"Tired of alignment arguments?"

>"stop to discuss with the GM"

you're not gonna like AD&D

...

I really like amber diceless but its a pile of weird and fucks and requires a DM that can keep up with the schemes of all the PCs and two dozen NPCs all at once, across a few dozen parallel dimensions.

The fact reading a big stack of novels is a semi-prerequisite for running doesn't help either.

...

Have you tried applying that same level of critique to D&D?

>Vampire, and it seemed to combine the worst parts of a railroad and a sandbox
You seem to be confusing rule systems with the person refereeing the game. I mean, I'm no big fan of White Wolf systems, but your text doesn't really make a lot of sense in the context of rules.

I've never read a diceless game that didn't either just replace dice with something more inconvenient (like cards) or reduce everything to a talking game.

>'Not Playing D&D' can be fun for the whole table! You could play a bunch of systems about cyberpunk, realistic modern combat simulation random dinosaurs in space instead!
every fucking time

I don't want to play a game about modern day gay vampires. I want to play kitchen sink fantasy games. If you don't like it, fuck off. Now there are some games that do it better than DnD, such as Fantasy Craft, and I am looking into it. But when you get a stick up your ass about someone playing DnD, recommend Fantasy Craft, not fucking Phoenix Command.

So i wanna DM a campaing set on a fantasy version of the age of discovery, my first option for systems is D&D 5e with homebrew, so what systems could provide me more than one of the following:
>crafting system or customizable weapons
>easy to create new playable races/monsters/classes
>rules for sea faring
>rules for exploration

>FATE, and found it full of "make shit up" and "stop to discuss with the GM"
Honestly, some campaigns revolve around things so inherently complex (like dogfighting or Stands of JJBA fame) that the only way to run them well is to either use a simple system that lets you abstract the fuck out of anything complex or use GURPS. FATE is for when you have a campaign like that and you don't want to use GURPS.

Will you ever stop being butthurt?

The problem with the "have you tried not playing D&D" is that people use it more often than not when playing a different system wouldn't solve anything.

Few problems discussed on this board can be solved just by switching systems, largely because at the end of the day, the system is actually only a small component to the game that's being run, and that switching systems just leads to a new veneer on the same old problems.

"Try X system" is not always bad advice, but it's not particularly helpful in a thread about problem players, or about story issues, or even alignment arguments, because even in the last case it's just a name (or a different name) for things you'll find in find in almost every other game. Even games "without" alignments still have degrees of morality to them or factions with codes of conduct, and most alignment arguments typically revolve around these two features of alignment.

Does D&D have flaws? Certainly, but most of these are remedied in far less time than it takes to learn a new system, and the idea that you should abandon a system just because something didn't work out is why we find a lot of people hopping through multiple systems hoping that a change of game will solve their problems.

Most of the whole problem with system discussion is that it's actually political in nature. Play X game or play Y game is a tactic to try to garner support for one game or dissuade people from playing another, and is largely dishonest in its lack of transparency. D&D becomes a target not because it's a bad game by any measure, but because it's popularity means people are less inclined to play other games.

As a person who has played his share of everything under the sun and now plays homebrews almost exclusively, I've really gotten tired of people claiming system superiority or inferiority when they're all just talking about the same inferior games just under different disguises.

If only they knew how amazing Duck in the Circle was.

Post-WotC D&D was a mistake.

>Does D&D have flaws? Certainly, but most of these are remedied in far less time than it takes to learn a new system, and the idea that you should abandon a system just because something didn't work out is why we find a lot of people hopping through multiple systems hoping that a change of game will solve their problems.

Complete bollocks if you're talking about 3.PF. The reason people are so loathe to leave it is that they've put a vast amount of work in to make it function. It's the sunk cost fallacy in a nutshell, and they would still be better off being more open minded and looking at other systems. I can't think of a single system that is harder to learn than D&D is to fix.

Yes. D&D is slightly less broken than M&M and fixed in about the same way: "don't play Pun-Pun" and the occasional high-handed nerfban for people who insist on going down that road anyway. You should have seen the screaming on one player when he wanted to combine about five classes and six splatbooks on his character, argued to the DM "it's not as good as CoDzilla", and the DM responded with "Clerics and druids are now secondary casters, your argument is invalid".

