D&D is not Generic Western Fantasy

>D&D is a gonzo superhero RPG with fantasy trappings.
>It is not suited for LotR, SoIF, or the Witcher.

Other urls found in this thread:

ageofshadow.freehostia.com/index.html
ironcrown.com/harp/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

No argument here.

agreed

k.

So why in the fuck do people seem to be so shocked by this then, and why are people trying to use D&D for gritty Sword and Sorcery Campaigns, when we can all agree that it's not that at all?

Yes?

There's a minor but vocal group in Veeky Forums that thinks D&D is LotR and that's why casters should be stronger than puny martials. They're also a big part of "martial with options? fuck off weeb" group.

Depends slightly more on edition, but generally accurate.

That's mostly in more recent editions (3e onwards), but yes, I agree.
Every time I want to run a fantasy RPG I look at the available systems and get quite frustrated when I realise I'll have to go through it with a fine-toothed comb and remove all the stupid warforged, arcane-archer, mystic God of fucking options and so forth.

>all D&D is high level D&D

I'm ashamed there's this many morons on Veeky Forums.

>D&D is a gonzo superhero RPG with fantasy trappings.

That's how I would characterize 'Generic Western Fantasy' rather than Tolkien being the example.

Even D&D at low levels isn't a great match for a lot of those worlds in most editions.

>Low level martials shouldn't have any option beyond swing a stick while casters should but casters are fine
Either you quoted me wrong or you agree with my green text above.

D&D isn't supposed to be a good match for those worlds. It's not supposed to be a generic system. Early editions were based on Jack Vance's works combined with pulpy sword and sorcery aspects, and later editions were based on running things established by previous editions.

Also:

D&D = Eberron

>mfw

>D&D can do regular fantasy just fine if you cut out 75% of the levels and options.
Then why not play a game that is actually designed around those lower level things?
They exist, you know.

What D&D is supposed to represent and be suited for has changed with the times just like most other fantasy works.

Right. So why are people morons for agreeing that D&D is fairly high fantasy overall and not suited for those more gritty lower fantasy worlds?

Eberron is a setting more honest about how the game actually works, rather than pretending it's perfectly good for oldschool sword and sorcery fiction.

Here, have some Golarion

Because 25% of a good game is better than 100% of a bad one. D&D has always shined from having a strong core mechanic for each edition when they were released, with 5e being a next great step in a long evolutionary line.

And, D&D is huge. even 10% is bigger than most games, and about 2% is all you need to run a great campaign.

>not suited

It's a generic fantasy system. It's suited for gritty and low as well as high fantasy pulp.

Stop trying to put limitations on a roleplaying game that obviously doesn't have them.

DND is called Heroic Fantasy in the book itself. Doesn't mean things can be themed to be more humble, especially at the start of the campaign.

>generic fantasy

A generic fantasy system would be using Mana, not spell slots. D&D is basically the only thing to actually use vanician magic.

Stop trying to force a heroic fantasy system to try and fit everything.

If out of Fighter, Mage, Theif, and Cleric you're banning Mage and Cleric because they don't fit the setting, then you should consider something else.

Why use D&D for the of at thrones when a game of thrones RPG actually exists and has mechanics dedicated to fitting game of thrones?

>It's a generic fantasy system.
[Citation Needed]
>It's suited for gritty and low as well as high fantasy pulp.
[Mechanical Evidence Needed]

Here, have some Planescape.

And some Spelljammer

Hi, I'm going to play pathfinder for first time and I have some questions (added in this other thread → ) Someone adviced me to ask here for a build for a starter dwarf warrior.
I still don't know my primary stats and I'm not familiar with the game. My character is going to be, probably, a female, if anyone have some ideas for their fluff I will heard it gladly.
Thanks.

Forgotten Realms

So, does D&D != Eberron / Golarion / Forgotten Realms / Planescape / Spelljammer?
If that's your position, I call BS.

Wrong thread, dude. I linked here because this is a discussion of D&D being a superhero RPG, not generic fantasy.

/pfg/ is thataway

I assume axe and board with heavy armor warrior? You need Str>Con>Rest
Int is good for skill ranks (and depending on the class you'll need some), Wis is good for saves and perception and Cha is good for diplomacy, intimidation, etc. As long as your Dex is 10+ you have no problem.

