - Monk for the Taoist lean and the physical/quanfa half, Cleric for the Shinto lean and the spiritual/animist-kami half.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 17:29
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:It's serviceable and its large marketshare facilitates finding groups. There are better systems for whatever it is you want to do with it, including systems that are essentially 5e but better, but those are its selling points. I'd love to read more about the systems similar to 5th. Like 13th Age is 3.5+4th+descriptive skills. Dungeon World/PTBA is kind of it's own thing with old school flavouring.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
Fruity20 posted:more or less, the skyrim of the dnd franchise? it's basically begging to be homebrewed. but how is it that pathfinder is unplayable? it looks pretty good and a few friends of mine loved the game. though, i can understand the rule heavy system isn't to everyone's taste. i'm more rules medium to light kind of gal. "Unplayable" may be a bit of hyperbole; it's very unpopular on this forum. It's got a density of information that makes it nearly impenetrable to new players and relies on legacy 3.5 rules with problems that have long since been solved by better systems. 3.5/PF is a game for people who love hypothesizing about their characters for hours on end, digging through supplements to find ways to sharpen their builds, and then still playing second fiddle to the guy who went straight wizard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 17:34
|
|
|
I won't lie, there's a part of my brain that loves Pathfinder's ridiculous character building, with dozens of classes and subclasses and traits and races and feats and magic items all plugging together into insanity. The problem is then you have to go actually play it with other people. I wish there were a video game with that much character building junk I could mess with.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 17:37
|
|
|
Harkano posted:I'd love to read more about the systems similar to 5th. Like 13th Age is 3.5+4th+descriptive skills. Dungeon World/PTBA is kind of it's own thing with old school flavouring. There's this thread over here. Enola Gay-For-Pay posted:I won't lie, there's a part of my brain that loves Pathfinder's ridiculous character building, with dozens of classes and subclasses and traits and races and feats and magic items all plugging together into insanity. The problem is then you have to go actually play it with other people. I wish there were a video game with that much character building junk I could mess with. Yes, basically. It's more of a character customization engine than a game, with a very dense, pseudo-simulationist and antiquated ruleset. For actual play it's a pain, since for the sake of smoothness it requires you to either throw away half the rules, or for the DM to have an encyclopedic grasp on its workings. Usually both. Conspiratiorist fucked around with this message at 17:41 on Sep 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 17:37
|
|
|
Harkano posted:I'd love to read more about the systems similar to 5th. Like 13th Age is 3.5+4th+descriptive skills. Dungeon World/PTBA is kind of it's own thing with old school flavouring. do you have a few minutes for our savior the demon lord?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 17:41
|
|
|
Splicer posted:You're thinking the fluff in 5E is at all useful for trying to build your guy. This is foolish! Tell me, how would you like it to play Not that I have personal experience with it, but probably poorly? Besides sharing an ability score, the two classes don't really support each other, since monk features need monk levels for progression. Unarmored defense is rarely better than even Scale Mail and shield, and a Cleric's bonus action is already a pretty contested resource, with Spiritual Weapon being the most prominent example. Sacred Fist was a neat prestige class in 3.5 that made it work, but I don't see much support for it in 5e.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 17:42
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:"Unplayable" may be a bit of hyperbole; it's very unpopular on this forum. It's got a density of information that makes it nearly impenetrable to new players and relies on legacy 3.5 rules with problems that have long since been solved by better systems. 3.5/PF is a game for people who love hypothesizing about their characters for hours on end, digging through supplements to find ways to sharpen their builds, and then still playing second fiddle to the guy who went straight wizard. I wouldn't go quite that far, it's plenty fine for just playing and it definitely is more playable than 5e. What it isn't is rules light though, and definitely not Fruity20's rules light taste. They'd be better off with Fellowship or like BECMI and not even 5e.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 17:45
