This picture perfectly describes why 3.5 is an amazing RPG system

This.

Not really. The broken 3.5 system wasn't repaired with gold, it was repaired with more bowls by several different untrained artisans desperately trying to improve the bowl.

In the end you just have a Frankenstein monster of ceramic bowls, Tupperware and Dixie cups stabled together.

So 3.5 is the broken vase and 5e is the gold lacker that smoothed out the system?

...

4e was the hammer that broke it.

Nah, you're one off. 2e was the complete vase, 3.5 broke it, 4e fixed it, 5e broke it again after it turned out people preferred it that way.

>butthurt fags who always need to complain

I like the fact is that even a backhanded compliment is enough to force you guys to start shitposting thanks to your mental issues.

I'm not mad that the game is bad. I'm mad that people pretend it isn't.

No, you're a delusional shitposter.
You're mad because you have a different opinion, a minority one, and that makes you feel small and worthless.

So, you act out by shitposting.
You're pathetic, and really are as small and worthless as you feel.

And I like the fact that you get so triggered so damn hard by anyone daring to criticize your system of choice.

He's right though. There's nothing wrong with enjoying a system, but if you like something you should be honest and aware of its faults.

3.PF is busted as fuck. That doesn't stop it being fun, but trying to say otherwise is straight up wrong.

It's not even my system of choice.
I'm just amazed by how you are legitimately compelled to shitpost like a neurological disease.

Seek help.

You seem to be using a lot of strange and contradictory definitions to argue your point, and while I can do you a service and pretend you're not shitposting, I can hardly say that you're helping anyone by defending the insane shitposting that these people are addicted to.

Shitpost about what?

3.5 being a broken system? Like it IS? And has been proven to be MULTIPLE TIMES?

I'm sorry this apparently keeps being brought up and that you just can't STAND IT.

And you seem compelled to shitpost about shitposting.

>proven

Look, you idiot. You're using a definition of broken that doesn't hold up.

If it was a broken system, people would not be able to play it. It certainly would not be playable to the point where it single-handedly revitalized a dying industry.

All you've got is exaggerations, bitching, and a hope that if you complain loudly enough, you can convince people outside of your little circlejerk that the game you hate is not only "broken", but that you can prove it. You're just trying to figure out ways to justify your shitposting, and at the end of the day, there's really no way, no matter how hard you convince yourself that your opinions matter beyond your own empty head.

You're using a definition which has no meaning.

A roleplaying games mechanics should support the experience the game is designed for. Between ludicrous imbalance, a broken CR system and a huge amount of clunk, 3.5's mechanics do not support the experience it was designed for.

It's a broken game. That doesn't mean you can't have fun with it, but that you'll be working harder to do so.

>people would not be able to play it.

You're confusing two different definitions of a word.

A videogame that's "broken" can be considered unplayable or unwinable but even then there are "broken" games that're at least functional.

Tabletop RPG's can literally be held together with metaphorical paperclips and tape. I can successfully "play" 3.5 by having people write down numbers on paper, have them roll a d20 and make shit up if I feel they got over an arbitrary number. Of course 3.5 by this standard is "playable" because unless the dice rolling mechanic is just insanely obtuse (like in FATAL) then it's easy to roll with it.

Furthermore you're again confligating popularity with quality.

>301 replies and 47 images omitted

>Between ludicrous imbalance, a broken CR system and a huge amount of clunk, 3.5's mechanics do not support the experience it was designed for.

Please. Your exaggerations don't hold up.
It's got it's flaws, but it's hardly as broken as you've committed yourself to believing it is.

It's funny, because as much as you like to talk about sunk-cost fallacy, you don't even realize how deep you've dug your own hole in your endless shitposting for no point or purpose other than to complain about a game you dislike that you think was, or still is, too popular for your tastes.

It's amazing, because I bet that when the interest in the system naturally decays, you're probably going to pat yourself on the back, thinking you played a vital role, when all you really did was shitpost to the annoyance of all around you about a game that's far better than you'd ever allow yourself to admit. Your hyperbolic attacks are so far gone and over the top at this point, that they make you look ridiculous to anyone actually familiar with the game and not composed of 76% NaCl.

You're complaining about a few issues of the CR system as if it were the death of the system, a system that still seems to be puttering quite contently after sixteen or so years.

I'm making short, concise posts making actual points and giving reasonable arguments. You're tying out litanies of good faith in defense of your idol of true RPGs. I think I know which one of us has a problem.

>No, you're a delusional shitposter.
W-well that's j-j-just like... your opinion m-m-man!

I know this is bait but on the off chance some user reads this and misunderstands that something being an opinion doesn't make it equal to other opinions and the quantity of people who have a particular opinion doesn't grant that opinion any level of dignity.