As for the classes, well, there's fighter, but I won't recommend it because is weak as fuck, talk to your Gm about the game and what he recommends you.

Oook let's go the 3rd one!

As for the classes, well, there's fighter, but I won't recommend it because is weak as fuck

Ok so wich is the powered combat class?

Barbarian is better.
Path of War has good and balanced martial classes, but it's third party stuff and most GMs don't like it.

If you don't mind magic you also have Inquisitor, Paladin, Ranger, Warpriest.

Because they're big stupid dummyheads and you're soooooooo smart for noticing. You're probably the most astute mind of our generation, user. In a perfect world you'd be crowned Supreme Overlord of Earth and afterwards all 6.5 billion people would line up to give you a blowjob in admiration, and literally the only reason they aren't is because their feeble minds can't comprehend your superior intellect. Furthermore, this was a worthwhile topic for a thread, and one that affects many people. It is not, in fact, what you get for using Roll20/FLGS classifieds (aka people no one wanted to play with in the first place) and it is CERTAINLY NOT an unironic shitpost by pretentious dipshit desperate to whine about popular things so he can feel good about himself.

There, I gave you the answer you've been fishing for this whole time. Happy now?

False.

What? I was one of the people that other dickhead called a moron in the first place.

I think you need to take a break, user.

7 billion.

OP here.

Haven't played D&D with Randos in nearly a decade. this thread is entirely in exasperation at the idiocy I've seen on Veeky Forums in the past 3 days, by people who clearly have no idea what game they're playing.

Noted.

Please recommend me a system that would fit a harder-edged western fantasy setting, that isn't schlocky garbage like Dungeon World, or a generic system like Savage Worlds/Gurps.

Well, of course! It's not like a being of pure intellect such as you could sully your hands by arguing it out with them at the time! Much better to make a thread about it days later so there's little chance of them arguing back.

Why not GURPS? It is exactly what you are looking for with gritty combat and lots of fitting options.

Warhammer fantasy Role Play 2ed

I argued at the time, as well. But after it occurring four times, in four separate threads, I figured I may as well make a thread specifically about it.

2nded

>D&D is a gonzo superhero RPG with fantasy trappings.
Sounds awesome. This is why I run 4e, because while it does "LotR, SoIF, or the Witcher" the worst of any edition, it does "gonzo superhero RPG with fantasy trappings" the best of any edition.

Congratulations, you're even worse than I thought. You didn't even have anything to get out of your system. You made this whiny, passive-aggressive shitpost PURELY so you could be told how right you are.

>GURPS Dungeon Fantasy fits the bill.

But other options:

>CJ Carella's Witchcraft + Dungeons & Zombies
>Ghosts of Albion + Dungeons & Zombies
>Fantasy HERO
>Pendragon
>Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 2e
>HARP
>MERP
>Rolemaster
>Mongoose's Conan RPG

My first pick would be GURPS DF, or GURPS Monster Hunters with fantasy equipment.

Then d20 Conan or Ghosts of Albion + Dungeons & Zombies.

I was actually expecting if I made a thread about it, someone who thinks otherwise might actually have a coherent argument. But they didn't. Instead it's just a bunch of whining about their poorly calibrated expectations not matching up to the game they were playing.

The most insightful post was the one mentioning how the books don't IN YOUR FACE, ONE-SENTENCE tell you flat-out that the game grows to superhero levels in the upper levels, and is not a generic low magic fantasy RPG.

LOTFP, if you can handle nsfw and osr

See attached.

>A generic fantasy system would be using Mana
Why? Just because it's the laziest and most unimaginative thing to go with?

You could look at ZeFRS or Barbarians of Lemuria, maybe?

>long story short

A group of people, upset about D&D having such a majority of the market, including the overwhelming majority of the fantasy market, try to spin a myth about D&D being unable to do what it's been doing for the last forty plus years.

D&D hasn't resembled OD&D for 30 years.

>Reads PDF
Yeah, that's already weird for generic fantasy, even then.

D&D has been shit at low magic since 3e at the latest, maybe even 2e.

I am not upset about this in the slightest. I simply find it annoying when people demand it be good at low magic fantasy and get angry when the party is level 18, and its not.

Im perfectly okay with D&D as a superheroes game.

Yeah that's the biggest argument against D&D being generic fantasy.

>I've been shit with D&D

How. Even little kids know how to use the system well for low magic.

