So 5e is pretty much objectively the best edition of D&D ever published...

Because it's boring.

I won't say it isn't a well executed game. It's simple, streamlined and straightforward, combining elements of the classic experience with a new player friendly way of operating.

But... It's completely without novelty. There is nothing new in 5e. No innovation, no progression, no new ideas of any kind.

I can see why new players, or D&D purists, love it. It's a modernised iteration of everything they love about the game, combining familiarity with a lot better execution than classic forms of the game ever had before.

But... For me? For people I play with, who play a lot of other games? There's no reason for any of us to care about 5e. Anything it can possibly offer, another game has already done, done better and done in a more interesting way.

5e is a game which might have expanded the scope of D&D, but in many ways it's kind of irrelevant to the rest of the RPG industry- Admittedly, the rest of the RPG industry is significantly smaller than D&D and its offshoots.

But yeah, that's basically it from me. I'm well aware I'm not in their target audience, but I still expected better from them, especially after stuff in the playtest.

For all 4e's faults and controversies, it tried something new and was utterly astounding as an example of clear layouts, easy to use templates and good, user friendly rulebook design, as well as the best game out there for grid based tactical combat.

For basically every edition of D&D you can point to some aspect of it that was new or interesting or meaningful, that had an impact and opened up new design possibilities. 5e... At least from what I've seen, and after a few years of play and discussion, just doesn't. Its resting on its laurels, and that disappoints me.

Literally all the players I've had who've come in from watching CR and the like have been pretty good.

At worst they're a little under the illusion that every game should be exactly like CR, however if you're not a massive sperg and explain it to them it stops being a problem.

They are however some of the most committed, immersed players I've ever had. They play decently rounded characters, they try to act and speak IC, and even if they're not good at it they're usually willing to learn.

95% of everything is shit. I can guarantee you that 5e is not unique with this - it's just got a lot more players all of a sudden, so it's got a lot more shit in it too.

Keep on looking through them until you have a few guys that you can tolerate, maybe introduce them to a different more specialized game, and have fun.

No. Seriously. Tell me about this mythic game that comes close to being as good as D&D.

You tell me how you define "good" and I'll tell you why you're wrong.

D&D is a jack-of-all-trades, but master of none. It's all right at what it does - that's to say, pretty much anything fantasy related - but there are far more focused games that're a lot better at the thing or two they do.

Burning Wheel, for instance, is excellent at roleplaying and actual plot stuff. Savage Worlds does great fast-paced rules-light adventure games. WFRP is great at grimdark shitty-life sort where you can be killed or maimed by the rusty blade of a goblin. Risus is pretty great if you're looking for something -really- rules-light for just a single evening's play. And that's just the ones I like - there are great many more that other people could recommend you.

All of them are probably better than D&D in the narrow areas they focus on, but will be left to dust in other ways. If you're looking for something specific, then you might want to try out a non-D&D system.

Can you really not name a game? Sounds like D&D is really just the unbeatable juggernaut everyone already knows it is.

It's hard to name anything when you give zero clarification or context. Without actual statements to base things on, you make it impossible to give you a meaningful answer.

>So 5e is pretty much objectively the best edition of D&D ever published

The dumbest statement ever posted on Veeky Forums.

And that's a well-defended title.

Props user.

>objective best edition
What is Moldvay B/X

That depends on what you think D&D does well.

But broadly speaking, Burning Wheel does fantasy roleplaying better than D&D, Lamentations of the Flame Princess does dungeon crawling better than D&D, and FantasyCraft does being D&D better than D&D.

>he says one minute after someone posted 4 different systems
To add: Even for the dungeon crawling that old school D&D was known for there are alternatives which may have more appealing mechanics for some groups, like DCC. Mutants and Masterminds reigns supreme for superhero games.

Why not directly answer the question presented at the OP - why do you not like 5e?

>It's not moldv-

Be more specific.

