RP heavy campaing

That's not really a fault of "new d&d", though. It's a fault of the GM who would probably do that regardless of system.

>play ad&d 2e
>non-combat session

I bet that you are also the kind of person who watches porn for the plot, right?

You do realize encounters per day include social or exploration that require the use of resources right? It doesn't have to be combat

at times

>You do realize encounters per day include social or exploration that require the use of resources right? It doesn't have to be combat

Yes, so? My point hasn't change, the game still is forcing you into having a certain amount of "grind your players down each day", if you do not understand how this at least "guides" the story in some way then I do not what to tell you.

I bet you're the kind of idiot who thinks a campaign can only have one type of session, and that you need to be constantly switching systems.

And yet you aren't forced to follow it at all, it is a suggestion not a decree ordained from the gods themselves. Even then when you aren't grinding down your players, if you have players with any braincells, they don't always need magic to solve a problem. Hell that's a huge risk because most spells that would solve these situations require verbal, hand gestures and most people will fucking put two and two after the fact or be outright aware due to the nature of the spell.

I'll admit some of the points you bring up are entirely valid but this is an odd one that only is an issue if you can't think for yourself beyond what the rules decree and act like most NPCs are retards.

Why is anyone responding to this sixteen year old troll?

Just ignore this idiot. He makes these threads all the time, and explaining the basics of roleplaying games to him has no effect.

The original intent was that players would have four level-appropriate encounters per day, each requiring about 20% of the players' resources. If you're replacing these with social or exploration challenges, they need to be as resource-intensive as the equivalent combats for the balance to work out the same.

Don't bother with the D&D babs, they are worse than nintendo fanboys. They will defend their precious D&D and treat it like it is some kind of engine like unity that can run anything from 100% RP futuristic space travel to 100% dungeon crawl and everything in between.

At least nintendo treats their fans good, WotC treats you like crap yet you still treat D&D like god's gift to the world.

>needing rules to roleplay
You pretend to be someone else and you talk and act like that person. Jesus Christ, it's not that complicated.

...

>look mommy, I'm trolling!

That's nice, dear.

TL;DR: The medium is the message, and 4e is dry enough that it feels distinctly unlike storytelling which is a big stumbling block.

It's about presentation and how the structure of the presentation of information informs the experience.
4e primarily describes characters as sets of combat options--which is not totally unique so far as people playing D&D goes.
But the change is that combat options in 4e are discrete, precise, and explicit mechanical interactions without being sheathed in a contiguous narrative. Even if for many players the narrative component was more of a token thing, its absence is still meaningful overall: there are still less details and less points of interest on which to build or with which to work with.

Without the abstraction of weaving actions through a narrative layer, even if that means that some rules are murkier, there are less perceived opportunities to have meaningful interactions moment to moment and people still feel like there's less storytelling going on. Even if otherwise it's the same total experience and they occasionally just tell themselves "I'm a wizard blowing up orcs!"

To put it another way, compare reading a story to reading a thorough synopsis of the story. Even if overall you know the same stuff and you're still learning the important things about the story and its characters it is a fundamentally different experience.

Even Colville (which is by far the best DM to ever create public content) agrees.

He says that D&D is just a wargame, RP and story telling are secondary.

Colville also wrote some of the worst dialogue and lore ever to grace a Triple-A game.

Nope, he was a game designer, he never wrote diaogue or lore for a game. Troll harder.

You are baiting, but you are 100% correct.

WoD (not the latest SJW-edition, oWoD or 1e).

Colville likes the new Ghostbusters and even defends it. I think we can disregard his opinion on everything.

Fuck, I didn't read the rest of your post, I thought you would be pro D&D.

To correct things: DnD IS SHIT

He said in a video that he wrote basically all the dialogue for that recent DLC-fest online monster-hunting game, Evolve maybe was the name?

What system do actors use?

Tenra Bansho Zero.

I bet you never played AD&D because I have had a lot of sessions that I ran and played with it where it was mostly RP and you had no combat (or almost no combat) at all.
People avoided combat if at all possible in AD&D because you died, fast.

Hillfolk

What is wrong with ghostbusters? Are you butthurt because "feeeeemales"?

I hate it because it's shit

because roleplaying is mostly not based on mecanics. its about setting and interaction between people. you can do as much great roleplay scenes in dnd as you can with WoD, l5r or even dark heresy. if you rel on mecanics for RP scenes, you are doing it wrong.

What exactly is your argument? That we're wrong, and we're not actually having fun? That we just think we've been playing a weekly game for three years, when actually the game fell apart in session three and we've just been hallucinating?

It's like you're saying "Why do people put onions on pizza? I don't like them, so no one should like them!"

>4e primarily describes characters as sets of combat options--which is not totally unique so far as people playing D&D goes.
I'll never get this. They spend like half a page telling you how cool your paragon path/epic destiny is. They have hundreds of background options. Every power has at least a sentence or two of flavor. The very fact they gave every class a power source, an actual cosmic superpower, builds flavor into even the martial classes. It was like a freaking superhero game where everybody is some ultra special champion with a complicated origin story and six different twists in their story's plotline.