|
|
|
lightrook posted:Not that I have personal experience with it, but probably poorly? Besides sharing an ability score, the two classes don't really support each other, since monk features need monk levels for progression. Unarmored defense is rarely better than even Scale Mail and shield, and a Cleric's bonus action is already a pretty contested resource, with Spiritual Weapon being the most prominent example. Sacred Fist was a neat prestige class in 3.5 that made it work, but I don't see much support for it in 5e.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 17:47
|
|
|
yeah I'm going to go against the grain here when I say that I think 3.5 and PF are a hell of a lot more playable than 5e, specifically because it has rules to cover most eventualities and doesn't ask you to make up all sorts of poo poo on the fly like 5e does of course, "better than 5e" is a really low bar to clear
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:yeah I'm going to go against the grain here when I say that I think 3.5 and PF are a hell of a lot more playable than 5e, specifically because it has rules to cover most eventualities and doesn't ask you to make up all sorts of poo poo on the fly like 5e does Exactly agreed. Pathfinder wouldn’t be my recommendation for most of this thread, but it is better than 5e. Shrugging at coming up with systems for anything hard makes a game real lovely to run.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:04
|
|
|
Fruity20 posted:Whelp so what i've read from this thread...is dnd 5th edition worth it? i'm at a online game and it's...fine. (would kill to play it IRL, though) It's worth it if you want to play a middle of the road RPG that tries to balance accessibility and rulings on things with the DnD setting. Unless you're starting up the IRL game yourself you're more likely to find a group playing DnD. I understand people liking or not liking certain systems but there's a lot of nonsense that gets thrown around about systems being stupid or unplayable when there are hundreds or thousands of people successfully playing them and having fun. It's a game not an automobile transmission.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:05
|
|
|
3.x tries to do something impossible, and it does it poorly. 5E tries to do something possible, and does it extremely poorly. Or vice versa, depending on your perspective.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:06
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Yes, basically. It's more of a character customization engine than a game, with a very dense, pseudo-simulationist and antiquated ruleset. It's amazing that PF 2e is basically already this but there's only one book. I can't even imagine playing PF 2e when there's more than one book, let alone creating characters. There are so many fiddly bonuses. DND 5e has kind of spoiled me in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:09
|
|
|
Fruity20 posted:Whelp so what i've read from this thread...is dnd 5th edition worth it? i'm at a online game and it's...fine. (would kill to play it IRL, though) If you like the online game you’ll like the irl game (assuming you’re playing with friends). If you’re asking if buying the rulebook is worth it I like the D&D Beyond online rulebook more because it comes with a nice character builder. Do a search for a coupon code if you decide to go this route.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I meant that rather than try to build what they want by looking at the fluff, they should decide how they would like a shrine maiden to play and then pick the class that matches that best mechanically and write "shrine maiden" on it. ...Cleric I guess, if I want to stick to the real world definition of it. Though then I don’t get the qigong and sacred sword and holy paper talismans stuff. Maybe a bit of bardiness? Maybe I should just write a playbook for it 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:17
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:...Cleric I guess, if I want to stick to the real world definition of it. Though then I don’t get the qigong and sacred sword and holy paper talismans stuff. Maybe a bit of bardiness?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:24
|
|
|
I've been reading 13th Age based on someone in this thread's recommendation and realized it's basically my ideal version of what 5e is trying to do. I especially like that when it came to TotM vs The Grid they went firmly in the TotM direction (ranges are either "nearby" or "far away") instead of doing The Grid but saying they're doing TotM like WotC. I'm running a 5e game now with people who are really skeptical about playing anything else so I'm thinking I'll just start slipping in 13A mechanics one-by-one and eventually they'll be playing that and not even notice. "So here's what I call an Escalation dice..."
