CONFESSIONS THREAD:

Only True AD&D is not garbage. You have unfortunately focused on inferior false editions like 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 5.0, Pathfinder, d20, and the like. Only True editions are Canon, only True editions grant you XP and gold in real life.

Only through True AD&D can you know true power and pleasure. True AD&D — 2nd Edition, 1st Edition, BD&D, OD&D — these are the stuff of legend, the stuff of Truth. Know these editions and you shall know religious ecstasy.

I don't see how going from a 5% chance per side to a 5.5% chance with a minimum of 16.5% success rather than 5% changes anything. d20 resolution isn't even the problem with the d20 system.

If you really take issue with the d20, use d% roll under. Suggesting 3d6 to people who hate d20 when they're almost fundamentally the same thing is absurd.

I like D&D but I can't keep track of the mechanics. Even shit like rolling initiative I look at my notes every goddamn time.

My group must think I'm a fucking idiot.

Are there flash cards that I can use?

>4.0, 5.0
stop

>confessions thread
>starting with a picture posted on Veeky Forums for what feels like half a decade
Wow such a crazy confession!

I try not to filter people for disagreeing with me but this isn't even an argument anymore. Every thread with this OP winds up to be pure garbage. Filtering this pic's md5 and I suggest that everyone else, regardless of opinion on D&D, do the same

But D&D isn't garbage, user. It's not to everyone's tastes, but it's a game that does reasonably well at what it tries to do for most editions out there.

But holy shit, I learned d20 Modern was garbage around the time I realized my houserules reworked half of the mechanics.

>Figure out how to easily convert D&D monsters into system of your choice
>Play D&D with mechanics you enjoy
It's surprisingly easy to roughly convert monsters, I'm actually managing it for a D6 Fantasy game. After the mechanics and crunch is nailed down, the rest fairly quickly falls into place.
I do think D&D is still a good game though.

AD&D was shit back in the day and it's even worse now because there are actually good systems to compare it to.

>d20
>every result is equally likely
>3d6
>bell curve probability, with a concentration around 10.5
It's like you don't try user

Fucking make me you false edition heretic

How fortunate for you, then, that you were able to resist pencil & paper RPG systems all throughout the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s in order that you could finally embrace them in the new millennium. Truly you are enlightened and not a little baby child who wasn't there and doesn't know shit.

AD&D has nothing going for it other than the nostalgia of grognards.

If only it could be wholly comprised of a couple rulebooks like your modern, perfect RPGs rather than comprising tens of thousands of pages of superlative material printed over the course of many decades.

Hey colton, you horsefucker.

When I found Rifts and discovered I have more fun with worse systems.

When I learned what linear probability is and how it impacts outcome variance. 5E with 3d6+2 is p legit. Bell curve probability plus bounded accuracy and advantage/disadvantage is an interesting combo.

The 2 step system of 'to hit/damage' can be such drudgery as well.

I think the main grievance with the d20 system is its' rigidity. It doesn't help explain the projected reality, but rather binds the projected reality to its' mechanical limitations. Because of the nature of the 'roll over' mechanic with the specificity of the character customization options you're very limited in what you can do.

Then you throw in the godawful prerequisite combat feat system and the ship is decimated.

In pathfinder you can only choke up on a reach weapon if you're a fighter of some arbitrary archetype. Basic warfare and combat physics are denied completely to keep its' grid combat system inherently 'balanced'- for a PvE game.

Also, STR mod to damage for melee weapons and DEX mod to ranged weapons is apalling; if anything they should be switched.

How are people still giving this retard the time of day?

Only reason I'm playing L5R is because everyone else in my group wanted to. I made a Shugenja thinking it would be like a mage, just asian. I don't like it or the system very much.

I liked Mk II Warmachine and Mk III looks like complete dog shit to me. Only reason I'm considering playing is because I haven't played in several years and I have just enough models that I should be able to adapt to the new rule set. I'm going to give it a chance and play a few games (probably 10) before I decide if I want to keep playing or drop it completely.

I really want to run a Shadowrun 5e campaign but I don't know if I will have the time and I know for a fact that I will use the modules rather than creating stuff myself.

I want to run a Iron Kingdoms campaign even more but I only know of a few missions and a conversion for the Witchfire Trilogy. Not enough for a multi-year, in real time, campaign.

