When you can't solve problems with diplomacy and cunning and have to resort to a three-hour slogfest through a bag of...

It's just one of a few trolls. Hardly a "sizable" population, merely a particularly dedicated and energetic one.

The answer is to match their fervor by discussing the games in other threads, while ignoring them and their witless and empty arguments. Don't engage with them, don't respond to them, and let these sad threads die.

>X is shit!
>There are some 7 to 11 significantly different kinds of X.
>Irrelevant!

Okay.

I think your problem is not D&D but with your DM. My DM regularly let's us solve problems in a non-violent fashion as long as we roleplay and come up with real solutions beyond "I roll diplomacy."

3.x fights definitely last longer than five minutes but they're over in two rounds unless your party is shit.

we had a kind of nice thread the other day where we suggested alternatives to DnD, perhaps you may want to dig it up from the archives.
Either that, or post your own alternative.

Have some here had play radiance rpg?

>when you can't solve problems with diplomacy and cunning and have to resort to a three-hour slogfest through a bag of hit points

Thats the fault of a bad DM, and worse players.

When did you realize you were a mindless, bandwagoning, meme-driven dipshit?

>When Charisma is a number and players can't roleplay social encounters for shit because they are autists.

Making Social skills a numbers game instead of making it require roleplay is what ruined social play in tabletop.

Somehow two rounds in my games takes 3 hours. Typically from characters arguing, or rules lawyering...

I agree. In my TTRPG I got rid of all social and mental attributes, and just replaced the latter with a simple - yet deep - skill system.

>When Charisma is a number and players can't roleplay social encounters for shit because they are autists.
Isn't that a problem with the players, and not with the system itself though? If anything, the system allows those "autists" to play more roles than they themselves reasonably could, which gives more freedom in making characters and playing the game, so it's a good thing.

>when you can't just diplomacy the BBEG into surrendering and ruin everyone's game, because they were excited to finally face it
Fuck off diplomacy cuck, you're just looking for a way to not play the game.

>when situations are trivialized by transmutation+conjuration wizards.

D&D would be immeasurably better if Charisma and Intelligence scores didn't exist.

>When Strength is a number and players can't grab a knife and jam it through dummy wearing padded leather for shit because they weak beta's.

Making Strength skills a numbers game instead of making it require discipline and training is what ruined combat in tabletops.

Oh, it's this stupid meme again.

>When HP is a number and players can't take an appropriate punch or stabbing because they are bitches

Making HP a numbers game instead of making it genuine hardiness is what ruined realism in tabletop.

You fags are STILL trying?

this to be honest familia

T. Focused Specialist Conjurer player

If fights last more than two rounds it means PCs are going to die in 3.5

>When Sanity is a number and players don't develop real mental illness because they are fucking casuls

Making Sanity a numbers game instead of making it a struggle for mental stability is what ruined horror in tabletop.

You do your role play.
Then you roll to see how it is perceived.
Eventually with bonus or malus on your roll awarded by the GM depending on the credibility of your prestation.

There are people who don't do that?

Please do not engage with these trolls. They already know their arguments are stupid, they just no longer care because they actually get more attention the dumber they are.

Don't try to strawman me.

Charisma and social behaviour can't be quantified.

Physical strength and coordination on the other hand can be quantified.

No one reply to this troll please.

I have my problems with D&D (3.PF to be exact) but I don't think what you say is a problem of the sytem per se, OP

What kind of trash GM did you have? Seriously, just get a good GM. Diplomacy is one of the legs this game literally stands on. Two others being exploration, and combat. If you don't have a healthy combination of these 3, you have a bad game of DnD.

He is a troll. A troll that spams these threads whenever he feels particularly lonely.
You're wasting your time replying to him in earnest.

Hopefully he did at birth, I feel that this feature is shockingly apparent in him, and perhaps engrained in his DNA.

There was no point in bumping this thread just to say what everyone already knows.

