Powergamers arguing over which class is the "best"

NO! That's SHIT roleplaying.

Either your char knows he's hot shit, or he doesn't.
The actual stats have NOTHING to do with how your char should act.
>Obvi the stat distro matters, your guy knows he's good with his mouth/hands/face, but Never how good except in comparison to KNOWN statblocks
>Has the lvl1 Wizard fought an Orc? than he might realize he's not hot shit Str-wise, otherwise he might roll lucky and keep thinking he's got it all!

Because in modern D&D most of your rewards like experience and treasure comes from killing shit and most of the abilities and powers you get are specifically for killing shit or getting around shit that can't be killed. If you want to de-emphasize this, you have to reduce the reward for combat effectiveness.

> This isn't League of Legends for fucksake

Then why is it so much like LoL?

Why is such a huge mechanical emphasis based on stats, spells and equipment? Why are the primary applications of your Race and Class what kind of stats, spells and equipment you can use? This is a very heavily incentive and signal for players to care about those things more than the anemic systems it has for roleplaying?

Oh wait.

It's because D&D is a wargame that I quite like with some RP strapped on.

God, work on your trolling, this is shit-tier garbage.

I think he means that there are other better mediums to work on your powergaming needs.

MMORPGs, Fantasy football, Several types of robotics and miniature engineering, like aeromodelism, etc.

If you want to make something more efficient, D&D isn't the most optimal medium for it.

It's like this, holmes.

The better a character is, ability wise, the more power they have to change the story.

I bet you reroll stats you don't like

Wouldn't that support your logic about the numbers not mattering?

does the DMG specifically note social encounters, and how not all experience and treasure should come from killing shit?

>If the party is a Bard, a warrior, and a thief, >There should be a little stealing and sneaking,
>a little singing and convincing
>and a little Foightin'!

Not really, since the DM decides how the power levels in a game goes and he can nerf you in several ways through the narrative.

What's the Dunning-Kruger effect?

>replying to bait this bad quality

No, fuckboy, I use point-buy. I came to make the character I want to play, not risk being the party's gofer because I couldn't roll a stat over 10.

But none of them allows you to spend an afternoon with friends. Or won't put you in opposition with other people.

And that's a shitty fucking DM, shocking.

Rather then being a passive aggressive little bitch, you could just all talk about the sort of game you want to play.

I know that's past most on Veeky Forums, though.

Rerolling? no it's the mindset,
You are trying to get your numbers the very best,
as though it's a video-game.

Uncreative Dms go by the numbers, and suck b/c of it.

It doesn't matter, because no matter what the stats are, I'm going to make encounters fit the party, and they'll be challenging to suit the rewards.

It makes no difference what the stats are, it just changes the encounters I'll use to fight those stats.

You guys both say it's shitty bait but you and me both know this thread is easily getting to 200+ posts just because he mentioned an opinion on D&D in the OP.

I think you are missing the point of the argument. Powerplaying is pointless if there's no solid measure of power or enemy leveling to go with. The concept of a DM and chance makes hard powerplaying pointless.

Powerplaying works better in more rigid systems, like videogames and tabletop games with set, solid rules.

Then why are you even using a fucking system if you're just going to fucking ignore it?

Oh, I know, because you're just a trolling retard, but I want to see you try and contort mentally to shit out some sort of answer.

Why can't you do a little bit of both?

>get invited to first ever TTRPG session ever 2 weeks ago
>decide to be a druid because that sounds cool
>want to an effective party member(friend who invited me specifically said they needed a little bit of healing)
>but also want to play my druid not as a treehugging hippy, but a pragmatic ecologist
>learn more about the class, seems like I can also do some cool shit

The Dunning-Kruger effect is below average people believing they're average or above, just like everyone does.

It has nothing to do with the DM adjusting encounters to fit a grossly unbalanced party

If your DM wasn't shit, your 9 average gofer would still be important to the party,
just like your all 9s Wizard can probably still beat an average Monk later.

Not even slightly.

3.PF. Party of a Druid, Cleric, Wizard, and Monk.

3 of those have massive amounts of power to effect the story, and you have to bend over backwards to try and make the monk even slightly viable without it being the most transparent bullshit ever.

If you ignore the numbers, then what's the point of having numbers in the first place? As a player, should I just ignore the numbers too? Or will that come to bite me in the ass later?

