Daily reminder that every single "problem" with Dungeons and Dragons is actually caused by terrible roleplayers...

If you can't even name which edition you're talking about, how can I believe your claims that the players are the problem? You're very bad at this.

>I'm so wrong that I'm trying to derail the discussion as if that would magically make me right

Start with reading the how to roleplay section of AD&D 2e, then move into the how to roleplay sections of your favorite modern D&D.

>Blaming everyone else but the DM
>Picture of Obama
Sounds about right.

I don't have a favorite D&D because it's bad.

>imbalance
>problem

Correction, you believe it's bad because you play it really really badly.

Good roleplayer detected

But it has all sorts of issues. Enemies have too much HP, and some classes are just straight better than others? You can't just roleplay those mechanical flaws away.

>Enemies have too much HP
No they don't

>some classes are just straight better than others
Only minmaxing pieces of shit believe this

>No they don't
Yes they do

>Only minmaxing pieces of shit believe this
But it's true. Also, wanting your character to be good at something is not min maxing.

But my problem is with the use of the d20 and its flat distribution. I prefer probability curves.

Daily reminder that every single "problem" with roleplaying is actually caused by terrible developers developing terrible games.

Learn to gamebuild, directors!

Name one enemy that has "too many HP" and I'll name the problem you are having that causes you to think so.

Your second response there is just justification for minmaxing, which is what minmaxing pieces of shit do, of course.

If you have spent any time during a roleplaying game thinking about the probability curve of the dice, you are not a roleplayer.

This. You don't come out of the womb as good story tellers or character writers. Games need to teach people how to play.

>wanting your character to be good at something is not min maxing.
>implying that a good roleplayers ever do anything in a game
>implying that you shouldn't just swan about moaning out your vagina about how opressed your character is
Try to keep up m8

Trolls. Trolls have way too many HP, and regeneration on top of that. It's not fun to just hack at them for round after around until they fall over.

And as for minmaxing, are you just supposed to play really terrible characters all the time? I don't want to be a person who can't do anything.

Are you sure about that?

...

It should be pretty obvious at this point, but if you spent any time at all thinking about how a troll has too many hitpoints, you are clearly not roleplaying. Your constant attempts to justify minmaxing (because that's all you know how to do) illustrate this.

> minmaxing pieces of shit

> game demands effective builds in order to have narrative authority

> play in a narrative fashion but actually have no control over the story because you don't win rolls

k.

So I just have to stop thinking about the numbers? Okay, I'll remember that next time my character would hit -10 HP. I'll just roleplay him as not dying and killing all the bad guys. Thanks user!

Just a reminder that if you let this shit steam your ass, you have fallen for bait.

No one who actually still plays dnd gives a shit if you like it or not.

user, I must tell you I love this bait image
fukken saved

>minmaxing piece of shit starts sperging out because he has no argument

So glad we ban people like you from our games

But that's what you said, right? Stop thinking about the numbers and just roleplay, right? My character wouldn't die, so I'm roleplaying him.

Unless that's not what you meant at all. In which case, why would you say something so silly?

>'tism spasm continues

>Calls autism when own logic backfires horribly

Okay.

>'tism spasm continues

This is exactly right, if you throw out all the numbers, D&D isn't bad. Don't even fucking read any of the parts of the players handbook that has numbers. Don't fill out the character sheet, that has numbers too.

Monster Manual? Find me a monster without numbers in there.

>'tism spasm picks up steam

>Still no argument

I do agree on players pigeonholing themselves and doing more rollplaying rather than roleplaying and not willing to think out of the box of the PHB despite it telling you to do exactly that

bad roleplaying will never change the fact that AC is a STUPID concept, because armor just shouldn't make you harder to hit

a really nimble ninja and a guy in stupidly heavy plate armor will take the same amount of damage if punched in the face. That's just wrong.

Jesus Christ this kid might as well be every "optimizer" I've ever had the misfortune of playing with. What a loser!

What the fuck rpgs do you people play? Dnd is just what everyone knows how to play so I play it but it seems fine.

I'd be down to try other systems but the other systems I've read are more or less the same as dnd 3.5 and all sound fun.