This PP is basically just "you're a really good fighter" yet they're describing the history of your martial practice and the nation that gave rise to it. The game was consistently evocative and bled flavor from every pore; it's certainly more than what 5e provides. I mean compare this to a 5e battlemaster's fluff description, or even that runepriest sort of prestige class in UA for an equivalent mechanically speaking.

The guys behind 4e later went on to say literally the only reason 90% of people hated 4e in their post-release playtests was because they used the wrong words like "Power" and "Healing".

No, they don't. The vast majority of class resources are combat centric and the encounters per day suggestion is meant for straining those resources. Social or exploration encounters rarely if ever strain resources. Ranger "exploration" features for example simply say "you get food" or "you move faster", no resource economy whatsoever.

D&D is a fighting game where the focus is fighting things down to it's very bones.

>no different than eating soup with a fork
I un-ironically eat soup with a fork. I mostly do it to get to the stuff in the soup, rather than the broth

A script? :^)

Yeah and Hillary lost because of misogyny and Russian trolls.

I asked a guy this exact question once and he said "Because DnD is the only system I know." And I think for most people that is the reason. And there is nothing you can do about it.

Because roleplaying doesn't require a stat block, and 5e is quick, flexible, intuitive, and fun.

People like you are why we can't have nice threads.
This is such a non-issue.

Burning wheel

Said the subhuman using anime reaction images.

>When WotC still had a sense of humour

Reading someone else's backstory isn't roleplay. It's not like a superhero game, it's like a medieval fantasy game except you have certain actions tied to certain dice and numbers that don't translate all that well to roleplay. Even when you try to make it work, it's wholly unsatisfying.
t. 4e player for about a year before dropping it on its head

One of the best RP experiences I ever had, was in D&D 4e.
Why?
Because the rules had fuck all to do with the RP.
The rules were there for basic task resolution, and making combat interesting.
The problem with these "social combat" and interaction rules, is that they take away from one of the most naturally-flowing parts of an RPG.
You can make a convincing argument but have an 8 charisma and roll a nat 1 and lol you just made the king angrier
Or you can have a shitty argument but roll an ebin nat20 and demand the guard captain suck your dick.
The other social combat systems I've seen, are even worse. A good argument doesn't need rules to back it up. A good RP scene doesn't need rules to decide how it turns out. Diplomacy should only be for when it's truly on the edge and the DM can't decide what the NPC should do. Or a game like Apocalypse World where trying to convince someone is hardcoded into the rules for important reasons.
Systems that try to codify RP are retarded, for restricting the one part of the game that most certainly does not need restriction.
Take Lumpley's law: a game system is how we agree on imagined events in the game world.
No one needs to agree or disagree on who said X or Y. Or who believes X or Y. That's just roleplaying your characters. If there is a disagreement, it comes down to whether the player is convinced, because a good RPer will make that decision.
As for combat, no one can ever agree who wins, because that's such a strong point of contention.
RP rules are literally useless.

You can use DnD for RP heavy games. It's generic. It's like gurps in that you can use it for anything, it just doesn't do either particularly well.

Then again, ttrpgs are games of pretend and you are promoted to modify and tweak rules. I have never seen faggots so shy before and sticking to rulebooks like they're divine edicts. It's games of pretend, fucking act like it and make fun games.

But maybe it's just me. I also make up board games and shit on paper too, so maybe I'm just not so creatively bankrupt where only shit in the rulebook is available and anything else is trash. Or did you faggots just forget that these are games of pretend and the only limits are literally your imagination?

Basically this, the best roleplaying I've seen was in a homebrew system because the players didn't feel like the rules were the law since we made them ourselves. A lot of rules we even changed or outright ignored if we wanted.

That said, when you have a game with a complex set of rules and lots of numbers it makes it tougher to modify things, and when you do it makes you wonder why you were using those rules in the first place.

Yeah. The variety is there for people who like different things. There are various playstyles. Ya can use a system's default, modify it, or even homebrew up a game on your own.

You'd think that on a traditional games board people would be a little more open to different shit. I get it's mainly wargaming and ttrpgs, but traditional games covers a lot. Anyone into the hobby shouldn't find a "what if we do this instead" that alien. Or find it a hard concept to replace or modify things for fun. Veeky Forums has made a ton of games from scratch. And I've seen people who pirate warhammer codexes and play with entirely placeholder pieces. If that doesn't show the amount of variety available in any given traditional game, I don't know what is.

>oWoD
most fun game I ever played was oWoD, good old vampire

>Not splicing DnD together with a game that better handles RP, and having separate fighting and social sheets

said the man posting on a Chinese image board

>still believes ye olde meme that Veeky Forums or even any of the Japanese sites that inspired Veeky Forums were ever focused on anime

Classic.

