Dungeons and dragons is shit

>dungeons and dragons is shit
What am I supposed to play then?

Stop making these threads and stop trying to push your troll meme.

None of the obscure shit memesters advise you. DnD is fine.

>WRONG

Get off that number crunch bullshit pseudo-WoW simulator, OP.
Low-calculation, highly cinematic loose-concept roleplay is the only way. The only way. Nobody but those involved should have hands in your sacred sessions.
That includes WotC jews and their zombie-legion of gay autistic fanboios.
Let them color inside irrelevant lines while you present the lines for your niggas color.
It's like that yeah

What did he mean by this?

D&D is only shit if you play the old bad edition or you try to run it outside of its focus. D&D is great for heroic fantasy storytelling about or adjacent to killing monsters. For anything else, find another system. As to what, well, specify what you're looking for.

Can you tell us more about what specifically you're looking for in a game?
1. Genre - Are you set on tolkienesque medieval fantasy? Do you want high or low magic? Or are you interested in trying an entirely different setting?
2. Power Level - Along with 1, this helps determine the feel of the world. Are the players random ordinary people, skilled adventurers, legitimate heroes, or demigods?
3. Mechanical Complexity - Do you want something super crunchy, or something fast and easy?
4. Setting Specificity - Do you want the system to come with a built-in setting to use out of the box, or do you want more freedom to make the world you want?
5. Combat/Social Emphasis - How much of the game do you want devoted to combat? Pure dungeon crawl games call for a different system than political intrigue games, and so forth.
6. What specifically do you want the system to do? What kind of game do you want to run?

See, that's too much. No one with whom you would want to roleplay would look at that and say: "wow, look at all this shit to consider! Cool!"
Hmmmmm, you want to talk to this person please roll 1d20+6 conversational initiative on that.
Not convinced this isn't a troll actually.
You guys must simply be incapable of having organic fun.

Just play gurps

Or risus(evens up)

Had a blast playing risus with my normie friends, in a generic d&d dungeon crawl.

>I'm an autistic faggot

and then

>No seriously, I'm autistic and a faggot

There's a lot of games out there, with different strengths and weaknesses. It's hard to suggest a game if you don't say what you want the game to be good at.

And do note that there are plenty of rules-lite systems, as your comment seems to indicate that you're worried about overly complex systems.

What do you want to play?

Have you considered that maybe different people and groups want different things out of their game? Some people like crunch-heavy games (though honestly 5e isn't that crunchy given some of the other stuff around). Maybe you'd like Risus?

GURPS

Your homebrew Dungeons and Dragons.

Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay

Dungeons and Dragons. Yes it is shit, but you should, and will, play it. I thought we've been over this.

>hey guys what should I play that's not dnd
>what sort of game do you want to play
>too much details

This boy anit right.

Gurps

D&D is fine, you just have to understand it. Be willing to play to its strengths and mitigate its weaknesses. Like, you know, basically any other RPG. Most editions of D&D are on the "Crunchy" end of what people like, having described mechanisms to adjudicate just about anything (Which is probably why people like the idea of migrating to GURPS, which is also fairly crunchy in that way)

AD&D: 1e and 2e thrive as the "thinking man's D&D" -- that is, you're going to have to think your way around problems more. It relies on a GM willing to come up with creative puzzles and traps and accept outside-the-box solutions.

OSR games are largely built on the framework of AD&D, and each of them will typically have their own character functioning as a layer over the preferred gameplay of 1e/2e. Could be better or worse for you depending on what you're looking for

3e is at once D&D's most triumphant and most cancerous form. On the triumph end, this is the edition that has everything. Because there is such an exhaustive library, you can usually find the exactly right mechanic you want to express your concept. On the cancer end, that will require wading through the entire hellscape of 3e's library, and in that library one option is not worth another. It's got serious balance issues, but there are also known hacks to work around the everyday (rather than game-breaking theorycraft or obvious abuse) scenarios. And here's a secret Veeky Forums hates: In an RPG, mechanical balance in a vacuum has a fairly weak correlation with fun -- it's there, but it's not super-important. Oddly, I might say this is a system MORE friendly to newbs than to advanced users since the d20 core is pretty easy to manage but once you start to optimize, bad things happen.