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:32
|
|
|
I thought about doing escalation dice in 5e, anyone try that? Any math it breaks horribly?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:...Cleric I guess, if I want to stick to the real world definition of it. Though then I don’t get the qigong and sacred sword and holy paper talismans stuff. Maybe a bit of bardiness? To piggyback off Splicer, what’s important to how you envision the character? The Wushu sword styles, the sacred prayers and rituals, what? Presumably you’re here to get the input of people experienced with the system so give us the General shape and we’ll try to fill it in with mechanics. (The answer will likely be Bard regardless)
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
Finster Dexter posted:It's amazing that PF 2e is basically already this but there's only one book. I can't even imagine playing PF 2e when there's more than one book, let alone creating characters. There are so many fiddly bonuses. DND 5e has kind of spoiled me in that regard. You said you were playtesting 2e, right? Even if your GM is running it badly I’m not sure why you’d say this. There’s very few modifiers during play so far, way fewer conditional or contextual modifiers. Character creation is more involved sure but who cares, you’re doing that without a time limit on your own time. It’s far from the unplayable spiraling complexity mess you’re making it out to be. And the math in general works and makes sense and is consistent. Is that what 5e spoiled you on? Good math?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:57
|
|
|
Yeah, when they say "what do you want to do", it means "I want my person to cast supportive, healing type spells" "Using a bow is cool" "It'd be nice if I could play a good liar" "I want to float 2 feet in the air, screaming blasphemously"
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
M.c.P posted:To piggyback off Splicer, what’s important to how you envision the character? The Wushu sword styles, the sacred prayers and rituals, what? Presumably you’re here to get the input of people experienced with the system so give us the General shape and we’ll try to fill it in with mechanics. Splicer posted:Again, not real world definitions or anything. Ignore the classes, ignore everything, just tell me what you want to do in fights, what do you want to do outside of fights, and what ribbon abilities/baubles are important to you. Imagine you'd never heard of any of D&D's mechanics and were just rambling on about this cool thing you wanted to be. Exorcise ghosts! Commune with the earthly spirits! Uphold the laws of nature! Protect sacred treasures! Brandish swords made of ash trees and white steel! Seal demons with paper talismans! Dance for the favor and blessing of the gods! Chant prayers of cleansing and bring down holy fire on the filthy earth! loving, like, baller poo poo like that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
Good lord are people in here really pushing 3.x over this? Like 5e has flaws but let's not go fuckin crazy here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 19:09
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:Exorcise ghosts! Commune with the earthly spirits! Uphold the laws of nature! Protect sacred treasures! Brandish swords made of ash trees and white steel! Seal demons with paper talismans! Dance for the favor and blessing of the gods! Chant prayers of cleansing and bring down holy fire on the filthy earth! Gurl get you a war cleric or a paladin and reach heaven through violence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 19:16
|
|
|
Arivia posted:I wouldn't go quite that far, it's plenty fine for just playing and it definitely is more playable than 5e. What it isn't is rules light though, and definitely not Fruity20's rules light taste. They'd be better off with Fellowship or like BECMI and not even 5e. If you like playing more than flipping through rulebooks, 5e is better. It's replaced a lot of fiddly corner case rules with broad 'good-enough' mechanics that work well on the table. I'd put it on the same level as 13th age in terms of ease of play/depth. There may be some hidden horrors in 5e that my brief experience with it havent yet shown, but afaik this thread doesnt have a laundry list of them which suggests they arent too pressing. sebmojo fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Sep 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
Imagined posted:I've been reading 13th Age based on someone in this thread's recommendation and realized it's basically my ideal version of what 5e is trying to do. I especially like that when it came to TotM vs The Grid they went firmly in the TotM direction (ranges are either "nearby" or "far away") instead of doing The Grid but saying they're doing TotM like WotC. Yeah, that's a good call- 13th age is fine as a system, maybe a bit better than 5e or on par, but also has Eyes of the Stone Thief which is amazing, probably the best campaign module ever written.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 19:28
|
|
|
