So Im looking for a tabletop rpg to play with my friends...

So Im looking for a tabletop rpg to play with my friends. They all have played DnD 5e and it seems like it just fizzles every time. I think its a combo of the game not being right for us and the DM is really dry. What rpgs does Veeky Forums recommend? I want something that the characters are really forced to specialize so that everyone has clearly defined roles

Other urls found in this thread:

mediafire.com/download/0g704j3g12ipw13/Eldritch_*ss_Kicking_Classic_RPG_(9551544).pdf
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Try something like Song of Swords. They say that you can get through a campaign in a single evening in that one.

If you're looking for more rigid enforcement of class-based roles, older editions of D&D may be more suitable. 2E has a lot of variety with its class kits.

If you don't feel like digging up a bunch of old supplements, then a rules clone would fine. These are usually free of charge, and some like "Labyrinth Lord" also include a basic campaign setting to work with.

Sauce on that image?

>forced to specialize

Lamentations of the Flame Princess.

You have 3 classes that all do one thing really well, and 1 class that fills in the blanks really well

Me and my friends meet up once a week to play Dark Heresy. The setting is in the grim dark future of the 41st millennium and there is only war. It's an investigation genre type game where you gather evidence throughout your journey in order to find you culprit.

If you're into hunting demons or gameplay very much like call of Cthulhu, than this might be the game for you. Also it's in the Warhammer 40k universe.

If the DM is dry the first priority would be to switch him out before changing system

You may have some difficulty with that, as most games aren't class based. D&D forces you to specialise more than other games, even.
That said, older editions (anything before 3rd) made you specialise more

If you're into 40k, Deathwatch is one of the more specialized role based games.
Black Crusade from the same line also has a decent amount of in-built specializations, but for most archetypes there is some flexibility which may not be what you're looking for.

Perhaps, if you want player roles to be more defined, your group should try making characters together? If you make them together, you can work out who fills what roles and make sure people don't step on each other's toes.

I'm curious about the GM being dry - could you tell us more?

Seconding this.

Houkago Play.

Its pretty good. The current arc is about the cast playing tabletop rpgs.

There's lots of things that might work, but first things first; switch the GM out for another. Maybe take it up yourself and let him play for awhile instead.
No matter how good the game is, a dry and full GM is going to be dry and dull no matter what you put him in.

So are any of the older editions of D&D still viable? with pdfs online or something? I feel like we got bogged down in mechanics a lot

maid or a board game.

I don't think dnd is the problem here.

>So are any of the older editions of D&D still viable
Yes.
Go have a look at the /osr/ thread for a pastebin or whatever with every D&D book up that isn't 3e 4e or 5e
Go for Pathfinder general for 3.x stuff

4e died alone and unloved so there's no general for it

If your group has played 3.5 or Pathfinder before, you'll probably really like Fantasy Craft or True20.

If you've never played 3.5 then they might be a bit awkward or heavy for your taste.
Generally I don't recommend 'd20 System' or derivative games unless at least one or two people in the group are familiar with it.

Eldritch Ass Kicking, wizards game about killing other wizards for power and shit, then can specialize in different kinds of magic(earth,fire,wind,water, and others that you want)
mediafire.com/download/0g704j3g12ipw13/Eldritch_*ss_Kicking_Classic_RPG_(9551544).pdf

If you want clearly defined roles, it doesn't get any more defined than Shadowrun. So defined, in fact, you might as well be playing three different games at the same time.
But I have a feeling that's not what you're looking for.

Now, do you think your group would benefit more from something a bit more mechanically interesting or something that provides you with roleplaying prompt within the rules?

>4e died alone and unloved so there's no general for it

DESU it doesn't need one.

You only need the offline character builder, the rules compendium, and the DM probably needs to read DMG1 and MM3. That essentially contains everything you need to run the game, short of adventures.

As for OP
I really like Strike! but there's not a lot of discussion for it. Combat roles are specialized, so it got you covered there, but out of combat it's a bit more free.

DnD 4e was built to do that and did it pretty well, but it has a plethora of rules conpared to 5e. Also everyone hated it enough that we got 5e after

Thanks for reminding me.

>I feel like we got bogged down in mechanics a lot
Sounds like it could simply be growing pains--it'll take time for people to settle into pretty much any new system.
But revisiting an older D&D will just introduce more new mechanics than 5e deals with, and they're all going to be more important to keep track of. You're likely better off trying out some non-D&D stuff.

Maid RPG can be fun if the group would want to play an anime slice-of-life comedy. Every character is going to be very, very different, but the mechanics are quite straightforward.
The game sort of assumes the players will be down for raunchy fan service gags, but you can (and maybe should) just ignore those bits.

There are also a good number of clean, light-weight games where characters can be quite different which are more like D&D.
Haven't had the chance to play it yet, but you should check out Basic Fantasy Roleplaying. It's free and has boatloads of optional stuff you can introduce as you become more comfortable with the game. Seriously, check out its downloads page--TONS of goodies, like new classes and variant options, plus some free adventures. It's kind of nuts.