5e is cancer imo.

But I'm roleplaying. I can't minmax AND roleplay, you said it yourself.

>If you have to hack at the monster for 27 consecutive rounds, you just aren't roleplaying hard enough.
Because combat never lasts for more than a single minute, right?

>'tism spasm shows no signs of stopping

All I said is that you're the type of fruity loser everyone hates to play with, kid.

I hate to play with idiots who don't know what they're doing a lot more than people who do.

>Still no argument
You're sending very mixed messages here. Are you saying I should look at the numbers sometimes? Walk me through this, I want to be a cool big dick gamer like you user!

Sounds like you need an injection of roleplaying in your campaign senpai

That's because you're a min maxing piece of shit, to use the parlance of our times

I think that you got your wires crossed mid 'tism spasm, user. Calm down and try again when you feel better.

You mean I actually know how the game works.

AC though colloquially referenced as "hit or miss" actually represents the threshold of protection your armor provides. A miss on AC is not a missed attack physically but an attack that was not capable of overwhelming your armor. The "miss" is a reference to failing to roll the right number.

No, I mean that you're a min maxing piece of shit, clearly.

Just tell me what you mean. I mean, surely a paragon of roleplaying virtue who can make bad games good just by excising his craft with adequate gusto would surely share his secrets so that he may better the RPG community.

Unless, god forbid, you don't know what you're talking about. You do know what you're talking about, right? I'd hate to be tricked.

>'tism spasm rages on

The other guy is right, you're just having an autism tantrum lol

Why are people getting angry at an obvious troll thread?

>Still no argument.

So you're wrong?

Autism, looks like. 100% pure "If I can't minmax I'll throw a fit online" Autism.

I'm definitely not wrong about your position on the spectrum.

...

You guys both know you're just kidding right and not taking this seriously, right?

It's fake like wrestling, right? The Roleplaying guy is obvious, but the guy responding is more convincing.

What anger?
All I see is standard Veeky Forums.

No I mean on both sides. A mechanically poorly designed system CAN be enjoyed and roleplayed within, but it doesn't make it a good system. Honestly both sides are being autistic retards.

>still trying to take the logical high ground mid tantrum

Just admit that you are a terrible roleplayer and I'll assign you your homework and you can go improve yourself. Who knows, you might actually get accepted into a real campaign someday!

Sounds like you're a little mad about being a bad roleplayer.

>Still no argument
>Wrongness intensifies
Don't worry champ, it's all a clever ruse on both sides. Everyone is trolling.

>'tism spasm ends with a classic "I was just pretending to be retarded"
>Waiting for the judges...
>USA: Autism/10
>Brazil: Autism/10
>Russia: Autism/10
>He's done it! A perfect Autism!

You know comparing some of the "arguments" on Veeky Forums to fake wrestling is pretty spot on. It's all fake and everyone knows it but it's still entertaining.

You put Synnibarr in there twice.

There's nothing wrong with SenZar.

In 5e everything is a glass cannon

>Still can't refute claims that he's wrong
>Still resorts to screeching autism
>Hasn't looked into the mirror to realize that he has become what he's hated the most.

He who stares into the abyss will find that the abyss stares back into him.

No user, you are the autist.

We're all autistic here. If we weren't we wouldn't be here.

>Goes for a hail mary last ditch demonstration for the judges in the parking lot but it's too late, the gold star for autism has already been awarded.
>to him

>Still wrong
>Still a retard

You're the saddest little faggot I've seen in a while

At level 1, maybe. You're fucking stupid if you think enemies are made of paper at high levels.

So here is my take on it. A system should not be measured by one's ability to work past its flaws by being a good roleplayer, but rather by looking at it from a perspective of what the system accomplished through its mechanics. This mainly is because roleplay is separate from the system and an external interaction with players that can be done even without a system in place.

Here is the first problem I have and its with complete eclipsement of characters. I think can all agree that from a mechanical side everyone wants to make a meaningful contribution. Now let us take an Alchemist and a Rogue. Both the Alchemist and the Rogue want to sneak into a building. The Alchemist, because of class features such as mutagen, chameleon skin, and invisibility, will have a bonus anywhere from 20-30 points higher than the rogue. In fact because of alchemist's class feature support it is likely there is nothing the rogue can contribute that the alchemist is not simply better at. Does not having anything that is your own feel good at a player? This is a failing of the mechanics.