>When dexterity is a number and players can't twirl a blade around their fingers because they have cheeto fingers.

Making dexterity a numbers game instead of making it a weird trick to get all the bitches and grow your penis guaranteed, Barbarians HATE HIM, is what ruined swordsmanship in tabletop.

>trolls trolling trolls

they may (or may not) all be shit anyway
for example, all of them are (from a 2017 pov) most definitely gamist in design

>He doesn't know that 3rd, 4th, and 5th edition are AD&D with the "A" dropped for marketing reasons
>Or that D&D and AD&D are different games

I'm curious, care to tell me about it user? I was thinking of homebrewing some stuff for 3.PF to improve the social skillset. Was thining 'Empathy' would be a nice addition as an emotional-based antithesis for 'sense motive'. Basically, used to sense hidden emotions/mental strain as apposed to actual planned actions/intention.

I stopped playing a bard when i was the only person on the table tried to diplomacy my way out of situations, even though we had a warlock with a higher charisma than me and was just a murder hobo.

I will give a quick example.

We are doing mines of phandelver, we are just before venomfang and we had a run in with the dragon cultists. I managed to convince the cultists that there was a demon man running around with flaming hair and a demonic ferret on its shoulder. The warlock runs in front of the cultists with his flaming hair caused by an illusion, has inspiration for an intimidation check and he says "hello there, time to die" casts an eldritch blast on one of the cultists and I manage to JUST fix his mistake by casting calm emotions on the entire group of cultists

>didn't always end with a fight to the death
And they don't have to if you don't have a shit tier GM.

>You do your role play.
>Then you roll to see how it is perceived.
This is wrong.
You outline how you want to make your argument or whatever.
The GM gives you modifiers based on the NPC's responsiveness to the tack you've chosen.
Then you roll.
The GM tells how well/badly you succeeded/failed.
THEN you roleplay the result.

Don't play D&D, then. That way you don't have to throw a tantrum like a goddamn toddler about how much you hate playing it.

>Not giving a long, eloquent speech first and hoping you roll well
Git gud, scrub

False equivalency because role-playing is a talking and planning (and rolling dice) game. Sorry that you haven't realized this yet. ... say are you one of those fa/tg/uys who have never played an RPG I keep hearing about?

> throw a tantrum
the post you are referencing was my first post in the thread. how is that a tantrum?

Y'all motherfuckers need sage .

Please, just ignore the bait. Don't give them the satisfaction of knowing they know just what to say to get a response out of you.

You're not going to convince them of anything, and everyone else already knows they are wrong. Let them wallow.

Precong 5e games have a problem though (at least the first ones) everybody hates the PCs, even the NPCs youre supposed to help, they all antagonize you and treat you like shit, and have predefined actions that can't be changed even if you roll 5 billion in Cha (persuassion). It all depends on the GM wanting or not to change that.

T. Dude who usually plays Party Faces and who played the first 3 modules of 5e

My apologies, I assumed you were OP.

I'm a GM running Lost Mines of Phandelver, and at least for that module this is plain wrong. Most NPCs are helpful, if a bit guarded until they can trust you.
Can't say the same for the other modules, I hear Hoard of the Dragon Queen is a steaming pile though.

D&D isn't garbage. It's just deeply flawed in many of it's iterations and editions like most other systems. (It also has the advantage of being well known.)

A good GM can make it work, just like a good GM can make any system work.

At the end of the day a GM should pick the game that they least have to change and finesse to get what they want out of it, but systems don't really matter as much as the quality of the people sitting at the table (or the artificial table as the case may be).

Why the fuck do you even play these games if it's not to get your kicks out of a good fight?

we had an excellent GM, if i rolled decent persuasion/deception then i would get more trusting NPCs, In this specific situation a bad player ruined the situation, i ended up rolling a monk with a charisma of 7 and just sticking with my morality of being lawful good and maintaining the "dont kill people that arent hurting us" rule

When I realized I was only paying D&PF

Not OP, but... You say that, but when I'm playing a game I actually like with any of my groups, I have tons of fun. I played 5E with one of those groups and the system straight up fucking ruined the game singlehandedly.