Glagha posted:Good lord are people in here really pushing 3.x over this? Like 5e has flaws but let's not go fuckin crazy here. 3.5 is fun........if you like seeing how ridiculously broken you can make a character. Why yes, I would like to be a gestalt with like 6 different prestige classes and ten of the levels being in ur-priest 5e is smoother in play as a game. I like building characters in 3.5, but I'd rather play 5
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 19:32
|
|
|
3.5 has many many downsides but it also has upsides of shitloads of books to mine for whatever weird character. 5e has no upsides, it's a plain oatmeal of a system. There's nothing good to say about it, other than its easy to find.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
Arivia posted:You said you were playtesting 2e, right? Even if your GM is running it badly I’m not sure why you’d say this. There’s very few modifiers during play so far, way fewer conditional or contextual modifiers. Character creation is more involved sure but who cares, you’re doing that without a time limit on your own time. "very few" In a single combat round, I had like 5 or 6 modifiers I had to add up in order to figure out whether or not I hit. And every single person was having to do that every round. There's proficiency and attribute, which are written on our sheets, but then there's item bonuses, cover bonuses, taking cover bonuses, whether an NPC has Mage Armor for additional bonus, and probably a few others I'm forgetting. Don't get me wrong, it's not as bad as PF 1e, but it's still pretty cumbersome. Granted, we were scraping the barrel for bonuses so we could keep from dying to a pack of goblins that have +6 to-hit and have bows that do 1d10 deadly on crit (which is easy to get at +6 when you have rogue/goblin/barb that are wearing no/light armor and you only need to beat AC by 10 to crit.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 19:43
|
|
|
Malpais Legate posted:Gurl get you a war cleric or a paladin and reach heaven through violence. War Cleric seems to be specifically about war, and the Paladin makes sense in some ways (the auras and oaths and poo poo) but is primarily martial and feels more like being some kinda flagbearer or something rather than tapping into a spiritual or divine power. Hrmmmmm
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 19:51
|
|
|
Arivia posted:I wouldn't go quite that far, it's plenty fine for just playing and it definitely is more playable than 5e. What it isn't is rules light though, and definitely not Fruity20's rules light taste. They'd be better off with Fellowship or like BECMI and not even 5e. i'm fine with more rule heavy games, I just have a sort of phobia that causes me to worry about breaking rules by accident. This is why I reconsidered not becoming a DM. sure mistakes happen but I want a smooth experience with a little less stifling. Like i do like fifth edition despite how large the book is but I read novels and textbooks and understood each detail. a shame it feels limited in a way. like i hear you could be creative in 5th edition, but I feel what abilities you get feel lackluster without making them versatile. correct me if i'm wrong as I might consult the book on whether that's true. again, homebrew exist but people said not to delve into it until your ready. I just recently got into a game recently. I was a bit inactive because didn't know what to say in character (what can you do with a neutral good human fighter with daddy issues? who's a rip off of cloud strife). Fruity20 fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Sep 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:War Cleric seems to be specifically about war, and the Paladin makes sense in some ways (the auras and oaths and poo poo) but is primarily martial and feels more like being some kinda flagbearer or something rather than tapping into a spiritual or divine power. Hrmmmmm Well, with the war cleric, are you not sold because they follow gods of war or whatever? If that's the issue, ignore that entirely. The spell list, proficiencies and weaponry are the types of things to look at, and if you like it, cross out every instance of "war is important" with "exorcism is important"
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 20:12
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:War Cleric seems to be specifically about war, and the Paladin makes sense in some ways (the auras and oaths and poo poo) but is primarily martial and feels more like being some kinda flagbearer or something rather than tapping into a spiritual or divine power. Hrmmmmm As said before, it doesn't necessarily have to be about war. You could easily reflavor it into the holy pursuit of justice or defender of the weak. In fact, paladins have an oath with more of a priestly defender in mind, Oath of Redemption. You do mention ~earthly spirits~ and ~upholding the laws of nature~, which is basically the resume of Oath of the Ancients paladin. There's also other kinds of clerics that may interest you, though War and Death clerics are the only one that get proficiency in swords, as far as I remember. Nature seems to hit a few of your beats, although Grave may also interest you. The flavoring is really going to come down to how you want to describe your spells and your roleplaying. Your cleric may summon a spiritual weapon that takes the form of the ash-and-white steel blade, or Turn Undead with the rebuking power of their paper talismans. Paladins do fall into the flagbearing leader archetype, but that doesn't mean yours has to. Your paladin's smites could easily be calling down holy fire to scour the evil that meets the tip of your aforementioned white steel blade.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