Hell, speaking of gaming companies in general, I'm worried where Privateer Press and WoTC are going. I really like Warmachine/Hordes and Iron Kingdoms but I've been hearing some pretty questionable shit going on there. Some staff members I knew and liked don't work there anymore, some other shit has happened. All I've seen for MTG is utter bullshit. I mean standard was always pay to win but now it's fucking ridiculous. I've even started seeing this infect EDH. It's like they're going full GW and ruining everything they touch. Almost seems bad enough for me to go full /v/ and /k/.

I hate AD&D and I am still glad 3.0/3.5 killed it.

3d6 requires you to really, really, really need to eyeball monsters, though. Doing stuff like fighting 18 AC monsters at low levels is going to be completely fucking retarded and completely reliant on getting advantage to have any chance of hitting them at all, and GWM and Sharpshooter's primary effects might as well be useless under 3d6.

The d20 System isn't D&D, OP.

Since you've clearly never actually played D&D, I recommend that you give it a try before leveling judgement. Swords & Wizardry and Labyrinth Lord are the most accessible clones out there; go ahead, go play. We'll wait.

>When did you realize Veeky Forums was garbage?
FTFY

>I have a secret to ppl who dont like d20's. Roll 3d6 instead.

Fucking this.

>These threads are always good and the in-depth discussion is top notch.
This is my first thread...

3d6 and 1d20 are not the same thing.

anydice.com/program/a2f
See picture attached

Sure, an unforeseen consequence is that advantage is needed more and that disadvantage is also a bit more powerful.

Hand them out more liberally! Use the inspiration system! Make 'em roleplay for their lives!

Actually it was D&D that made me not ever want to play PnP because of how it worked. GURPS was my first PnP. Then I switched to Shadowrun 4th ed and pretty much ran that for 3 years straight.

I don't particularly think D&D is particularly more garbage than any other system that has mainstream appeal. I favor FATE and other narrative driven, streamlined games, but while DnD is weighted down heavily by its mechanics, it's also got the support to pull it off. Items, monsters, loads of classes and supplementary material, there's enough there to support the game to prevent gameplay from becoming too bogged down or overwhelming to prepare for. Yes, there are issues with balance across editions, but when you're dealing with such large and diverse systems, things fall through the cracks and a good DM can fix those problems as they come up.

FATE on the other hand is super streamlined and fun to play, but it also puts a whole lot of the responsibility to making it interesting and balanced on the players. At best it's a framework and that requires dedication. The base game isn't really robust enough to support something has crunch on the level of say, forgotten realms to reflect uniquely in the mechanics. Instead it would end up as a weak generic aspect that would only differ in fluff.

So yeah, DnD is garbage at some things, but so are most game systems. They have to be doing something right though, because they're still around, aren't they?

Relatively new to Veeky Forums but I've been playing D&D 4e with my friends for almost two years now. What is wrong with it exactly?

If you haven't tried any other system then you won't understand why D&D is bad.

Just give a couple systems a whirl and you'll quickly get it.

>4e
You're either trolling or a fool. Either way, lurk moar.

If you're having fun, nothing

I personally didn't enjoy my time with 4e and prefer 5e by a large margin, but I'm not gonna yuck your yum.

I've tried a few other systems but I just keep coming back to D&D

My friend tried to put me onto the Fantasy Flight Star Wars games but those dice pool mechanics were just way to faggotty for my taste

>FATE

jump off a bridge holy shit

I played Fantasy Age/Dragon Age before D&D and I find myself missing the 3d6 system often. What other decent RPGs use it?

Stirring argument there, friend. Is this the part where I respond with "no u" and post some sort of witty reaction image?

It's the first and only system we've ever used simply because we didn't know of any other systems.

Is it just the dice rolling that is bad? It always seemed pretty straight forward to me. What other systems are there?

>At first blush 3.5's item creation system looks pretty good, but it's swingy as fuck, and tends to break - in both directions - when doing anything interesting.
>Example: Trying to make a potion pouch that allows you to make Witcher 3-style potions costs hundreds of thousands of gp, despite it requiring materials, taking time, and having a hard limit on potions available per day based on how powerful the potions you want are.
>On the other hand, you can gain, "fast healing," that only works outside of combat for 1,000 gp - 500 gp if you make it yourself - using cure minor wounds. It works once a round as a standard action, and restores 1 hp on use. Use it once a round out of combat to emulate fast healing 1, or in combat to end effects that can be ended by gaining 1 hp or more.