In my experience people generally have an idea of *what* they want to play and you nudge their power level on elements of that specific concept if they're out of line. The mass brokenness of D&D becomes largely irrelevant when you realize that you don't need to fix the Truenamer if nobody is playing a Truename, don't need to fix Incarnum if nobody is playing an Incarnate, don't need to fix the... (insert humorously long list of everything potentially broken or imbalanced in D&D)

Oh look, it's eternally triggered bitch-user.

>This is only a problem with bad players
>This is hardly a problem to begin with
>This is only a problem in an edition that has been dead for a decade

That might be because you're a bitch-user?

>>crafting system or customizable weapons
Start learning Savage Worlds motherfucker

Right you're the one getting angry and calling people names in a thread making fun of one of the most popular TTRPG's in the world in the style of a shitty infomercial.

And THEY'RE the ones who're "triggered".

You know he did mention REIGN which IS a fantasy game with several settings right?

Opinions on runequest?

>don't play D&D play these meme games instead

Oh look, it's eternally triggered bitch-user.

>endless thread after thread about how to fix "×" in 3.pf
>endless thread after thread about how to fix caster imbalance
>how dare someone suggest playing one of those meme games OP must be triggered
Holy kek

>Any RPG that's not D&D is a meme
I just... please stop.

Fate, Apocalypse World, Burning Wheel, Phoenix Command, and Dinosaurs In Spaaaaaace are all clearly meme games. Get the fuck out.

>meme game
>meme x
Please stop. Just say you think they're shit.

I actually like Apocalypse World but don't pretend it isn't a fucking meme game.

>meme game.
No stop. "Is a meme x" really needs to fuck right off.

Why? We both know what it means. What would you propose as the alternative?

gr8 b8 m8 i r8 8/8 but h8 to rel8

WHAT THE FUCK DOES IT MEAN?
EXPLAIN IT?

You know what it means. A game that isn't actually meant to be played.

Something being a meme means that it is an idea propagated by communication.

IE: Meme Games are games that people discover through communication.

>A game that isn't actually meant to be played.
Okay yeah. You're just fucking with me.

That makes every game a meme game and the term meaningless.

>That makes every game a meme game and the term meaningless.
Yes. "It's a meme X" is a meme phrase.

What classes are in GURPS?

Are you pretending to be retarded? These games are discussed and spread by word of mouth but nobody ever actually plays them. Veeky Forums is almost completely about the meme games because it's full of people who don't actually play tabletop games.

I think you might want to take one second to realize you lumped everyone who is still playing 3.5/pf into one group before you are allowed to complain about anything else.

>"stop to discuss with the GM"

Gross.

No, but seriously all those systems are shit too.

>That makes every game a meme game and the term meaningless.
That's his point. It is meaningless.

If anything, the most popular games would be "meme games," e.g. D&D or Pathfinder.

yes and no
if you followed all of the rules contained within a GURPS book you would end up with the worst rules bloat you have ever seen and nothing would make sense
the point is that you're supposed to just pick out rules that you like to fit whatever you're playing

GURPS is a toolkit. Pick and choose what you want. GURPS Lite, 50~ odd pages long, has most of the rules for playing the game, sans magic and more detailed combat situations.

None. You use your imagination to make a character up. Though there ARE class templates in GURPS Fantasy if you must

If what does and doesn't matter changes so drastically at the DM's discretion, is it even really a game at that point? Do you need to say, "We're running ," when you're just making shit up anyways?

So many of the games people put forth as an alternative to D&D are ones with little to no structure. I don't want to just play pretend with my friends - I can do that on my own, I don't need to buy a book or read a pdf for that.

>is it even really a game at that point?

GURPS isn't just a game, user.
This is fucking serious

>If what does and doesn't matter changes so drastically at the DM's discretion, is it even really a game at that point?
??? I don't understand the question? GURPS is GURPS. Whether or not you use hit locations or wounding modifiers or bleeding or cover or whatever doesn't really change how combat is resolved, you're just given more means to the end. You still roll to attack, they still roll to defend, and you still roll damage. The only thing that changes is the granularity of the effects.

>Do you need to say, "We're running ," when you're just making shit up anyways?
But I'm not, user-kun. It's all there in the books. I can give you page numbers, if you'd like.

>So many of the games people put forth as an alternative to D&D are ones with little to no structure.
GURPS is highly structured and hands having a dozen different splatbooks in play way, way, way, way, way the fuck better than D+D.

Basically, you have no clue what you're talking about. Good to know.