Pathfinder: Imagine 3e's bloat never stopped. That someone put a quick spitshine on the rusty elements of the rules and then just kept growing them. The cancer is now malignant and terminal, and its name is Pathfinder.

4e: People call any edition of D&D they don't like a WoW-simulator and... I will respectfully disagree, no edition of D&D sucks that hard. That said, I see why people make that complaint about 4e with it's "every class gets a fistfull of spells in the same category, have a healer, tank, dps" setup. It's nastily reliant on grid combat because while every edition can make good use of a grid, 4e really loves its precision positioning mechanics... so I'd call it more a Fire Emblem simulator than a WoW Simulator. And I like Fire Emblem. But there's a reason it's so damn divisive -- on one hand it's mechanically balanced, but on the other hand it's not what a lot of people were looking for out of a D&D entry. Another fair /v/ comparison would be Heroes of Might and Magic IV.

5e: The latest version of D&D tries to take good notes from AD&D, 3e, and even a little of 4th. Its advantages are that it's currently supported, less intimidating that AD&D or the OSR, and more balanced than 3rd, and it supports TotM play pretty well compared to 4th. Its disadvantages are autists sperging at the very mention of D&D and butthurt 4efags who wanted to see 4.5 or bust. It's not great, but as D&Ds go it's inoffensive.

user. If I said:
>Fiasco
You would say...?

So, what if you take the meme pill and want to move past D&D, and not just to one of its off-brand kin like the OSR, Pathfinder, or 13th Age. Then you have to answer what you actually want to get out of your RPG. GURPS bears mention because it's probably the second-best choice for just about anything. Why is that? Well, most RPGs would be like a specific model kit. They come with the parts to build a specific thing, possibly in one of a few variations. GURPS is like a giant bucket of unsorted Lego blocks -- you can build absolutely anything you want... assuming you identify which bits you need and assemble them in the correct shape because the instructions sometimes aren't helpful.

And past that... seriously, what's your interest? Do you want D&D's sort of "high fantasy adventure"? Or maybe you'd prefer comfy lower fantasy journeys, for which you could grab Ryuutama. Urban Fantasy? There's probably a White Wolf World of Darkness game that does at least kind of what you're looking for. If you want to go a little more anime, look for the next time the Kamigakari thread reappears, it's fairly neat even if right now all we've got is a fan translation. Or maybe you want to comfy it up and play a game inspired by Harry Potter or Little Witch Academia, in which case Veeky Forums made an RPG on its own for just that. Chances are any concept you could hope to pitch has a specialist RPG either formally published for it or made by Veeky Forums, and can be emulated in GURPS if all else fails.

Personally, I like D&D just because of how modifiable it can be and just how much shit you can do with it.
Especially if there's that one prick that always wants to do that one annoying thing because (at least in 3.5) there's a rule for just about everything.

Except GURPS just does this better.

-Fantasy
-Legit Heroes
-On the Crunchy side, but not RIFTS.
-I don't mind either way
-More combat focused
-I want a good fantasy system that gives my players plenty of character options, but easy to learn. My group is primarily 3.PF, M&M, and nWoD; I'd like to find us a new system.

Not OP, but I'd appreciate the help

4e D&D is probably one of the more popular fantasy tactical-combat-heavy games, with a distinct and consistent heroic power level.

Other options you could check out are Burning Wheel (might be a bit too narrative/social-heavy), and Hackmaster (might be a bit too gritty/no-magic).

I wouldn't recommend trying to bring people from 3.PF to 4e. Someone always tries it, and it always turns to skub.

Certainly gurps.

It is far less for crab people than RIFTS

It's actually really simple, but keep in times that at any time you shouldn't be using more than a third of the book.

Savage Worlds or Strike!.