I use Mutants & Masterminds now. Statting stuff as Equipment or Devices is just as easy as statting it as a power and costs less.

The dice rolling isn't bad, GURPSfags are just obsessed with bell curves.

that would be nice, yes

Oh no. The way it constructs the systems doesn't appeal to me, but if you're having fun, by all means. Try out other systems in the future, but 4e is a fine introduction.

I was more referencing to all the strife 4e has created on Veeky Forums, which you can still see today almost every time 4e is brought up, hence LURK MOAR.

My confession is that I find system-advice from Veeky Forums to be utterly devoid of any kind of merit or value. Because I play games for fun and the playing of them makes them fun. And the rules of the absolute best game possible would contribute little to that, and the rules of the worst game possible wouldn't take that much away.

Very well.

>He doesn't like streamlined systems that are perfect for testing original settings and character high concepts, and playing more relaxed sessions that spend 4 hours on combat that had to get brought over from the last session because you had random encounter with five goblins.
No U

Remember when Veeky Forums shilled fantasycraft 2 or 3 years ago?

I am very hesitant to ever buy a game recommended here.

D&D is a great system. It's no Dungeon World, but you can't expect it to be. It's an idea from the 80s after all.

Ehh I've had fun with fantasy craft.
However I bought it before ever hearing about it on Veeky Forums.

how do you score a critical? just asking as regards the current 5% chance to crit/ auto miss. don't know the probability of throwing 3 6s or 3 1s but pretty sure is way less than 5%.

And now Dungeon World ( happened while I was typing this)? Yes. I don't understand why people keep stating these "let's fight about system" threads.

Sure, ok: there are genuinely bad games out there. They aren't hard to recognize.

Virtually every other opinion is based on "I had fun playing this system, and it has colored my opinion of it." There isn't an objective measure of the superior game. It is all going to come down to who you play it with and how you play it together..

DnD 5e is my favorite system.

Such simplicity, such grace.

I've played dozens of different systems, starting with Pathfinder which is actual garbage, Paranoia, Shadowrun 3 4 and 5, A Song of Ice and Fire RP, Bounty Head Bebop, homebrewed modern systems, and every DnD from Advanced to 5e.

Nothing comes close to the beauty of 5e. The classes are diverse and have distinctive flavors and feels without being unbalanced, the combat is swift yet feels dramatic and powerful, and it has all of the monsters and magic items and spells we all know and love. The system has support, with new material coming out every week, and thats just from the developers, let alone the cornocopia of homebrewed material.

Have an inspiration, OP, for sucking cock magnificently.

It's extremely rare to crit with that system. You could even make it so that a 19-20 is the crit range and it's probably way less than 5% probability, speaking out of my ass.

But you don't roll straight 3d6, it's 3d6+2, so the range is from 5-20. If you did do crit fail, it'd be triple ones. There's different ways to do it, I mean salt to taste, you're already houseruling the core resolution mechanic at this point.

So you would then reward crits with bigger gains, like an auto kill or something. That's what I'd do if it wasn't egregiously improbable to the situation.

My group's been using Mutants and Masterminds for fantasy, supers, and horror for a while now. We switched the base D20 to 2d10 and never looked back. It's not perfect but with it's pretty good with only the bare minimum of house rules needed.

As for Dungeons & Dragons being shit, I grew up with the light red box and 1st Edition AD&D, and it simply broke too much fucking ground to be shit. Have some respect for the first generation games that paved the way.

Paving the way does not excuse its flaws now. We don't hold up stone clubs as the epitome of weapon design just because they were where we started.
If people use stone clubs, making it themselves and surviving with it, then we go "wow, that person is able to survive with nothing but his wits and a basic tool".

If someone plays 1st edition, we go "wow, that's a group actually playing first edition, having fun despite the system he's using".

When I found out that there was a good chunk of the player base that disregard levels as a sort of balancing mechanic, and believe that casters, by default, should always be better than martials, although levels are frequently the balancing mechanic for encounters.

The other thing, D&D players playing nothing but or branching out. I consider D&D to be the first step into the roleplaying hobby, but rather than trying new systems for different feels of games, it ends up cut-and-pasted into every possible genre with the D20 system. D20 Fantasy games... Forever. No WoD, No CoC, no Dark Heresy, No anything.