This is also not because the alchemist specifically built to be better than the rogue, but merely because the alchemist's inherent features are superior as a class.

Now let us look at Trap Options. Trap Options aren't necessarily a bad thing in that, a feat that is flavorful and allows your to do something cool but is not optimal isn't bad. An example of this would be most Style feats. The problem comes where you have two feats that neither are very flavorful, but one is simply better than the other.

I don't know. I can roleplay it and enjoy myself (and do, I play D&D and enjoy it), but why should a system require me to?

>RPG
>Roleplaying Game
>GAME
I think OP is missing the point.

Even after calming down enough to present your case you're still wrong

I'm a different guy.

Another problem would be rocket tag. At high levels offense and defense do not scale. By the numbers characters are at first very fragile, become mildly robust, then at high levels enter into something called Rocket Tag. This is true in 3e, 3.5 and Pathfinder (so 3rd edition derivatives). This causes at high levels combat to become situated almost entirely on who acts first, as initial actions are very likely to cripple your future ones.

>No argument
>Still a retard

After having suffered from release 4E, 5E, and a truckload of shit video games that did the exact opposite of rocket tag, I could not possibly give less of a shit about rocket tag because it's the opposite that ruins games, not rocket tag.

Also a lack of variety of combat for some classes. An example would be the humble fighter. A fighter most likely has their most effective action being a full attack because killing the opponent is often the end goal. Other actions such as trip, grapple, drag, bull rush, etc. are often invalidated by an enemy being too large, or by the fact that it will get you no closer to defeating an enemy. The fact that one's action is the same each round, and there are only so many ways to describe hitting someone with a sword (even in text based games one can only say how they attack so many ways).

Both sides ruin games. Rocket tag and elongated combat.

>And in conclusion, minmaxing is not only good it's actually necessary. Thank you.
>Please clap

This is like people bitching about mobas
I can only control my own gameplay
but I can do things to try and mitigate the deficiencies in other people (and myself, to be honest)
Like not playing D&D. 5e good though :^)

In D&D it is. The game is balanced around the assumption that characters will optimize to some degree. In fact, every system is.

>Please clap

>Still wrong
>Still a retard

No, rocket tag annoys me in the worst case scenarios, but the other fucks up the game to the point where I will outright refuse to play.

No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is it does not feel satisfying to not be able to contribute. For a fighter often his means to contribute is via a full attack more so than other abilities.

This is especially true if he is fighter large enemies, or worse enemies without weapons. A fighter who has a very flavorful duelist build with sunder, disarm, and steal is up against a huge sized dire bear. He can not sunder, disarm, or steal from this creature because it has nothing to disarm, sunder, or steal. This he is forced to only full attack, because his character can not do anything else without provoking AoOs and in character it does not make sense for him to do anything else because he knows he will leave openings during which he will be attacked.

How is one to solve this except by only facing enemies he can sunder/disarm/steal from? Is this always an option? Is the fact that the system can put you in a situation where your specialization no longer matter or that they are so narrow that you can not contribute outside a small set of conditions good?

Wtf user.
Is this b8?
An enemy whose main gimmick is being REALLY FUCKING HARD TO KILL is poorly designed because it is REALLY FUCKING HARD TO KILL.
Fuck if some of these players were at my table id tell them to go check out pf with the sperglords.

100% agree with the op, but ill extend it and mention that the dm can roleplay poorly too.
That said, a player who wants a noble fop with no combat talent should not whinge that their build is obviously inferior just because they are too retarded to rotate their character to solve a problem

This is such tremendous bait I can only assume it's being done so OP can feel successful at 'trolling' people.
Congrats, OP, you've successfully imitated a retard.
Or you are one.
Could go either way, really. It's probably both.

>The only way to contribute is to roll high all the time
I guess it's true what they say. Min-maxers really just can't imagine a scenario where playing a role is better than playing a (high) roll. What a shame!