It does, as well as alternative ways of advancement that don't involve acquiring experience points from murdering things. However, the default style of play in 5e still expects several combat encounters a day. As much as I like 5e, it's still very heavily combat-focused with character abilities focused more on killing things with a little bit of utility.

Yes, a wizard literally unable to cast any spells at all, sure is a worthwhile character, you dribbling 'tard.

Thank you

The system is a basis for the gameplay,
the Rules that the Dm can bend.
Literally ANY system can be a good game, but you do need ground rules, and DnD is the most well known.

>Have you considered the thought that not everyone is out to "troll" or deceive you?
This isn't /b, friend

Have you tried not playing 4e?

4e is designed for the LoL crowd and plays and feels like a video game all the while providing an inferior experience to actually playing a video game.

>Literally ANY system can be a good game

Oh, you're one of THOSE. Yeah, we're done here.

Setting: The magic in the world is weakining and all the spells and sorcery are weaker with each day

Setting: Inquisition is gathering all mages because all of them are considered heretics and only holy powers are the true power

Setting: Industrial revolution starts earlier and gunpowder is readily available and widespread.

Setting: The gods left the world and magic can only be done through dangerous pacts with demons.

See, simple settings premises can easily make the monk the most practical team member or at least equally useful.

Ok, yes, full retard and not even bother to hide the trolling. Last (you) for you, and I highly advise the same from others.

But to point out the problem here: You are flat out saying ignore the fucking rules, so no, you apparently don't need ground rules as you just change them randomly, fucktard.

You're a retard if you can't make a 1st level fighter at 15 PB capable of reliably hitting a goblin.

The one thing fighters excel at is doing huge damage whenever you want. Their failure is the lack of versatility, generally diversity in playstyle, and near-retard mental faculties so you gave acceptable physical stats.

I said not transparently trying to fuck the magic users, jackass.

So, the only way to make the monk even slightly worth it(And even then, a fucking fighter would still be better) is to fuck over the actually good classes without lube to the point where you'd have to be full retard to choose one.

Great fucking examples.

Every single one of these settings requires you to rewrite the system so the spellcasters just actually don't work as written, which, as homebrew, does not defend the system in the slightest, or is an untenable setting as the idea of martials or martials with secondary casting ability threatening a mature population of spellcasters is laughable, assuming default 3.5 ruleset.

Not to say those aren't all fun ideas for campaigns! It's just for the most part all of them would be better in either an earlier edition of dnd than 3.x, or an alternate system better suited for their tone and power scale.

>1
That's mechanical, not setting
>2
So they need to be sneaky until they're able to fuck off into a demiplane. If only there were spells that could help with that

Also
>Cleric, Druid
>not holy
>3
You can't just solve all your problems with damage, and that does nothing to help the monk
>4
So WH40k-style perils? Adding in a random chance for a TPK does not a balanced party make.

Or, just play a system where you can't accidentally create 3 gods and a shit-eating peasant in the same party.

Narrative aspects. It's inside the rules of the game, so it shows how pointless it is to powergame in a RP game like D&D.

Show me a rule that says those setting can't be used. If you can't, I just proved that the narrative is the ultimate powergaming in the game.

>Has to rework entire setting to make monk even slightly relevant.

You aren't helping your case any. Besides, all of those ideas only make the casters more fucking interesting plotwise. WHo would you rather be in a world where magic is dying? A formerly mighty wizard desperately hanging on to the last shreds of his power as he delves into the mystery surrounding the phenomena? Or some tool that goes around and punches people?

Are you sure? Are you 100% certain?

Because you are wrong. So, so - so - wrong.

I said. I wanted.

You to fucking show me.

How to make it viable.

Without transparently trying to fuck the magic users.

Level with me, your family tree is a fucking square, isn't it? Because that's a very simple request you've utterly failed to do. Can you even understand the words I'm typing right now?

Not necessarily,
why is the Monk there?
He may be more important to the story,

and if we ALL know the monk is less effective numerically, it's totally appropriate to make him more balanced, especially if you told players ahead of time that the game would be FUN, regardless of what class they chose.

Ask your DM, in my case yes, Roleplay your Guy, does HE know that item is shit? use it anyways!