Only endless D&D.

The only one I know off that uses 3d6 is Ops and Tactics and that system is autistic as fuck.

Fuck off and stop polluting /tg with your narrative bullshit faggotry. Go choke on a dick.

Play OSR and learn that not all DnD is 3.5. There's nothing wrong with a d20 as a standard roll, making a curve just waters down the randomness.

That's because WotC set a precedent for making a splat-book, or optional rules, for everything that they noticed that their fanbase enjoyed. Horror a la Call of Cthulhu? Heroes of Horror. Playing as werewolves or vampires? Savage Species level adjustment buy-off and/or Libris Mortis. Etc.

It just... it became prolific.

GURPS is 3d6 roll under

>A single d20 roll is almost entirely unsuited when dealing with tasks in which someone demonstrates competence.

So the issue isnt DnD, It's that you have a shitty DM. Why are you rolling on things that you demonstrate competence in? Your DM shouldn't make you roll a strength check every time you open a door. You roll when multiple outcomes are just as likely. If it's uncertain if your base skills could overcome this particular obstacle, you roll a die.

I want to buy and scan/run Eoris at some point in the near-ish future

This is bait

4th ed doesn't get a good reputation on the board for the shitstorms it brought up, combined with flaws in the system itself (D&D is a very combat heavy game, and 4th edition is much more combat focused than other D&D versions). This doesn't mean that roleplay can't happen, but it's not facilitated by the rules as well as it could be. Plus, there's a fair amount of homogenization of the classes in an attempt to balance them out (previous editions of D&D would have huge power variances between the classes, and this gap was slightly closed).

I actually regret saying this a bit because if you're enjoying the campaign you're in and the player's your running a game with, you should feel no need to change. While I personally don't care for D&D (or Pathfinder, for that matter), they're still good games, especially for newer players.

>homogenization of the classes
This meme again.

...

The Swedish RPG Eon does, if you know Swedish its prolly the best realistic fantasy game out there

spot the grognard

Spot the faggot.

Every time I decide to go back into painting models/terrain I buy 100-150 dollars of new stuff and never finish it all. I have an ever increasing backlog of models and terrain/buildings

I don't get it. Why is the d20's line completely straight? I mean I get that rolling three separate dice can hold a probability different to a d20, (The minimum is three, and the added dice can make for certain numbers to appear over others) but can it really change the rolls up that much?

At that point aren't you making the dice rolls goes from random to a more centralized result? If you can hit the monster on a 9 to 12 you're going to be hitting much more often than on a D20, where as before it was roughly half and half miss or hit. On that same token if you're having trouble hitting something, rolling to hit is going to be that much harder to do.

It's in order to make things nore consistent via bell curve. You know, simple probability? Average rolls (9-12) are much more common than extreme rolls (1 or 20) with this method.

System does not matter. The Forge lied to you. Their conclusions are unfounded, and the only attempt to empirically quantify this did not provide anything to evidence this assertion

"Hurr, I don't like random chance, even though I can control the minimum results through distribution of skill points."

Git gud.

There's a few butthurt guys who will bump this thread because they NEED to feel like they're doing something to reduce D&D's popularity, or they otherwise start to worry about things like their dead end lives.

It's not like Shadowrun or WoD where the bonuses translates to another die (and thus, another opportunity to gain a success) being rolled. In a d20 system, the bonuses are always placebos because the biggest bonus you'll receive, and the thing that will determine your success overall, is the d20 in and of itself, not the bonuses.

>3d6 and 1d20 are not the same thing.
When you're using a roll-under system it doesn't matter. In this case, the probability distribution is not relevant. The CUMULATIVE distribution is what matters, and furthermore the cumulative distribution can be freely stretched or squashed linearly without changing the behavior of the dice. In this case the standard deviation of 3d6 is almost exactly half that of 1d20, making it very easy to swap between a 1d20 and 3d6.

3d6 to 1d20: Double all modifiers; ex. a +2 bonus becomes a +4 bonus, and a +5 bonus becomes a +10 bonus. Also double the distance of each DC from 10.5; ex. a DC 11 check becomes DC 12, DC 20 becomes DC 29.
1d20 to 3d6: Halve all modifiers, and halve the distance of each DC from 10.5.