Why don't you just shut the fuck up and read the goddamned rulebook you illiterate

Also stop listening to retarded memekids.

user are you mentally deficient in a clinical way or is it just a chronic lack of using your fucking brain and stopping to think for a second?

GURPS is a modular ruleset but is essentially static once modded. You're not making shit up you fucking idiot, you're just discarding rules that have no relevance to your campaign (why the fuck would you have vehicle maneuvering rules in your paleolithic tapestry-weaving campaign)

Jesus Christ, play something other than D&D for once you fucking ignoramus

>There's nothing wrong with a flat probability curve
There sure as fucking hell is, but only if you're not looking for swingy-as-fuck random-ass games with little coherence (this isn't meant as an insult, those games can be fun as hell and is an upside if you want it, but a huge drawback if you don't)

Hey, flat probability curves have their place for random tables. Nowhere else, but they have their place.

Actually like I said, I wasn't actually insulting flat-probability games. I love running M&M with flat-probability because superhero games SHOULD (in my opinion) be swingy as fuck and unpredictably and hilariously chaotic.

Flat-probability has several places apart from zany campaigns and intentionally random things. I just said to the other user that there is definitely something wrong with them in several systems where complete randomness is inappropriate.

You're making the common mistake of assuming that the probability of the die result is what ultimately determines the reliability of systems with largely binary "sucsess/failure" resolutions, rather than looking at the average value of the target numbers.

Games with higher/lower values are less swingy and produce more consistent results (regardless of whether the dice involved have a flat probability or curved), while systems with more median target values are more swingy.

Flat probability is ultimately just easier to use and calculate, and provide a wider degree of flexibility in regards to how swingy/consistent you want to make a particular game.

While that's not exactly an untrue argument, technically, I will clarify that I am referring to probability curves in terms of the probability of certain events occurring.
This should've been clear to infer from context, but suffice it to say it is obvious and banal that the probability of certain events occuring can be the same given altered distribution, even with different probability curves.

Oh look, it's the eternally bitch-triggered bitch-user bitching about people bitching about not liking what he likes.

Oh look, it's eternally triggered bitch-user.

d20 is terrible, but storygames are worse.

Are you saying that you're hoping to ignore what's obvious and banal, all in order to make a moot argument of little consequence?

You're not really referring to probability curves in terms of certain events occurring, but of certain dice results, which is not the same thing in a roleplaying game. I feel like you're being a bit unscrupulous with your method of argumentation.

Well, with such a welcoming playerbase, how could I not play GURPS?

Consider the fact that the post was a reply to someone claiming flat probabilty curves have literally nothing wrong with them, in context of Dungeons and Dragons.
You're being disingenuous by ignoring that context. Your post, if simply making a pedantic statement about incorrect usage of terminology by the OP, is inconsequential.

why on earth would we care if you play GURPS? Your happiness matters nothing to us

here. I was just correcting that user. I'm not an evangelist for GURPS. It'd be great if more people played it, especially for the things it's good at, but I'm not going to lose sleep over you saying you won't play it because some people were mean to you on the internet.

>flat probabilty curves have literally nothing wrong with them, in context of Dungeons and Dragons.

Yes. There's literally nothing wrong.
You seem to think there is, based on faulty logic built around a misconception that only looks at one part of a larger equation.

Oh look, it's the eternally bitch-triggered bitch-user bitching about people bitching about not liking what he likes.

>Variability is too high in Dungeons and Dragons by design
>this is somehow a misconception
nice meme, you math illiterate

Variability isn't too high by design.
In fact, you made a largely unprovable statement, because it is in fact grossly and provably incorrect when it comes to early D&D 4e, where variability was very much on the low side thanks to easily met target numbers to compensate for the comparatively long strings of actions.

I've tried to explain that the degree of reliability has much less to do with the dice involved in comparison to the targets numbers, and with those target numbers and the degree of reliability being a matter of taste that changes between editions, groups, and individuals, I'm starting to feel like you're just going to continue to make awkward statements that are more like unsubstantiated attacks than arguments.