How did that happen?

Did you try playing it the same way you play your other systems?

I've never played 5e, and haven't touched D&D since 3.PF back when it came out. Only played PF for about a year.

I've found other game systems I've fallen in love with so I never had a reason to stick with it.

I don't blame D&D for what is in the end, my personal taste of what I want out of a game, and the amount of work necessary to put into it. The people are always what matters most in terms of fun.

I had a PF group I introduced a bunch of different games (including 5e) to and they literally sabotaged their own fun just so they can go back to playing PF.

By being worse at doing everything we played D&D for. It was way worse than pre-3E at running gritty campaigns, it was way worse than 3E at running fantasy superheroes, it wasn't a good midpoint between those, the combat was boring as fuck compared to any edition's and especially 4E's, and the low bonuses made everything a crapshoot where it came down to how lucky you were, especially noncombat, where there was the constant problem of people with no training being fucking Superman when it came to skill checks because someone would always get lucky on their roll. I couldn't stand it at all.

>How did that happen?
>I'm dumb and blame personal failings on a system I don't understand because I'm dumb

Nothing to see here, folks. Just a bitter goblin raging at everything except himself.

So, your homebrew bullshit that worked for 3.5 didn't work in 5e?

And your friends can't enjoy combat unless it's mmo-style power-card spam?

Learn to role-play, my dude.

The d20 system is pretty shitty. The bell-curve is non-existent. But 5e helped fix that with advantage rolls.

Honestly, 5e is the best D&D system yet. 4e was great if your players were role-players and didn't just pick a power-card and read it robotically.

Sounds like the problem is with your group not understanding how best to use 5e.

Characters don't really come into their class till level 3, maybe that was your problem.

You were expecting to be powerful from level 1, like 4e.

It doesn't work like that.

Or, and this might be hard for you to believe, we don't like the kind of game 5E is suited for and never will.

Calling D&D "deeply flawed" just smacks of bug-feature confusion. Flawed at doing what, exactly? It seems to work just fine for things that you'd expect D&D to be good for.

We played until level 5. It didn't do shit to curtail the problems we were having.

I was lucky my gaming group has bed playing since the early 80s and had already jumped ship from dnd more than a decade before.

So about 22 years.

I've played DND a couple times, it isn't that bad. It's just really hard to go back to it because you keep looking at everything and thinking how it's being done wrong/poorly.

I started off as a 3.pf homebrew to correct all the deficiencies I saw in 3.5 - stuff like armor not giving DR, classes being extremely inflexible with no real character creation, and players ignoring their mental stats (or more rarely in my groups, completely overplaying them). I also wanted to capeshits without Mutants and Masterminds which I think is a rather shit system. So I began working on a system that has no mental stats (the closest thing to mental stats is Senses - basically how well you can detect your environment and changes in it). Races work as a base "class" giving you your HD, starting wealth, and power points to build your character with, and each has their own unique strengths and weaknesses.

One of the things your race (Origin) gives you is base skill tics. You then have the option of buying (using PP) advanced skill tiers which work on a negative starting tics/upgrade cost curve - meaning starting off (not upgrading) you get a bunch of skill tics, but it's extremely expensive to buy more. At middle PP cost, you get 10 less starting tics than no cost, but you pay half as much to advance a skill later, at highest cost you get as many starting tics as not upgrading, but pay 1/4 the cost to advance a skill - but have spent a significant number of PP already.