While the probabilities of success aren't exactly equal with these conversions, they're within 2 percentage points, which is a tiny difference. There are absolutely criticisms that can be made about D&D, but its choice of 1d20 over 3d6 isn't one of them.

anydice.com/program/a244
See picture attached.

In a d20 system, you can always acquire a large enough bonus that a roll on the d20 becomes irrelevant. For example, a character with +15 to a skill will never fail at a DC 16 skill check. On the other hand, if a higher bonus means more dice, there is never a guarantee of success, and the thing that determines your success overall are the d6s in and of themselves, not the bonuses.

There's always systems like Scion where you can accrue auto-successes.

The more dice you're rolling, the more likely you are to succeed, or at least not fail.

For example, compare a dice pool of 4d6 to a dice pool of 20d6.

In the former (assuming SR rules), if I roll two [1]'s, then I glitch. If I roll two [1]'s and no successes, I critically glitch.

However, if I were rolling 20d6 instead, I'd need to roll ten [1]'s to glitch or ten [1]'s or no successes in order to critically glitch.

Each die has a 33.33% chance of coming up as either [5] or [6] and you also have the option of spending edge to reroll and [6]'s that you rolled.

Not to mention, you can also just forgo rolling and just take an automatic success for every 3 dice you would've rolled as well.

In a d20 system on the other hand, what a [1] signifies differs from table to table. In fact, some will still rule a crit fumble on skill checks just because it still gives a chance for failure.

I'd steal GURPS crits: crit on 17-18 and fail on 3-4.

>it's another my system than your system episode
Fucking pathetic.

5e introduced me to tabletop.
It's the only system I know well enough to DM for.
I like D&D's fantasy kitchen sink aesthetic.

Well, mechanically, TDE is much more accurate, but it involves rolling 3 dices for every most checks, and attacks can be thwarted by parries.

It's a lot slower.

D&D is really good for... combat. I feel that d20's curve is way more fun for combat situations than a bell curve would be, and it's even far easier to balance encounters that way.

It's just that no D&D ruleset was ever designed to do non-combat stuff as more than an afterthought, though (except for magic)

That's not really a confession, but I agree. The d20 shines in combat encounters, but it's annoying for skill resolution. Skill resolution is the most annoying thing in any edition of D&D, and they should have always kept proficiency rules as optional.

4e is actually infinitely better when you use 3d6 and whiffs become less frequent.

5e is built mostly to play around d20 statistics and works fine.

3.x and Pathfinder are clusterfucks in which the dice don't matter once you are doing meaningful stuff, unless you're unoptimized, and then the dice are all that matter.

TSR D&D has a bunch of exploration mechanics, probably in equal proportion to combat. And the exploration is far more common at the table due to the speed of combat.

I never really played DnD
I did play with a group who played exlusively DnD though.
They were kind of veterans, they said they started with 3.0 and played it, because it was the only thing on the shelves.
As time went on, they started to remove the useless shit, "(...)like health points, because it doesn't work like that in real life, some tables because they were crap..."

When started playing with the they have long stopped playing the system and moved to freeform.
Those stubborn fuckers decided not to switch to something better, but to remove all the bad from DnD.
And all that remained of it was the "name" prompt on the character sheet.

Should've been done like GURPS.

Hear me out.

In OSR games I would usually do success rolls as d20+ability score v.s. 20. Unless there was a real skill system like LMFOP. You got two rolls take highest if it was something relevant to your class.

Skills could "default" to attribute - 5 then be increased with skill points or something of that sort. Would keep things bounded. So at 1st level rogue might have 13 in Stealth despite Dex of 15 but that's better than your average Dex 15 person would still have Stealth at 9.

Something to consider. Probably a fucking terrible idea but I loved how GURPS handled skills, I just didn't like the boringness of 3d6 quite as much.

So what, you'd rather try for probability than have the bottom line of what you're capable of automatically be higher while also increasing the upper limits of what you could possibly do?

It may not be perfect, but it's closer to what actually getting better at skills is like.

i never did. my two friends ruined the game for me.

one always made chaotic stupid fuckboys that always had to be the center of attention & really wanted us to play his GoT fanfic as a campaign

the other was a guy who was too afraid to leave his comfort zone and rather than learn a ruleset that's suits his needs more than DnD he just houseruled DnD to give it more "depth".

So we can ship you off to the Near Death Star.