People are allowed to like 3.P. They can even have fun with it. The discerning opinion by people who have cited so many facts (actual facts) in so many topics and which will surely be reproduced below by people with far more time and fucks than I have is that the d20 system is a broken confused mess desperately trying to fix all the perceived wrongs of 2e, succeeding at little of it, and making most of the game a fair bit worse. By chance it happened along as everyone was getting on the internet though and introduced the vast majority of current D&D players to the game. A number of factors contributed to its cultural dominance and created what we all know and understand as "The Brain Cancer" which makes people invent reasons and justify why one of the worst RPGs ever made must in fact be one of the best simply because it is popular and it's often the only one they have seriously played.

>why 3.5 is an amazing RPG system
3.5 was shitty to begin with, and you attemps to "fix" it do not make it better.

>implying 3.5 ever worked in the first place
>implying it's ever been fixed
>implying

You're making worthless, exaggerated grievances and claiming they're "actual points", and relying on hyperbole to try and prove the unprovable while calling that insane goal "reasonable."

It's a better system than you'll ever allow yourself to see, and that's your personal, mental issue. Your hate is your own fault, not the system's.

It's a medically proven fact that playing 3/PF in the longterm induces degenerative brain cancer.

It's not his fault. Don't hate him for it.

But we should still put those sorts of people in isolation, so the cancer can die out peacefully.

This picture perfectly describes why 3.5 is an amazing system.

> This system is broken, and that's why I like it.
> I'm mad that people pretend it's not broken.

You're shitting out walls of text without ever once actually talking about what he says.

Monk, Wizard, Druid, Cleric.

That's your party. I'm sure you'll screech and whine, but the monk player is literally worthless in this scenero.

The only fact is that you NEED to shitpost, like it's your little personal crusade.

Why not constantly shitpost about the other equally or more broken systems like Exalted, GURPS, or the various ST?

Is it because you only know how to parrot what people say about 3.5?

That's nice, dear. Now go with the nice men in white coats.

Also, you braindead retard, everyone knows those are broken ALSO. The difference being, they don't have this mind-mashed defense force that try to pretend otherwise.

That's an interesting idea.
But, your petty complaint doesn't actually hold up, and there's plenty of ways to build a great monk.

I'm sorry, but you're asking to engage with trolls, as if they had points worth making, rather than admonishing them.

Nothing can be said to them that they won't complain about. They're that mentally fucked, like yourself.

>there's plenty of ways to build a great monk.

Hahahahahahaha

Oh my fuck that is such perfect comedy gold. A good monk in 3.5. Christ, you're an idiot.

Monk 1/Cleric 19 doesn't count.

What mind-mashed defence? I don't pretend that a game is unplayable or even bad when it isn't, and I have enough sense not to focus entirely on the complaints of a few asshats who can't look beyond their hatred.

There are people, in this very thread, who think their opinions qualify as objective proof. They're so mentally fucked, that they've had to force themselves to believe that their minority opinion is somehow more valid than that of those of people who play and enjoy the game and aren't so fixated on obsessing over its few flaws.

Because it was broken and got fixed by people with much better ideas than the people who made it?

Show us, nigga.

Nigger, you just said a monk is an acceptable class, and you call OTHER PEOPLE fucked mentally?

>I don't even like the system
>I just open threads about it and argue with the people in them
I think out of everyone here you're the one who need to get some help.

I've seen people build strong monks and have fun with them.

You're so delusional, that you find that ridiculous, like you've spent your entire life reading through CharOps boards quantifying various builds and comparing them in order to evaluate the mathematical distinctions based on hypothetical scenarios.

That's nice, but some people actually played the game.

I prefer playing other systems. That doesn't mean I'm blind to either the faults or strengths of 3.5.

Just because I like a different game best doesn't mean I have to violently hate all the rest.

>It's got it's flaws, but it's hardly as broken as you've committed yourself to believing it is.

spot the 4 major problems with this 3.5 DC example list.

SHOW US THE FUCKING BUILD, YOU LYING MOTHERFUCKER

Show us, or this proves, not that we needed more proof, that you have literally no argument other then wild shitposting and enraged screeching about your waifu system.

Hey, I've played a Monk and had fun with it. I was in a pretty long running campaign playing Monk into the Drunken Master prestige class.

Which is why I know exactly why they are completely fucking useless. The GM had to bend over backwards to make me relevant and come up with interesting custom feats and rules. We figured out a custom system for improvised weapons which actually gave me some utility and damage, and ended up being pretty fun to play.