Yeah, it's pretty biased :( Still wish crafting didn't suck
good character development for someone who's not very good at their chosen profession.
>The best stores are all about equally matched heroes after all

I didn't. I don't have to. The game rules allow me to make a setting that undermines magic users, then magic users can't be objectively better.

Maybe your family tree is more like a line, since you can't grasp simple human concepts as rules.

>:(
Wherever you came from, you have to go back.

He was arguing powegaming as ina character that is objectively better in combat/fights than a physically oriented class.

I agree with you, playing a magic user in a setting that is straight up detrimental to magic users would be pretty interesting.

>If I twist and break the system to transparently fuck the classes, MAYBE some others will have a chance!

Neck yourself, you worthless faggot. You claimed to be able to do it, and then you gave me this shit. Fuck off the edge of my dick.

>I wanna play pretend MY WAY or I'm not playing!
Never ignore the rules,
but the entire point is that the DM is above the rules, if you 3rd party broken splatbook your way through something I worked hard on, you can bet it's going to crop up later on in a way you don't recognize it and can't dodge it.
>the PLAYERS need ground rules, and the DM has to understand/recognize those.

Holy fucking shit. No, not a physically oriented class.

There's a very, very specific fucking reason I said fucking monk, you goddamn retard. And the fact you think even with the T-1's down someone would pick a monk, well. This is just flagrantly stupid.

And DMs need players, and if some faggot like you is DMing, me and the rest of the guys are packing our shit and leaving you high and dry.

So, I'm just going to throw this hypothetical out there. Say we're fighting some measly goblins on the road to some bigger evil, and I'm playing this big battle scarred veteran dude. Real hardass. Say a goblin, I dunno, gets a good roll and does a ton of damage to my fighter dude. Now, it doesn't really make narrative sense, to me at least, that this type of guy would die to some piddly nobody goblin. Should I just ignore that damage then?

I'm glad you decided to not point out the reason you chose monk specifically and in fact chose to only throw a few more insults there.

That will really make me understand your point.

And I can make a setting where the monk has a +40 BAB, 100 hp per level, and 9th level spells as at will natural abilities. Your ability to fuck with mechanics doesn't make the game intrinsically better.

The fact that you don't understand why the monk was chosen for that, or can't extrapolate from the post, says literally everything I need to know about you.

That's a waste.

>the entire point of D&D
9/10, fooled everyone under the age of 25. Jump in your time machine and travel back to 1992, pop onto USENET and try that shit, and watch how fast you get owned by people who hadn't had their intelligence pummeled out of them by trash media

Response successfully generated!
if you've seen the roll, you're taking the damage yes. Normally that's MY (DM) roll,
you will get the damage that helps the story/fun the most.
If it's honestly a fight we're "encountering" you fighter isn't intended to breeze past them, and they're pretty close to your level.
You'll either die if it's nbd to reroll or I want to emphasize the lethality of the campaign,
Or you'll go down, just Baaarely make it out unconscious, and now someone else gets to use their abilities to help you (no heals? the thief can steal something to help you? etc)

>If you're actually level 11 fighting a few CR 1/3 goblins, that a boring AF encounter

I never argued it was better. I argued that it was allowed in the rules of the roleplaying game format of narrative-driven game.

Of course you can make any class good if you mess with the mechanics, it's the whole point of having a system. Some will favor some types of characters, some won't, but the narrative aspect will always keep "powergaming" a subjective topic, since the narrative can, at any point, favor other classes.

Good for you, buddy. As long as you know you won this internet argument.

also, Damn!

and I wasn't clear, players shouldn't See the DM's damage roll, unless it's a Crazy dramatic event, like the BBEG fight...

If you're close to death and it's you last possible hit, I'm rolling a special die, right in the middle of the damn table.

My child, it is really simple once you think about it: clearly the goblin stabbed your fighter in the dick or its blow managed to slice open a major artery or sever a ligament. Even being a big though fighter guy won't make you immune shit like that.

Here, let me educated you slightly.

Tier 5: Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute. In some cases, can do one thing very well, but that one thing is very often not needed. Has trouble shining in any encounter unless the encounter matches their strengths. DMs may have to work to avoid the player feeling that their character is worthless unless the entire party is Tier 4 and below. Characters in this tier will often feel like one trick ponies if they do well, or just feel like they have no tricks at all if they build the class poorly.