The skill system itself works thus: you have several broad categories, each with a base skill of 6 and can be advanced to 20. At 14, basic skills unlock advanced skills and you get to select one advanced skill and gain 6 free points in it. When an advanced skill gets to 14, it unlocks master skills, one of which gets 6 free points. Essentially it looks something like Engineering -> Mechanical Engineering -> Hydraulic Systems. Then it's roll a D20 and add all applicable skills, up to a +60 bonus. 10 is a simple task, 20 is easy, 30 is moderate, 40 is advanced, 50 is difficult, 60 is hard, 70 is impossible, and 80 is wish fulfillment.

D&D is a very DM centric game. If you're having problems with constant failed rolls, maybe your DM is to blame, not the system? Or maybe your group doesn't know how to play their roles in combat?

D&D is a well put together system. It has it's flaws, sure, but your reasons for saying it's shit don't apply to the system, they apply to your group.

What system is your absolute favorite and what did you enjoy about it?

>when you get knocked prone and your best bet is staying prone, because otherwise you get a nice AOO shower, waste an action and then get knocked prone again next turn anyway
>when it's lvl 7 and you know the wizard will pepper the battlefield with control spells which don't care about allies and you have to get your anus ready for Ewards Black Tentacles of forced intrusion
>when it's the first turn and you already know which of you and which enemy is going to get focus fired that one of you will sit out the next few rounds of combat
>when you just have to roll about average but the d20 think it's time to go all flippy floppy on you

Eh. 5e is a decent D&D-genre heroic fantasy RPG in the vein of AD&D 2e, but the BEST edition yet?

It sounds like you're unaware of red box Basic and blue box Expert.

Basic is the worst TSR D&D

t. WOTC employee

The trolls are really active today. What gives?

>but your reasons for saying it's shit
"I don't like this system and it ruined a campaign I played in" is not the same thing as saying it's a shit system. At best it's saying that the system is shit at running what we're interested in.

>D&D is a well put together system.
Dude, you can't say something like that without specifying the edition

i kinda have to agree. for me, D&D is not bad it's just pretty mediocre, except for branding and community size. caveat: i am not a particularly gamist player, so it hasn't been designed to appeal to me.

I've been playing since AD&D, but it's hard to compare the fun I had then to the fun I have now in the newer systems. It's different. My DMing style has changed. What I enjoy in my games has changed.

By best edition yet; I mean it's the most streamlined; it has a ton of fluff for DM's and players to use; it's got some smart ideas put into it.

All that being said, I've come to prefer Edge of the Empire as my favorite system. I'm working on a dark souls inspired science-fantasy using the dice system. So take from that what you will.

Unless you're suggesting that it's his fault for not houseruling the whole system on the spot when it started spitting out dumb bullshit, no, it was definitely the system at fault here.

He either played it wrong on purpose or is an incredible idiot.

I don't know which is worse.

>t. unpopular opinion

All right, fair enough.

D&D isn't a board game with strict rules and a strict narrative to follow.

If the players are constantly failing in encounters or whatever then maybe something in the game needs to change. Either the players are biting off more than they can chew of the DM is throwing too much at them that they aren't prepared for.

I'm not saying D&D is perfect. It's definitely not. I can't stand d20 systems, no bell curve. But hating on the system because you can't win all the time isn't the system's fault.

I genuinely have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. I don't even see how that intersects with anything I said.

There's a reason AD&D is the one with more supplementary material. There's also a reason the Basic line was largely dumped after 1994.

the deendeeshills are really active today. who's paying ya?

You're a stupid meme. His meme is a sound argument; whereas you are likely a grognard

How is using the printed DCs in the adventure and the skill system the game comes with wrong? What the absolute fuck.

Maybe I'm confusing you with shit someone else has said in this thread.

I'm not saying you have to house-rule the game but I'm confused as to what you mean by "spitting out dumb shit"

I thought you were referring to the constant failures.

Are you seriously going with system bloat as your argument for why AD&D was better?

In which universe is this accurate?

The problem with those adventures is they're almost always meant for specific party compositions.

So when you make your own characters for them it adds to the difficulty.