D&D does plenty of things well but you are retarded if you thiunk it is the end all be all system for any RPG you wish to run. The "best system" will largely come down to what kind of game it is you wish to run.
>low fantasy, high lethality?
Riddle Of Steal
>Dark fantasy, high lethality?
Shadow of the Demon lord, WHFR
>Capeshit and/or mixed setting?
Gurps

>Why not directly answer the question presented at the OP

I replied to this:
>So 5e is pretty much objectively the best edition of D&D ever published.

Do you see a question there user?

Does that look like a question to you?

d20 was a mistake

>Burning Wheel
It's got awful mechanics that encourage people to ignore them rather than be forced to use them. Calling it good for roleplaying is more of just avoiding its weaknesses mechanically.

>Savage worlds
Doesn't really do anything that D&D can't do better.

>WFRP
Some genuinely awful mechanics that have so many dead sacred cows that it makes people who still play GURPS seem relevant. It's only saving grace is its atmosphere, but that can easily be ported to just about any edition of D&D in the lower levels.

>Risus
Really? As far as rules-light games go, this is one of the notoriously bad ones. It's beer-and-pretzels in the worst way.

Because it is bland and uninspired.

It took everything that was D&D known for and thrown it away. Yes there was a lot of bad things but what is left is not enough. As a result we got a boring, bland system that is ok for newbie players as their first RPG but for more experienced people it doesn't offer anything that other systems don't do much better.

Yeah yeah, Avatar is the best movie ever made and CoD is the best game ever made.

If anything being the most popular game means it's crap for the lowest common denominator.

The question was
>Why do -you- not like 5e?

Were you so eager to come here and tell how horribly wrong OP was that you didn't even read his full post?

>"but in X i could do this, why can't i do it here?"
Like what, go ahead I will wait.

>. As a result we got a boring, bland system that is ok for newbie players as their first RPG but for more experienced people it doesn't offer anything that other systems don't do much better.

^^This guy is reading my mind.

5e is baby's first ttrpg.

It's basically just 3e again. The classes, races, monsters, the book formatting, the art - dear god, some of the fucking art - just ranges from plain to awful.

His opening sentence voided any hope he may have had for an objective answer, or an honest discussion.

OP, is a faggot (as usual), and not entitled or deserving of being taken seriously.

srs question user.....

Because I see comments like that a lot.
Is the art work really that important to people? I never give it more than a passing glance, so it's difficult for me to relate that people judge (for lack of a better phrase), the system on the art.

...

>It's got awful mechanics that encourage people to ignore them rather than be forced to use them
Such as?

>Burning Wheel does fantasy roleplaying better than D&D

Only if you play it like you're not playing Burning Wheel, and at that point you might as well be playing D&D.

>Lamentations of the Flame Princess does dungeon crawling better than D&D

It does Masochist dungeons modestly well, but overall it's a prohibitive system that stumbles at doing anything other than bleak and punishing. It's only good point is that it has some pretty decent dungeons written for it.

>FantasyCraft does being D&D better than D&D.

FantasyCraft doesn't even do FantasyCraft well.

>Why do -you- not like 5e?

Terrible balance all around.

d20 is a bad system with HP bloat and boring repetitive combat that makes it seem like a board game with RPG elements.

Obviously best race/weapon/spell options for every class meaning there is 0 freedom unless you want to be gimped.

Is there anything worse that could have happened to the hobby than Geek and Sundry, the father of Critical Role? The autism that shitlordian place brought upon us with the Stream shit has turned the entire hobby upside down.

Artwork may not be as important as the actual mechanics, but it still has a role in evoking mood and imagination. Even mechanically bad games can be remembered for their good art, and terrible art is a stain on even a good game.

And 5e's art ranges from adequate but still fairly uninspiring, to downright awful.

huehuehue/10

What 5e did to the hobby reminds me of what EA Games did to video games.

Yes, there are more people playing and it's more popular than ever. But at the same time games are a mass produced boring shallow crap for the dumb masses.

D&D isn't a movie or a video game.

It's a roleplaying game that has dominated the roleplaying market. More than half of all players play some variant of D&D. These are people choosing to play this game because, frankly, there's very few games on the market that are even capable of competing with it.