RISUS is also free, and super-simple. A universal game, you build characters by putting points into what cliches or one-word descriptions fit your character. There's not a list, just whatever makes sense.
Not very well suited for D&D-style adventuring, though, because how damage works. It can lead to cascading failure.

Lasers & Feelings is a one-page, Trek-like RPG that's amazingly simple. Probably too simple, to be honest as it'll wear out for any group in two or three sessions.
You pick your job, 'style', what your party's ship is good and bad at, and that's mostly it. Roll d6 based on how suited you are for a task based on your job/style/context, compare to a number you have based on how Lasers (Spock-like) and Feelings (Kirk-like) your character is. And that's seriously all the rules.

>and the DM is really dry
You are going to have a serious problem finding a game system that fixes that on a mechanical level.

Instead, I suggest you look at the setting. Most RPG have a setting they are attached to, built around. Take a look at your DM. What sort of fiction does he like? What really gets him going the most?

Pick a game system that has a setting based on that.

What's the sort of genre you're interested in, and more importantly how much time do you have per week?

If it fizzles and loses interest, a ruleset change is probably going to help less than a scheduling or genre change.

It might also be an issue of game style - RPGs can vary between very tightly scripted narratives (something like LoTR or Dragonlance's epic journey) or open sandboxes - and certain genres may demand your game system provides for more of one than the other.

On the topic of D&D, I haven't played it before but I set up a character sheet. Did I get it right, or did I mess up horrendously?
I must warn you that my handwriting is terrible, and sometimes too small. And the picture may not be the best quality either,but I tried

The girl is an absolute semen demon.

You're missing your Ranger skill proficiencies, but otherwise it's all correct.

For reference:
>Choose three from Animal Handling, Athletics, Insight, Investigation, Nature, Perception, Stealth, and Survival

Play Fantasy Craft, I can shill if you want.

Seems okay, except your wisdom is a +3 modifier and your dexterity is a +4 modifier, so adjust things based off of those

You're not having fun because you're playing the RPG equivalent of McDonald's, when everyone would much rather be enjoying a nice dinner at a family restaurant or something.

D&D is a toxic game that you need to get away from in order to get some perspective and find out what you /actually/ want to play.

You seem to be a weeb, so I'd recommend DoubleCross or Anima. The former is (literally) more episodic while the latter is suited to big, epic campaigns.

If you want a break from mindless slaughter, try out a WoD game like VtM.

If you want to step back from the small time bullshit, try REIGN, or if you're feeling particularly adventurous, Kingdom.

In any case, your problem, as with most problems on this board, is D&D itself. Remove that and you will be a hundred times better off, immediately.

As someone coming from a background heavy in L5R, japanese TRPGs and Storygames, I find that personally I've had the most fun and the easiest time with DnD retro-clones.

I wholeheartedly recommend Dungeon Crawl Classics, Beyond the Wall, and Lamentations of the Flame Princess, all of which I've played and enjoyed immensely, if for surprisingly different reasons.

The trend of going back and fixing the ideas of the past is producing some real gems.

Why anyone would recommend that piece of garbage Anima is beyond me.

It literally took the d100 and made rules for which it could just take the d20 for without any problems.

Not to mention the shitty, shitty character creation. Where you have to make a character with clearly defined height and built if he/she is strong enough to benchpress 200 kgs.

What if I want to play a guy who does not look as strong as he actually is? That rule completely fucks me over in that regard.

No, Anima is a piece of garbage that needs to be thrown out the window.

Shill detected. Preparing to purge.

In all seriousness, if a class and level system isn't clearly defined enough for you, maybe you should try a conventional boardgame that limits the actions players can do.

The problem with Shadowrun is that it's very defined in play, but character creation s freeform, so unless an experienced player helps everyone out, you'll end up with a bunch of gimp characters.

>Houkago Play
Too bad it's not updated for a year now.

Dumbass, you couldn't be a more transparent NARP shill.
D20 is the worst dice mechanic, d100 is far better in every way. Besides, only a genuine autistic spergs about dice enough that it impacts their enjoymrnt of a game. As for what you're talking about in character creation, I saw nothing like that and you have no reason to use a rule like yhat if it doesn't suit you.

Not him, but did you miss the part where everything is multiples of five and 100 / 5 = 20?
And the size rules are pretty much at the beginning of the chargen rules.

That's not how probability works, retard. A d100 is significantly less swingy than a d20 and allows for far more outcomes.

Please tell me you are trolling. Or in school at least.

A d100 is more granular (more outcomes), but entirely as swingy as a d20.

However, if everything really is in multiples of 5, granularity matters diddly, and it literally is just a d20.

OP what you want is Dungeon World

It's pretty much objectively one of the best currently out there. It has fast easy to use mechsnics and is perfect for beginners, it's a lot cheaper than most of these other rules bloated systems that cost fifty dollars. There is no reason for extra rules when it is he role playing that matters. Dungeon World is fast and innovative and still feels exactly like the spirit of ADND before DnD 3.5 destroyed the hobby and ruined a generation of role players.