You've explained nothing, I already stated quite explicitly that of fucking course the probability of any given result is the probability of any given result and this depends entirely on where the results are distributed on the probability curve, and as such literally any system can produce literally any mechanically identical result given enough granularity in its choice of stochastic processes, but D&D's general use of modifiers that are too low to impact the resolution mechanic as heavily as the result of the die is literally the definition of high variability: the dice roll matters proportionally more than the skill achievable by any given character. BABs for example are far too low to give any reasonable representation of the narrative skill of any given character in terms of levels.
There are methods employed to mitigate this, of course, but these are additional adjustments necessary exactly because D&D is far too swingy with the modifiers as they are.
4e is far better designed in that sense, but rarely do we talk of D&D as 4e without explicitly mentioning it, and as such it would stand to reason it is not what OP was talking about. See: the reference to caster supremacy, also mitigated in 4e.

Your pseudointellectual nonsense is honestly facile.

Underrated

RQ6/Mythras is my favorite published system.

BRP is flat probability dice results with difficulty adjustments based on multipliers. 5e has its core rules build around getting more or less consistent results. 4e balanced large bonuses to limit swinginess.

>Your pseudointellectual nonsense is honestly facile.
Your very smug for being wrong.

> but D&D's general use of modifiers that are too low

What? I'm starting to get a sense that you really are just a silly troll, especially because not only is that false and D&D does not have a general rule like that, but that such a general rule would make the game less swingy, which is exactly what you're trying to complain about.

Please, can you do me a favor? I think you need to put on a tripcode. You seem like a chap that should warn people who you are.

Do you honestly not know what the words used in my sentences mean? It is the only possible way I can fathom anyone being so oblivious

Who are you.
You seem to be a troll of particular dedication, and I request once again that you warn people, lest they try and take your posts seriously.

Given your evident absence of any mental capacity to understand anything past your own idiocy, I'm going to just stop posting in this thread.

You are objectively retarded. Go seek help.

Put. On. A. Trip.

You seem quite proud of your posts and don't think you are a troll, so why do you act ashamed when asked to sign a name to them?

I always see people retreat to this. "you just had a dumb DM." The rules shouldn't need a genius to run them, because you can't always get a genius when you need one, and when you do get one, they get fed up at how behind the curve you are, and they walk. I wish that everyone who has a pet system they know very well would simplify it down to something their kid sister could run, so that we could all play instead of just looking at each other and arguing about what a succubus can or can't do.

ITT

"Have a problem with a game ?"

Get a fucking decent GM or table that add their own spin to it instead of following the rules like holy laws.

If his group is so deficient that he can't allow the DM to do anything but follow the script in a module without the game blowing up, the he really shouldn't be playing anything other than D&D.

They tend to behave poorly when you have stacking bonuses or penalties. Also, in practice you rarely see results tables that allow flat systems to exhibit normal distribution-like effects.

Calculations are typically equivalent between both systems. Again, stacking bonuses/penalties are the primary concern, not the dice rolling mechanics.

I have a doctorate in a heavy statistics-using field, and I can't figure out what thesaurus-pants here is even trying to say.

Yah it sounds like 99% of his problems boil down to shitty GM, shitty player, shitty group. Fixing the rules when the people suck won't change anything.

White Wolf (and Fate, GURPS, etc) are excellent games but no game can survive chronic assholishness.

every time too

>>"I played D&D for over 3 years now. I tried not playing D&D and I found my martial artists mobility options could actually interact with his attack options!"
Have you

>>"I DM'd for most of my gaming life and after not DMing D&D I found I didn't have to fudge numbers on monsters half the time just so the non-caster characters could hit monsters!"
tried not

>>"I'm a long time wizard fan and after not playing D&D, I don't have to jump through a bunch of pointless hoops now because other character concepts are designed to keep up with me!"
playing 3.5e

user I hate to be the one to break this to you but given the average age rating and general attitutes on Veeky Forums 3.5 IS "standard" D&D to a lot of people.

AD&D is some wierd old school mess with rules nobody understands that's lost in the past with the grognards who never left it.

4e isn't "muh D&D" it's WoW/a tactical combat game masquerading as D&D.

And 5e is too new/lacking in an identity.

I don't like it anymore than you but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

I made two games that weren't D&D so that I wouldn't have to play D&D anymore, and I'm still playing D&D.

Just accept death. There is no escape from the OSR.

"Tired of seeing morons posting shit?"
>Shows a post on Veeky Forums with the text "a dice".

Not that user, but I disagree with you on both 4e and 5e. 4e is still D&D, but with more rules for the part of the game that actually needs rules instead of, say, tables of prostitutes or profession skills for farmers.

5e is the new/hip/popularized D&D, marketed at the crowd that was introduced to the game via Critical Role and the like.