There's some games I do like better, but damn, you've got to be one dumb cunt to even try to call D&D a bad game. If D&D is bad, all roleplaying games are bad, and most are terrible.

You can't see it because you're too close to the issue, but you are the real problem with this hobby. You can't find players because nobody you know IRL wants to play with you so you have to go looking, and that always turns out poorly. If you weren't a miserable gatekeeping curmudgeon, maybe you'd have friends who wanted to play games with you, but given your use of le edgy reddit boogeyman, I'm guessing you're more content to sit alone and sniff your own ass fumes than to actually interact with another human being in person.

Every game has shitty mechanics.
You think that measuring gold coins weight is a fucking good mechanic?

You don't have an argument. You're making baseless assertions and acting like they're so obvious you don't need to justify or defend them. Just thought I'd point this out.

Fair enough. Thanks.

2e had some art that drew me in somewhat.

No one said Avatar is a bad movie or Call of Duty a bad game. Both are perfectly entertaining and functional, and there's a reason they're so popular.

There are better ones out there, though. It's just that most people don't get deep enough into the hobby to go looking.

Alright, I'll bite.

>Only if you play it like you're not playing Burning Wheel, and at that point you might as well be playing D&D.
Almost objectively false. Burning Wheel's strengths are explicitly in facilitating both personal and grand-scale fantasy roleplaying beyond the scope of D&D's "a bunch of hobos get sent on quests" model of game design.

>It does Masochist dungeons modestly well, but overall it's a prohibitive system that stumbles at doing anything other than bleak and punishing. It's only good point is that it has some pretty decent dungeons written for it.
Considering D&D's difficulties in making mechanical systems outside of the ones meant for dungeon crawling satisfying, you might as well go for the system that builds a better dungeon crawling experience if that's what you want to play.

>FantasyCraft doesn't even do FantasyCraft well.
Sorry, I couldn't hear you over the sound of martials being useful at all levels in combat with casters.

While we're at it, I'll throw 13th age on the pile of games that take everything good about the D&D edition they're derivative of (in this case 4E), refining the mechanics, and adding something on top of it that's more mechanically and thematically interesting than anything D&D has ever done (the Icons).

Haven't tried it, but if I had to guess I'd say:
>Promotes gameism via players having meta knowledge
>Class Based system
>"HP" as luck abstraction/ HP bloat

But I haven't looked so, I couldn't say for sure.

>You think that measuring gold coins weight is a fucking good mechanic?

It's horrible!
PC's should be able to carry 11 billion ton of metal, as long as that metal is in the form of a coin!
Weight is stupid, and racist.

>jack-of-all-trades but master of none

GURPS. You described GURPS.

OD&D with supplements & houserules > B/X = BECMI > OD&D as written > 5e = AD&D 2e > AD&D 1e > 3.5 = PF > 3e

Never played 4e.

Keep pounding on that strawman and eventually we'll believe you're right. Don't forget to keep mentioning it's a LEFTIST strawman either because it's totally relevant to the discussion

>waaah the shitty mechanic in my system isn't shitty because realism
Mechanics that only serve to bloat the game instead of further the enjoyment of it should be stripped out. I came to roleplay and kill monsters not manage my funds and have to protect some fucking horse cart. I legitimately cannot tell if you are only pretending to be retarded or are this mind-achingly fanatical about this game.
Before you go strawmanning, no there is a difference between a shitty bloat mechanic (weight of gold) and a challenging mechanic (disease, survival etc.)

All right, so D&D is a jack-of-all-trades but master of none so long as you stick to fantasy. GURPS removes that restriction, but it's also even more rules-heavy and difficult to learn and play.

I do still like GURPS as well, though. I like to take that advantage of versatility and play it to its max by bringing up these bizarre mashup crossovers where you could play just about anything. If you were to stick to any single theme, you'd probably be better off with something else. [](Such as D&D.)

>There are better ones out there, though

There's ones that have specific advantages to specific groups, but as a whole it's really not too farfetched to go ahead and call D&D the best roleplaying game, or at the very least one of the best roleplaying games. It's very hard to populate a Top 10 list without D&D on it while remaining honest.