Have you considered that you're stupid?

Yes, having a pool of magical energy that drains as you cast spells is pretty generic at this point.

This, low magic in D&D is pretty easy, just play from 1st to 4th level

What system am I supposed to use for extremely low magic LotR style games then?

It's just objectively worse at it than other systems

>You'd have to be retarded to think D&D is ill-suited to low magic!
Okay then, genius, show me how to have upper level D&D be low magic, without gutting most of the classes.

We've already discussed e4 and e6 and e8.

The argument is against people thinking ALL of D&D is suitable for low magic.

Obviously, if you cut out the top 75% of the game material and stick to e4, you can *DO* low magic (though I'd point out it's still shit at it compared to the alternatives designed for low magic).

The One Ring
GURPS is pretty swell as well

>Just remove 80% of the game, bro

>how do you do the wrong thing?

What is wrong with you? Do you not understand how the game works? Upper-level D&D has classes tied to high magic. You're going to have to remove them if you want to play low magic, which isn't really an issue because you're still left with a good number of classes.

Or, you can just play low level D&D.

Why are you deliberately trying to be stupid?

>I'm dumb

20% of D&D is still a huge game.

>objectively

And, we're done. Since you're here just to be stupid, all we can do is laugh at you now.

Middle Earth

GURPS Dungeon Fantasy, HARP, and MERP are all pretty good at it, there's a Not-Middle-Earth BRP Spinoff whose name I forget, there's a Middle Earth for Unisystem Hack that's pretty good, The One Ring, there's the 2002 Lord of the Rings RPG

The one attached is alright.

Character Sheet

NPC Sheet

Character creation Example

And because it's unisystem-Based, if you wanted to add in stuff from a different unisystem game it's basically plug & play.

>The argument is against people thinking ALL of D&D is suitable for low magic.

So, strawmen?
Who ever argued that the high-level, high magic spells in D&D are suitable for a low magic campaign? Hell, the fucking DM's guide even explains how to run low magic campaigns for people who are apparently as dumb as you seem to be.

And, I'd point out that e4 isn't shit compared to alternatives. You might have your preferences, but really, you sound like you're just the kind of guy who doesn't know how to run a game that thirteen year olds are expected to be able to understand.

Not an argument

Sure, though it will still mechanically not offer nearly as much as WHFRP or GURPS in that department, nor will be as close to a gritty low fantasy deal as you can get with other systems either. In the end D&D is just not made for that type of game, and it shows.

I'm not even sure e4 with martial classes only would be that great at it. Say you're running game of thrones, for example. How many times will it take to stab a sleeping level 4 Barbarian with a dagger to assassinate him? He's gonna have at least 30 health easily.

You're arguing with several people who disagree with your absurd notions, not just one.

>muh e4.
>how is e4 worse than a game dedicated to that power level?
In D&D, a level is a large improvement. In a low-magic RPG, levels are less of a big deal, or there are no levels and you can improve stuff far more gradually.
That's the big one I can think of.

>play high levels with all the casters removed.
Okay, again with the gutting of most of the game. you CAN do that, but it still seems very unlikely to yield better results than choosing a game designed around what you're trying to play.

3.5 & Pathfinder also have shitty combat maneuver mechanics making them nigh impossible to do unless you dump everything you are into a single combat maneuver, and so you get boring stand still and full attack combat, much of the time. RPGs designed around martial characters have more options to make that more interesting.

You still need all those magic items unless the GM is also going to throw out the published monsters and adventures.

In pathfinder you can give them innate bonuses, but they really don't keep up as well as the items do, and the GM is still going to do a bunch of work to try to make the challenges reasonable without proper magic items.

This.

It's too bad WHFRP and GURPS are both pretty bad. GURPS in general is a terrible system that is more of a meme recommendation than honest advice.

If that's what you're hoping to compared D&D to, it's no wonder you're all sorts of bitter when people decide not to play your just-not-as-good games and play D&D instead.

No, user, don't say that, you're not the brightest but you aren't dumb.

Not a fan of WHFRP, but GURPS Monster Hunter and GURPS DF are both pretty good, and lack the big problem that tends to come with GURPS (how much work it is for the GM to configure it for a particular campaign they want to run).
Either GURPS option would be preferable to D&D (especially pathfinder) for a low magic fantasy campaign.