Savage Worlds is point-buy and pulpy, originates from a wargame.

Strike! is class based and full on tactical skirmish, 4e style, but without the other D&D trappings.

REIGN?

>D&D is great for heroic fantasy storytelling about or adjacent to killing monsters
not really as the storytelling part is hardly the focus of the system. it's great for boardgame-like combats and looting and leveling.

Tabletop games are as good or as bad as your DM/GM end of story If you hate your game it's probably their falt

different game systems are tied to different playstyles and some people don't like high magic (or low lagic) fantasy settings.

to say that it only depends on the GM is incredibly simplistic. it's a combination of all kinds of things with the GM being a significant factor.

I agree. Why don1t you pitch that FATAL campaign for your friends you always wanted to run?

If you like D&D, but don't want all the number stuff just play 5th. It seemed pretty good when I played it f or a while.

I also played Shadowrun, which I think used d6 similarly to GURPS

>Shadowrun, which I think used d6 similarly to GURPS
It uses only d6, but is otherwise pretty much nothing like GURPS.

They are both pretty autistic and simulationist.

yeah, it's a FUCKHUGE difference whether you add up those d6 or count how many are a certain number or higher.

>pretty autistic
I see you haven't used GURPS properly.

Yes actually, it is. Probability and the such.

Just play a game that works for you, OP. If D&D lets you and your group have fun, play it. If GURPS does it, go nuts. Hell, you could all just sit around a table and mutually pretend without dice and you'd still be justified, so long as you're all enjoying yourselves.

Earthdawn.

Fantasycraft.

>ctrl+f
>Dungeons the Dragoning 40k 7th ed.
>0 results

Veeky Forums I am dissapoint

There's some serious shitposting going on here, but yeah. This.

If you want to play a game about moving in 6 foot squares and hitting a goblin and then watching the wizard hit him better then yeah, DnD is for you, and so is fucking tic-tac-toe. Moving within a poorly balanced, rigid class system is for uncreative Overwatch babies. Stop letting the game find new ways to tell you how to play it, and start finding new ways to play new games.

>Have you considered that maybe different people and groups want different things out of their game?
Is that why dndrones are defending their game as "fine for any group and application you could think of?"
There isn't any group on this imageboard more schizophrenic than D&D IDF. One post they argue about how their system is versatile and able to handle most things people want to do in RPG, then when somebody points valid and wide area of applications it's WELL ITS DIFFERENT NEEDS AND TASTES.
Make up your fucking mind instead of spewing contradictory statements in circles.

Have you considered that maybe different people and groups want different shitposting out of this thread?

Call of the Dungeons the Dragoning Primaris edition thank you very much, get your weeb shit outta here.

You're confusing two separate opinions, each with their own population of proponents on Veeky Forums. There are some that believe that D&D is flexible enough to do most things you'd want to do with a system and that any improvement another system might be over it isn't worth the time and effort required to learn and introduce it to your group. Then there are some that believe that D&D is no different than other systems in that it has specific strengths and weaknesses, which does mean for some people/groups it will fit what they're looking for, despite other systems being superior for games outside of D&D's core focus of killing things and taking their stuff.

(Note: this is not talking)
My personal opinion: D&D is broader than some but obviously not as broad as others. If GURPS is a bucket of Lego, and most other RPGs are specific model kits, D&D is like a warhams dual/multi build kit... it can be a few distinct things, but not everything.

The biggest core of D&D's identity as separate from most other RPGs is how it scales characters over time. Every edition of D&D fundamentally has you starting out average (well, 4e pushed level 1 power higher, but still not really to anything super-special) and ending up somewhere between "Awesome" and "God". D&D's story is the nobodies who rise up to (re)shape the world, that's just how its level scaling works. Even other games that have XP and Levels rarely give you more than a little math up as you level: you start stronger, but don't grow the way a D&D character would.

>Call of the Dungeons the Dragoning Primaris edition
bitch I almost fell for that!

It's either:
>sauce
>tits
or
>gtfo
for you.