>I came to roleplay and kill monsters not manage my funds and have to protect some fucking horse cart.
> there is a difference between a shitty bloat mechanic (weight of gold) and a challenging mechanic (disease, survival etc.)

There was a time weight of gold was counted among the latter. You got experience points out of gold for a reason.

lol

Stupidity. The Post.

It's true that D&D's range and versatility do a great favor to the game, and that it would almost certainly populate any list of top 10 systems, but saying it's objectively and irrevocably the very best system out there is still a bit too much.

Sure, it might be for you, but others may disagree and they're no less right than you.

You can always play GURPS Dungeon and see and behold as everything that D&D promises, being done better.

>objectively

Yes, that's silly.

>irrevocably
Honestly, I think that may actually be the case. D&D is the spotlight game that everyone wants to work on and the best designers compete with to contribute to. It's been the #1 game since the start of the hobby, and very likely may retain that position for at least the next twenty years, if not trully forever.

Even when the WotC D&D faltered, that was only because people went to a D&D clone.

Meh. There are many other dungeon crawlers that do dungeon crawling better than D&D, and probably better than GURPS.

Every dungeon crawling is better than D&D. D&D is turn-based-combat The Game and nothing else. You could have an entire campaign inside a room with few to no skill checks and people wouldn't notice. I would know, I done this before. Twice.

Is GURPS Dungeon actually good? I have a bunch of rule books for it but haven't gotten a chance to play. does GURPS allow for flexible styles of play and intrigue?

GURPS Dungeon is terrible though, especially the magic. It also just suffers from being GURPS.

The core mechanics of GURPS can be summarized as "What if someone tried really hard not to be D&D, with being different more important than being good?"

>D&D is turn-based-combat The Game and nothing else.

I don't know about that either. Sure, 3rd edition and beyond are exactly what you described, but AD&D and especially B/X do the whole range of dungeon crawling, focusing on avoiding combat nearly as much as or even more than actually fighting. Battles in those systems are ugly attrition you'd be best to get around without.

It's just that fights are also kind of complicated and require a bunch more rules than anything else in the dungeon.

The problem with statements like this is that D&D remains dominant due to sheer size. Most people who play D&D just aren't aware other RPGs exist, or have any real inclination or opportunity to explore them.

Among those that do, it seems quite common that people find a game they prefer or find enjoyment in the variety available.

The size and market penetration disparity makes it impossible to really make a meaningful comment. When most people who play it have never had an opportunity to play anything else, you can't really call it a choice or an informed preference.

Still, though, it's pretty much completely gotten around anyone that's played older editions of D&D. Only the truest fanboys and weirdos still play 3rd or 4th editions, let alone even older ones. Even most AD&D players have decided 5e is their thing.

And all of those guys have been playing for years, and have had all the time in the world to find a system they'd like even more. Yet they never strayed far from their D&D edition of choice.

Flexible is the whole GURPS shtick.

GURPS Dungeon also will be done on kickstarter as a separate bundle with bestiary.

That's only really true for 3.5. 2e, 4e and the older editions all have very distinct playstyles that 5e does not cater to. 5e borrows elements of them, but it doesn't capture the same experience.

Sounds like a problem with your players, not the system.

>Most people who play D&D just aren't aware other RPGs exist, or have any real inclination or opportunity to explore them.

Why do people act like this is true? What? Do you live somewhere that the internet doesn't exist, or do you buy your games from magical D&D stores that only carry D&D?

Do you honestly think that most people who play RPGs, not just D&D, but RPGs in general, are unaware that there's more than just D&D? Are you so fucking stupid that you honestly are trying to say that the only people who play D&D are the ones who haven't seen any other game like people are trying to hide them or some shit?

Stop belittling the community just because you need to try and rationalize why you think D&D is undeserving of its dramatic popularity.

>You could have an entire campaign inside a room with few to no skill checks and people wouldn't notice.

D&D is a far older game than skill checks.

You'd think it would take an ignorant moron to think D&D is the only roleplaying game out there, but that's precisely what most human beings are.

Lucky ones are those that break free of the mold and grow to something more.