But all of that fun came from the group I was with and the efforts of the GM to make a busted system and a worthless class actually enjoyable, and I'm self aware enough to acknowledge the distinction.

I'm going to guess hearing a guard being more difficult than climbing a rope, opening an average lock being more difficult than swimming in stormy water, heroic being 5 higher than formidable, and opening an average lock even being near a heroic act

>Guaranteed replies
Oh you're going to get a lot of of this one

Oh, we all know it's bait. But can't risk the newbies. Idiots like this have to be utterly ground into the dirt. This system dies with the grogs that play it now. Never again.

>Your exaggerations don't hold up.
archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fw/20040221a
>Monstrous Crab

I really dislike how this picture is getting moved around tumblr as some sort of "people who are depressed/mentally fucked are more beautiful than normal"

The actual point of is to take something that was broken and turn it into an art piece. A more proper metaphor for tumblr types would be taking someone who's mentally fucked up, ice picking their brain to make them a vegetable, and then dressing them up in fine clothing and putting them on display so everyone can gather around them and say 美しいね。。。

So 5e is modern art?

not that guy, but whats the problem with monstrous crabs?

What you fail to appreciate is that complaining about one class hardly invalidates the system as a whole.

It has a lot of great things about it. Class imbalance is an issue, but that's the natural failing that comes from having so much class diversity and trying to make the classes feel mechanically distinct.

There are plenty of glitches and compatibility issues, which is why the DM's guide and supplements offers tons of advice on how to keep things moving smoothly even if the mechanics need to be adjusted for the tone or style of the game. For example, the 3.5 Oriental Adventures campaign book has everything on a lower tier of power, but it outright bans certain PH classes and replaces them with ones that trade mechanical power for in-setting strength and influence.

I won't argue that it doesn't have flaws. No one could argue that. But, for a system that does what it does, with all its broad reach and styles of play that made it the go-to system for the better part of a decade, it performed admirably and should be respected.

It's a game so good, that it still manages to compel its haters to lash out at it at every opportunity, as if they fear that it won't ever stop commanding the respect that this titan of a system has earned over its still-enduring lifespan.

Look at its stats, its strategy, and then its CR. The damn thing is a TPK machine that's almost impossible to fight without Glitterdust.

>Class imbalance is an issue, but that's the natural failing that comes from having so much class diversity and trying to make the classes feel mechanically distinct.
No, it's not, it's completely unrelated to this beyond the developers and playtesters being utter shit at playtesting the game. Fuck off.

>It was popular so it m-m-must be good!

That's a neat cover.

Compared to other games made around its time and long after? It's practically a masterpiece.

It didn't sweep up all those industry awards by accident, after all.

Address the point or fuck off. Nobody wants to hear you jack off about 3.5 while repeatedly dancing around every point someone makes.

Oh yeah, I forgot Grognards got 'Dancing Goalposts' as a SLA.

>Extreme power imbalance between classes
>"make the classes feel mechanically distinct"

>Admits "There are plenty of glitches and compatibility issues"
>It's okay though because the DM can just fix it

>"for a system that does what it does"
What? Dungeon crawling hack n slash? Because it doesn't do that very well.
>"with all its broad reach and styles of play"
Oh, more things it doesn't do well.

>It's a game so good, that it still manages to compel its haters to lash out at it at every opportunity, as if they fear that it won't ever stop commanding the respect that this titan of a system has earned over its still-enduring lifespan.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you: the Brain Cancer.

We're not talking about ordinary popular. We're talking about an immediate best seller that remained at the top of the charts for years, then saw a revitalization under a different publisher that once again propelled it to the top of the sales charts.

We're talking about the game that was the most played, most popular game ever. It had literally the largest player base, with the highest percentage of players, in roleplaying game history.

This isn't your Justin Bieber or Twilight. This is the level of popularity that puts it on the tier of the Beetles or the Bible.
You're right, in that popularity doesn't mean something is good, but their is a correlation between the two, and even if 3.5 is only half as good as its popularity might suggest, it would still be the best game of all time.

I'm willing to concede that it's probably only about a quarter as good as its popularity would herald it to be, but even at a 10th it would still considered a great game.

No, this is exactly like Twilight, you just pathetically continue to try and dodge the subject.

And yet it was still less popular than AD&D/BD&D in their heyday despite a fucking moral panic aimed directly at it and not having the rules on the internet for free.

What does that tell you?

>This isn't your Justin Bieber or Twilight. This is the level of popularity that puts it on the tier of the Beetles or the Bible.

>This is the level of popularity that puts it on the tier of the Beetles or the Bible.

Veeky Forums is over. We're just... Done. This is the ultimate expression of what we've come to be as a board. Jesus fuck.