Examples: Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Rokugan Ninja, Soulknife, Expert, OA Samurai, Paladin, Knight, CW Samurai (with Imperious Command available)

This is why I chose the monk, you unbelievably dense faggot. Because its a worthless class you have to contort yourself transparently to try and increase 'narratively' to the point its nakedly clear you are doing it for one reason and on reason only.

Because you can't do it without twisting and breaking everything around it, and even then its going to be pretty goddamn worthless.

But you said the numbers don't matter and I should ignore them. Damage is a number, as is my HP. There's no way, narratively, my guy would go down to a goblin. Not even go unconscious.I mean, it's just some goblin, and I'm a hardened veteran of a hundred battles.

You're sending some very mixed messages.

Is it just me, or have even the obvious bait threads been going down in quality recently? Normally you get some mechanical debate in these threads, which is at least something, while this thread's basically
>well not if I have a forcefield
>>but my magic goes through forcefields
>it was a hologram :^)
>>so was the magic :^))))

>uses outdated 3.5 tier list
Nah.

Retards on Christmas break, I think.

But yeah, Veeky Forums in general's taken a fucking nosedive.

Here, have the updated position of the monk, then.

Tier 6: Not even capable of shining in their own area of expertise. DMs will need to work hard to make encounters that this sort of character can contribute in with their mechanical abilities. Will often feel worthless unless the character is seriously powergamed beyond belief, and even then won't be terribly impressive. Needs to fight enemies of lower than normal CR. Class is often completely unsynergized or with almost no abilities of merit. Avoid allowing PCs to play these characters.

Vanilla Monk, Unchained Monk, Aristocrat, Expert, Warrior, Commoner, Vow of Poverty Monk

oh you wanted the reason, that's a lot less interesting.
Yeah you got stabbed in the dick, that last big fight ruined your armor and you were a pretentious ass and didn't notice.
Or those measly goblins you thought they were?
yeah noone passed the checks to notice their weapons had some crazy BS poison on them
Why the fuck did you think I put CR 1/3 goblins in a legit encounter?
>(The cure was sold in town)
>(The rogue could have taken the poison off some flowers earlier)
>(And the Bard could have asked what those were and I would have just told him)

>Veeky Forums in general's taken a fucking nosedive.

Haven't really noticed but then again Veeky Forums has been borderline unreadable shit ever since moot first implemented captcha.

>Why the fuck did you think I put CR 1/3 goblins in a legit encounter?
Because you're an idiot.

Don't get me wrong, I can still find at least 2 discussions I can enjoy, which is more than I can say for any of the other 'chans or forums. It's just that it seems like we're rapidly approaching the Retard Singularity where there's nothing salvageable.

Then again, it could just be Christmas Break Retardation combined with /pol/ and tumblr angrily making out about how much they enjoy authoritarianism.

>Tier 5

HAHAHA, so you were using this outdated shitty tier system. Wow, sorry if I didn't understand you using a measuring system that is completely subjective and not at all used by the official books.

WOW. Now I know you are a tryhard that doesn't get that D&D and roleplaying games aren't Fighting games with solid strats and flowcharts.

HAhaha, great argument buddy. and since you just said you can make them useful by "twisting" the narrative, you just said yourself that they can be useful in D&D, a NARRATIVE DRIVEN game.

Just because a part of the fanbase/players enjoy to theorycraft tier around combat prowess doesn't mean they are worth jack shit if the NARRATIVE doesn't allow for it.

It was alright for the most part. I noticed the real drop when /qst/ was made. Really encouraged the shitposters. "Hey, if we whine and kick up enough of a storm, we can get anything we want banned!"

>PS, it's You.

Never have I ever.... given a shit about "Bait" on /tg
Neckbeards were always easy to "bait" and that's not a thing anyone gives a shit about on here.

>mfw "bait" is from like, Noone ever said "Flamebait" on the chan, so it's not that.

Here's the updated, faggot.

Monk's even MORE worthless, you illiterate shit. But sure, cry more about how the mechanics don't have anything to do with anything.

got you dead thou innit?

>and if I killed you that way, for no reason, it's because noone else in the group likes you either and we want you to ragequit...
>And it's not my house that'll get fucked up :P

>And that's why this kind of thing keeps happening to you
>Damn these morons in all aspects of my life!
>Everyone else just sucks!