> Only the truest fanboys and weirdos still play 3rd or 4th editions, let alone even older ones.

3rd edition remains the second most popular game. 4e is also rather popular, ranging from 3-6th place.

The older editions of D&D are barely blips.

Stop being dumb.

>Only the truest fanboys and weirdos still play 3rd or 4th editions

Wot, loads of people still play 3.5 and will continue to play it.

>And all of those guys have been playing for years, and have had all the time in the world to find a system they'd like even more. Yet they never strayed far from their D&D edition of choice.

Again, in my experience? Most of them have never had a chance.

It's hard to imagine, because I can't think of a single entertainment medium other than RPG's where this is true, but D&D in and of itself is significantly larger than all other RPGs put together.

If you're a casual roleplayer you might never even think about other systems, and even for people who care enough about RPGs to look up things about them or discuss them (which is a minority), a huge number still purely focus on D&D.

However, this is changing. D&D has been pretty consistently losing market share as the RPG space has gotten bigger. I think one day, if RPGs continue to exist as a medium, we might see a day when D&D is no longer the majority. It might still be the biggest, but it won't eclipse the whole rest of the industry the way it does now.

You're trying to spin this idea that only idiots play D&D, all because you're just upset that they don't agree with your opinions.

That's pretty pathetic.

So what do you guys reckon is most popular non-D&D (or PF) RPG out there?

Ehh, I've seen such attitude. Many D&D players just plain refuse to read anything else. Or just skim the book and throw it away.

Those who try even one other system normally over time develop a portfolio of systems that they like besides D&D.

The vast majority of any community will never look on a board like this. Enthusiasts who care enough to do so are always the minority. They don't really care about discussing things or looking things up. They stick to their local community and the things they enjoy and they're happy with it.

Some people buy all their RPGs from book shops which only stock D&D and Pathfinder in small, limited selections. Despite all the convenience of the modern age, the sheer number of groups like that would surprise you.

Nahh, it works with all systems. There is those who have the same relationship with WoD or GURPS.

D&D just the biggest kid on the block so it gets the biggest share of retards.

No, I'm just saying you vastly overestimate the average intelligence of mankind.

World of Darkness.

GURPS would be my guess.

>casual
>roleplayer

e6 is the best way to play 3.5. You, Sir, have good taste.

Call of Cthulhu is very popular at my RPG club

You may as well play 5e at that point.

Tier 3-4 only is the best way to play 3.5. It's literally the only thing it does arguably the best.

>Why do -you- not like 5e?

Because I don't care for boilerplate fantasy conjured up by guys who read a lot of Tolkien. I don't play D&D at all.

>Why do -you- not like 5e?

Because it's shallow as fuck, but still too crunchy as a "light" option.

>Most people who play D&D just aren't aware other RPGs exist

A challenger to OP's "STUPIDEST FUCKING POST EVER ON Veeky Forums" title.

And yet, D&D domination is only a thing in US and few other countries, while Europeans play other games. European roleplaying scene, while smaller, is also vastly superior to american in terms of quality. Make of it what you want.

3.5 has more options in 6 levels than 5e has in 20. you actually can do pretty interesting characters in E6 that still feel powerful compared to the rest of the world but remain mortal.

>3.5 has more options in 6 levels than 5e has in 20.

One reason to why it's so famously imbalanced and utterly unplayable. Good luck maintaining that many options without such an effect.

Yes it is one of the problems. But at least it's not boring.

But it's true. It's that simple.

If you're posting on this board, you're probably an enthusiast roleplayer, or a casual roleplayer who was on Veeky Forums anyway. Given that, it's very easy to realise that the vast, vast majority of the people in any hobby do not care enough to post about it or discuss it or read about it. And this is true for any community you care to mention.

The people actually talking about it, debating it, investigating it and comparing it? They are always the minority. The trouble is, the non-interactive majority are essentially invisible due to their non-interaction, so it's really easy to believe that everybody must be like you and me, people who care enough to post on this board and such. But that's just not the case.

from
>D&D players are fucking morons
to
>Americans are fucking morons