Finster Dexter posted:"very few"  I don’t what why Did you recalculate your attacks from base principles every time? Do you do that in 5e, too? Why are you individually adding up for each attack modifiers like attribute, proficiency and item bonus that stay the same? Why not write down the total as a “longsword attack” or whatever like people have been doing throughout the history of RPGs? Taking cover is a specific combat bonus, that kind of stuff is the very few I meant. Mage armor applies to the NPC’s AC, not your attack roll. So either you’re intentionally misrepresenting the Pathfinder 2e rules to make them look bad, or you just don’t know them in the first place and shouldn’t be stating an uninformed opinion. Which is it? @sebmojo: this thread has plenty of lists about what doesn’t work with 5e. I know gradenko’s done a bunch. And “ask your DM” really isn’t a suitable “good enough” for anything.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 20:59
|
|
|
I have to say, I really don't like redemption paladin. I played one who did not kill anyone sapient because he wanted to give them all opportunities to redeem themselves or be redeemed and the extremely limited spell slots along with very few control spells for paladins made combat really unenjoyable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
M.c.P posted:To piggyback off Splicer, what’s important to how you envision the character? The Wushu sword styles, the sacred prayers and rituals, what? Presumably you’re here to get the input of people experienced with the system so give us the General shape and we’ll try to fill it in with mechanics. Pollyanna posted:Exorcise ghosts! Commune with the earthly spirits! Uphold the laws of nature! Protect sacred treasures! Brandish swords made of ash trees and white steel! Seal demons with paper talismans! Dance for the favor and blessing of the gods! Chant prayers of cleansing and bring down holy fire on the filthy earth!
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
Malpais Legate posted:As said before, it doesn't necessarily have to be about war. You could easily reflavor it into the holy pursuit of justice or defender of the weak. In fact, paladins have an oath with more of a priestly defender in mind, Oath of Redemption. You do mention ~earthly spirits~ and ~upholding the laws of nature~, which is basically the resume of Oath of the Ancients paladin. There's also other kinds of clerics that may interest you, though War and Death clerics are the only one that get proficiency in swords, as far as I remember. Nature seems to hit a few of your beats, although Grave may also interest you. Oh hey, actually yeah a war domain cleric isn’t so bad. Hits almost everything I want. Even has Spirit Guardians for summons via ofuda. I guess I could cross out “war” and call it “purity” or “cleansing” or something. Maybe a level in Bard or something to represent kagura? Or that could just be flavoring. Edit: oh hey Shield of Faith has a material component of “parchment with holy text”. Perfect.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
Fruity20 posted:i'm fine with more rule heavy games, I just have a sort of phobia that causes me to worry about breaking rules by accident. This is why I reconsidered not becoming a DM. sure mistakes happen but I want a smooth experience with a little less stifling. Like i do like fifth edition despite how large the book is but I read novels and textbooks and understood each detail. Depends on the class and the players and the GM. Sure you can't necessarily reinterpret your power in any way you choose but if you've just started playing you're likely to have a broad range of possible solutions to problems using your powers and general abilities. I've played some 5e with new or very rusty players and they seem to be pretty happy with it. We'll see what happens when we get into the extremely combat heavy areas but keep in mind you're hearing from a bunch of people who've played several iterations of DnD as well as other RPGs. None of this is new to them and they know exactly what they do and don't like. This thread reads like a high end watch forum where everyone tells you a rolex is actually a lovely watch when all you wanted was to know how to get a good cool looking used one like your dad owned. If you know people that are interested in playing 5e then it's worth the investment. If they don't know what they want to play then it's totally up in the air. The core rules and premade characters might be enough to give you a little adventure to see if you can take it the direction you want. If you really like the players and the GM you're playing online with and 5e isn't really exciting you then you should probably look to another system.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 21:39
|
|