>It had literally the largest player base, with the highest percentage of players,
No, again, that's AD&D.

user, none of the posts were really shitposts.
They just disagreed with your unbacked statement with their own unbacked statements.
Unless you claim you are shitposting RIGHT NOW.

So desu ne?

That's your opinion, friend.
A minority opinion built up on opinions built up on opinions, that you have the audacity to believe are anything more than opinions, just so you can try and fuel your hatred past the insurmountable wall that is overwhelming popular and critical consensus.

3.5 was great. It might not have aged fantastically and there's other games people might enjoy more, but to compare it to Twilight is just your hyperbole getting the better of you and making you look ridiculous.

The first major problem is the idea of a rank 0 DC, like the scale should start at 2 (so that it's possible for a person with zero bonus points to a roll to be able roll under it and fail) or it should start at negative-(whatever the maximum number of penalties a roll can experience).

Why are you encouraing rolls to see if people can climb a knotted rope? Where's the random element of chance that the d20 is representing coming into things there? And does the check carry up all the way to the top of the rope or do you need to make a DC5 roll every so many feet up the rope? Or is it per knot of the rope? And if that sounds like a retarded quesiton, bear in mind that the possibility of your SEASONED ADVENTURER™ with BACKSTORY™ without DEX BAB or ranks in climb to fall off the knotted rope, possibly to their death, is 1 in 4, so a knotted rope hanging over an immense abyss is now a 1d4 save or die event for a PC. Which is insanity for a skill check for what should be a minor detail of someone going through a dungeon.
Then realise that this is for a KNOTTED rope, presumably an UNKNOTTED rope is harder to climb, like maybe a coin flip of a chance to fall off the rope and die? And this is the "easy" DC, because the scale started at 0 and ranges to 40.

Why is the "average" DC not anywhere near the middle of the range, what sort of fucked up math has the average of a range between 0 and 40 be 10?

Not only is opening something itself described as "average" given a Formidable DC, but the probability of opening that lock are thus:
With 18 DEX and thus 5 BAB, a thief needs 10 ranks in Open Lock to have a 50/50 chance of opening a lock. 18 DEX, 10 ranks, half of all average locks a thief tries to open he still fails at.

At least with twilight, the landwhales that clung to it were ladies.
3.5 is a sausagefest of grognards that is mostly remembered for its failings.

Then why is literally everyone else laughing openly at your retardation?

According to you, that makes it the objectively correct opinion.

>This is the level of popularity that puts it on the tier of the Beetles or the Bible.
This is the future we chose. The bait has gone too far.

In regards to roleplaying games, of course.

When you look at the top of the list, that's really where it sits.

>tg falls for the bait
Every single time

What in the fuck even is this thread.

I guess everyone was just looking for a fight today.

The salt of a few circlejerkers is just that.

You come here to Veeky Forums to lick each other's wounds and to feel like you're not a minority, when all you end up doing is gathering together in the dark of these shitposting threads, complaining to each other, while the rest of the community goes on and ignores you while enjoying themselves playing whatever games they like, including 3.PF.

And it's a good system, or as good as you can polish 3.5. Full of modular rules, a single spellcasting class in the core, more options for things besides fighting. Unfortunately this also makes the system too heavy.

user, why do you keep shitposting like that?

>18 dex, and thus 5 bab.
What the fuck are you talking about?

>mostly remembered for its failings.

That's just you and your salty friends, really.

Most people actually see it as the backbone of the current most popular roleplaying system, 5e.

user, why do you keep shitposting about how salty you are?
Everyone laughing at you seems to be in good spirits.

Except yet again, that's AD&D. You can try to dance around it and refuse to address the point all you want, but the fact of the matter is that D&D in the 80s was far more popular than D&D in the 2000s ever was and sales data will consistently back this up. Basic D&D used to sell over a million copies a year. Nothing related to 3.5 ever came anywhere close to that.

I like how you need to feel like you've made some point worth making.

It's this that helps other people realize that the people who still complain about 3.5 really are insecure and needy.

You're a really desperate crew, but I guess that's just how shitposters roll.

I want to let you know what your post is pile of bullshit but emphasized
>KNOTTED
made me actually check it instead of just scrolling over it because TL;DR

Yeah, D&D 3.5 actually significantly hurt the popularity of the D&D franchise.

>Popularity equals good for my thing!
>Wait, everyone's saying I'm wrong?
>Popular opinion is WRONG!

Suck my shit, fagatron.

user, why do you keep shitposting about how angry you are?
Are you upset that upset that people do not agree with you?

By our 3aboo's standards The Phantom Menace is the best Star Wars movie.

man, imagine how much more popular tabletop would be these days if 3.5 never happened.