Ah, so if I roleplay in a manner you don't like, you take control of my character away from me and get to determine his character traits for me. I think I've figured out why you ignore the system. Because, without mechanics, the players have no leverage against your tyranny, and you're free to railroad them however you please.

Man, you are missing the whole point.

The tier isn't made by the actual game designers, it doesn't matter in an actual day to day game because of the narrative aspect and it doesn't matter as long as the DM and the PCs agree on the terms.

You can show me threads and threads of theorycrafting and research and my main point still stands: If the narrative can changer the usefulness of a class, than the tier list is pointless in a non-combat driven campaign, aka pretty much any campaign played in a NARRATIVE DRIVEN game, like D&D.

>got you dead thou innit?
lolno, goblins had too much trouble hitting me with their shit attack bonuses and my high fortitude save protected me from the poison the one time they actually managed to hit me.

I'm 99% sure he's being a deliberate strawman, hence namefagging as "sage," the thing you should be putting into the options field.

You know the 'actual desginers' couldn't playtest for shit, right?

You know how they tested this shit, and why its so broken? All they played were healbot clerics and blaster wizards.

And the 'narative' doesn't change the actual raw USE of the class, faggot. All it changes is the number of hoops they gotta jump through, and they have the raw power to.

And why the flipping flying fuck are you trying to run a non-combat game in D&D anyway?

Shhh, let the stupid newfags think they are being massive trolls. They love that shit and I enjoy seeing how stupid they are.

>guy systematically destroying every argument you put up
>Lol he's a troll

Uhuh. Sure thing, 'sage'.

no I mean you failed the check to notice, as did your teammates in that instance.
Your stats, standard check rating.
Magic weapon noone noticed then, rather than poison. (Or the goblin was using the crazy artifact dagger you missed earlier and I was trying to give it back to you guys)

No strawman? no sockpuppets
no trolls. I clearly have played quite a bit of RPGs and read quite a lot of theory (Whether or not it's useful, you can't pretend I don't sound like I've actually done these things)

>You sound like a player that's never given any thought into worldbuilding or mechanics beyond what the rules are
>L4D's Director system is SUCH a great Idea in theory

It's allowed, it's in the rules and clearly you have a different idea of what a roleplaying game purpose is.

Playing DnD just as a combat game is stupid, there are several other systems with better combat mechanics and if you are that hungry for powergaming, you should focus in medium with stricter rules so your powergaming actually has a point, like in a MMORPG, in which the rules will stick for a few months-years, you get some loot and some online prestige.

Powergaming in D&D just leads you to finish the story faster, kill enemies that aren't really a challenge to kill and maybe finishing your gaming session earlier so you can go back to your homes faster.

It's legits not me :(
here, I'll start dumping my armor folder, the extra effort will surely prove my case!

>Check
>Stats

Those are numbers, which you've repeatedly told me to ignore in favor of roleplaying. You said they don't matter. Why do they suddenly matter?

Holy fucking shit, you actually think D&D isn't a fucking game that revolves mainly around combat.

This explains so much of your retardation.

>Magic weapon noone noticed then, rather than poison.
Oh, so you're just going to make up shit until your little mary sue goblins stab all your players with their mary sue knifes covered in their mary sue poison?

They're a way of representing how good you are at something, which the DM is free to fiat away.
>did your fighter also minmax every skill?
You want to just make up reasons why your Mary sue character would NEVER die?
>(And that's the correct use of that term btw)

>You want to just make up reasons why your Mary sue character would NEVER die?
Because they're statistically too powerful to die to chump change like goblins.

>Your way of playing is worse than my way of playing, despite being fully supported by the game system and encouraged more and more with each new edition

More insults, you really are giving it to me. I'm about to start agreeing with you, just a few more and I'm about to break.

So, we're agreed, that guy's a worthless troll and we're all going to stop feeding him (you)s, right?

Never underestimate goblins. Better adventurers fell because they underestimated the little bastards.

Yeah, I couldn't imagine why someone's insulting someone too stupid to understand basic facts.

If you want to think you won, feel free, but I'm done wasting my time on someone as ignorant as you.

Go ahead, proclaim your victory. I just don't care anymore, if god came down and beat some sense into you, you'd still claim D&D wasn't mainly about combat, despite a raw 60% of the book being about nothing but.