>I don't know how to play
>let me explain how I don't know how to play
>do you understand that I don't know how to play?

Crystal clear. I'm surprised you're still pretending to have ever run a game in the system.

Whether they are "Good" systems has nothing to do with it. They are however much better at gritty low fantasy, emphasizing caution over cool, which they do a million times better than D&D with features ranging from GURPS's bleeding system to WHFRP's magic repercussions. I personally don't dislike D&D, I play B/X on a weekly basis and finished up a 3.5 campaign earlier this year.

Coup de grace

Thankfully with DF and Monster Hunter everything is chosen out of the box, which eliminates a lot of the GM prep. I would like to see more published adventures myself. Thankfully there is a new one coming with the new DF books next year which should be perfect for beginners.

Combat maneuvers only become useless from 10th and beyond levels, till them a martial focused can use them pretty efficiently.

While I hate to be the gay 'not an argument' guy. You really aren't defending your position well here.

For the sake of an outside observer, how about you explain what he's doing wrong or how you would do it, rather than just greentexting?

so instead of properly arguing your points against, ad hominem. nice.

You can play Game of Thrones using M&M, that doesn't mean M&M is a good system for low magic settings.

>GoT

Level 4 Barbarian is like the Mountain.
How many times was he stabbed before dying? With poison even?

For most people, a coup de grace dagger attack will kill them. For anyone with a character level, ie, being important to the story, it makes sense for them to not be excessively fragile.

Ah yes, a devastating critical hit from a 1d4 damage weapon. That'll certainly do the 30+ damage you need to kill him.

Maybe try and poison it to? I'm sure whatever non-magical poison you brewers up will certainly get past his fortitude.

I was going to rebut, but
sum it up nicely. You make outrageous claims, and because you can't back them up with well reasoned arguments you sling insults.

The BRP Spinoff is Age of Shadow
ageofshadow.freehostia.com/index.html

This is the page for HARP
ironcrown.com/harp/

MERP and Rolemaster aren't bad either, but are rather clunky for chargen and advancement. They would not be my first choice, but I have played them and they were still fun.

e4 doesn't use levels past level 4, but instead changes to a more gradual rewards system. Levels 1-4 are basically just the tutorial allowing players to learn their main abilities in steps.

Everything else is just him not understanding how to run combat, or that magic items at low levels do not significantly contribute to characters enough to make a DM have to worry about unbalancing published monsters or adventures.

It's more of him trying to figure out how to make the game not work, without really looking at how easy it is to make it work.

Assuming they took the feats for the maneuver they want to do. Limited number of feat slots, and a lot of investment in a given maneuver.

Sneak attack goes on coup de grace
At 4th level is 1d4+2d6+Str, if you fail a fort save against 10+that you die.

Lets assume 12 Str, 10+1d4+2d6+1= 20.5, I'm pretty sure the Barb is not going to save that often.

>The gold costs of poison in this game
good luck with that. Nearly cheaper to hire an army.
Top kek.

>I don't have the slightlest idea how coup works in 3.PF: The post

Do you even know what e4-e6-e10 is or how it works?

>Do you understand you get more feats after hitting level cap in e4/e6/e8
Yes. yes I do.

user did not specify that was in relation to eN, only mentioning level 10.

For all I knew he was referring to simply running a 3.x game with 1-10 level range; so I pointed out the feat requirements of combat maneuvers at the low levels is quite high, in addition to them becoming useless at the higher levels.

No, it's just a gonzo fantasy RPG.

And most popular fantasy is gonzo fantasy to begin with.

You're essentially saying "It doesn't work if you do X" when people are saying "It works if you do Y."

Why would people do X when it's obvious to do Y.

There're still requirements in eX, and most maneuver feats require more than 4 BaB.

>Just because it's the laziest and most unimaginative thing to go with?
That's why we call it generic.

Nope. I'm simply saying

"It works ___" without specifying "if you do B" means not everyone is going to assume B is part of your claim.

If that's the claim you're making, be explicit.

"A) low level D&D" is not the same as "B) e4 D&D"

Lots of people play A and aren't talking about B. people in this thread have mentioned A without any mention of B.

I'm not going to assume you mean B if you don't specify.

>just play from 1st to 4th level
>magic missile
>disguise self
>enlarge person
Totally low magic here.