Class roles are pretty solid and it is far from a "bland" game as it allows much more freedom for the players. Last session my fighter wrapped a vampire in a bear hug and wrestled him out a window. We are talking about real roleplaying here, not babby 3.5 shit. In D&D I'd have to roll like six checks to do something like that, assuming I had the proper feats. In Dungeon World you just have to roll a 7+ on 2d6. The rules flow from there.

Have fun!

>d100 just as swingy
A d20 gives you a 5% likelihood for any particular outcome. A d100 gives a 1% likelihood for any particular outcome.

And modifiers don't change the dice roll. The use of opposed rolling, open rolling, and fumbling rules make the outcome of the dice significant no matter the modifier. That it's divisible by 5 doesn't mean a damn thing because there is a substantive difference between a 95 and a 19.

>A d20 gives you a 5% likelihood for any particular outcome. A d100 gives a 1% likelihood for any particular outcome.

Yes, obviously. You'll also note that the differences in possible outcomes is 5 times as big in a d100 than in a d20. Resulting in the same swing.

Random number generation methods with curves are less swingy. Random generations with flat distribution are equally swingy. The only difference is granularity.

>resulting in the same swing
A d20 has a 10% chance of extraordinary results every time it's rolled. A d100 has a 2% chance of extraordinary results every time it's rolled. Playing with a d20 is much more likely to produce extreme outcomes over normal ones than a d100, therefore it is more swingy.

Dungeon World. If you guys are so lazy to learn D&D fucking 5e then it's the best system you can put your filthy hands on.

This is only true when crit fail and crit success counts.

5e doesn't have crit fail at all as far as I can tell, and crit successes only count on attacks.

I don't know about Anima, but even if there are crits (both ways) the difference is very minor; you could just use a confirm roll on a 20 or a 1 (a d4 would net the same result I think).

The point isn't about crits, as that depends on the system (though D&D is prone to this cancer), but rather the fact that a d20 has a 10% chance of giving the most extreme outcomes possible every time it is rolled. A d100 has only a 2% chance of this, making it less significantly less silly.

Except all secondary abilities and target numbers are divisible by five, so there is no difference in practice.

You have a 10% to roll the outer 5-5% of results on a d20. There's a 10% chance to roll the outer 5-5% on a d100. Since, when dividing by 5, 2-5 is the same as a 1 on a d100.

The only situation where that matters is if you succeed only on a max roll.

Like, if you need to roll above 50 in the d100 system, you have the exact same chance to roll over 10 in a d20 system.

If you have to roll over 95 on a d100, that's exactly the same as rolling over a 19 (or in other words, a 20) on a d20.

The only difference is if you have to roll "exactly number divisible by 5 or more" in which case, yeah, there's a difference on the top where "you have to roll a 20" is more likely than "you have to roll a 100".

Otherwise, it really is just a difference in granularity.

Is this copy pasta? Elaborate bait? Or have I been here for so many years that genuine enthusiasm seems impossible to me?

Refer here, retard.The "upper 5%" of a d20 is the single number 20, and rolling it has significant consequences in every d20 system I know, including the kusoge D&D. A 20 is the best possible result you can achieve on a d20, and it has a frequency of 5%. In every d100 system I know of, and indeed in Anima, there is a large difference between a 99 or 95 and a 100. This is because 100 is the highest possible result, and is significant from other numbers by virtue of that alone, setting aside its equal probability.

The "upper 5%% of a d20 is much more significant than the "upper 5%" of a d100.

It's virt/Craig.

He has an "obnoxious GW fan" persona he likes to bust out from time to time.

>The "upper 5%" of a d20 is the single number 20...

That is exactly what I was saying in the post you are replying to.

The d100's "only 2% chance for the edge case" only matters when you need to roll exactly 100 to succeed, or 1 to fail. If you merely need to roll above 95 or under 5, they are identical.

So in every other situation, they are identical. Basically, the only places where they aren't is when you need a crit fail or crit success. Which I've already said.

The entire issue comes to that point, though. D20 and especially D&D is far more likely to produce absurd results than d100 systems including Anima because the quality of "upper 5%" does not typically (ever?) have meaning, but rather the quality of "maximum/minimum" is important.

>A d20 gives you a 5% likelihood for any particular outcome. A d100 gives a 1% likelihood for any particular outcome.

This has literally nothing to do with swingyness, retard.

It's not, though, because a nat 20/nat 1 is only automatic success/failure on attack rolls and saving throws.

It's a dedicated false-flagging DW shitposter who's been fervently spamming every thread he can for the past week or so and instigating as many fights as possible. Pay him no mind.

And only the 20 and 1 do that, because they are the maximum/minimum, as it is in d100. The only difference being the frequency of the extremes, which is the issue at hand.

Thanks dude, this wasn't mentioned by anyone else, but a level one ranger can have five proficiences?

The topic at hand was specifically ABSURD results. D&D doesn't have those. If there's no way you can succeed, you simply don't get to roll, and except on attack rolls, a nat 20 or a nat 1 is simply a success(or failure) like any other so there's no silly things like being able to jump twenty meters in the air just because you rolled a nat 20 on your jump check.

Except Anima doesn't have any automatic failures and gives you an open roll on a 90+.
Which gives us an even higher chance of "absurd" results with 11% as opposed to D&D/d20's 10%.