>has to make a frankenstein abomination of a game just to have fun

Have you tried just finding a better system? When you have to do that shit, maybe another system is just easier.

Oh but the 'social combat' actually IS real, user.
You'll find tons of examples through history of people falling for a charismatic guy's dumb (or even evil) idea - just because of his nat 18 (rolled on 2d6) CHA stat.
For a recent (and most memorable) example, see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler

tl;dr: user has never heard of the phrase: 'smooth talker'.

The problem with D&D and RP is that all the PCs are overpowered gods.

They think they should be able to roll something or cast some spell to solve any problem they have.

Other systems which have scaled down powerlevels necessarily rely more heavily on RP to solve various situations because combat is undesirable.

...

Fate, Runequest

I've played D&D/PF for years and have had some extremely fun sessions with compelling RP but I think those were always due to the players taking initiative and roleplaying amongst ourselves and coming up with our own little dynamics with each of the other characters. The system never really pushes that or validates it however. I feel like whenever I'm sitting around a campfire roleplaying with the other characters the GM is sitting there bored out of his mind with nothing to do since, as long as we don't go to sleep and continue on his role in what is happening is near non-existent.

Since then, I've drank the kool-aid. You should as well, its better on this side.

"It's the only system I know, and I'm scared of learning new things".

That doesn't explain EVERY case, but it explains more than 90% of them.

>The system never really pushes that or validates it however.

This.
A good RPG is supposed to support all aspects of RP (I'm, looking at non-combat stuff here) in it's mechanics - otherwise it's just an overgrown wargame.

I really want to help you, but like, all you've said is how you feel about it. The man made an excellent counterpoint.

Wild Talents worked pretty well for my group

help me with what? We've both just said how we feel about it, and as long as we're having fun in our own way that's fine. He likes being told how cool his paragon path/epic destiny is, I like telling it myself and either way is valid.

It's a not a rebuttal and doesn't really add to that particular line of discussion, though it's relevant to the topic.

His post was a demonstration that 4e did, in fact, place a lot of in-world, roleplay focused narrative in their rules, a refutation of , which appeared to make the claim that 4e lacked the narrative layer that players need to get into a game.

Your post was just that you didn't like it. That's fine, but it doesn't follow.

Link unrelated, right?
Here's the one I'm sure you meant to post. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt

Care to explain YOUR link?
'cause all I can see right now is Adolf a good boy - he dindu nuffin.

I suggest learning some actual history.

Oh, I have.
And, unlike my example, your 'smooth talker' only managed to get covered in glory by knocking up a dyke 6 (six) fucking times.

>Oh, I have
I'm absolutely certain you haven't.

So the legend about the D curing lesbians actually basis in real life

So point me in a fucking direction.
Note: no 'enlightening' please - or I'll 'enlighten' your brain with a tracer bullet.

The entire New Deal and dragging America into WW2 doesn't ring any bells?

Well, it's either that or: spread your legs,
and think of Susan.
Either one works for me.

New Deal was just the final nail in the "Democracy in the USA"'s coffin.
USA dragged into WW2 was just the 2nd act of the zombie that rose out of it. (coffin, that is)

He was a goddamn crook with a hideous, insidious wife.

4e is the logical consequence of 3.x

Flashnews, son: vast majority of the Big Heads anywhere (let alone USA) have been crooks.

Fate

My point stands.

I blame 3rd edition for that. A heavy codification of skills and abstract options for "character building" undermines a lot of the game these days.

That's not quite right - 4e did place a lot of in-world, roleplay focused narrative in their rulebook, but not so much in the rules. Its design is generic, which can be a strength since you can re-flavour things as you wish, but it comes at the cost of your "superpowers" feeling very samey when you compare your character with another. That can still be overcome if the group and GM are good, but it's a limitation nonetheless.
And since when do posts need to "follow"? I'm not trying to rebut his rebuttal, I even think he's right in that regard. I'm just offering a different perspective. We're on an anonymous imageboard where a thread can be started by shitposting about RPing in D&D and end with people talking about whether hitler was right.

>an excellent counterpoint
His counterpoint to not liking the presentation is "play through 1/3 of the total character level content anyways;" that's unhelpful at best.

>everyone makes up sheets filled with class features and weapons and dungeon exploring skills and spells
>DM has a big book of monster stats to fight

ok now lets all sit around and not use any of that and just talk about what would be cool/funny if it happened

>feeling very samey when you compare your character with another.
One of the following characters has this damage line on their character sheet: 2d6+4

A Fighter
A Ranger
A Wizard

Which one is it?

>game provides content to do something
>this somehow prevents you doing something else

>just talk about what would be cool/funny if it happened
You're doing that either way, it's just in one scenario some arbitrary numbers suggested you do it.

Hundreds of backgrounds, power descriptors, built in power sources for everyone, subclass selections, etc. Plenty of flavor in heroic tier, and it only increases as the game goes on.

to someone who hasn't played the game, what does that mean? 2d6+4 tells you absolutely nothing about a character

Welcome to my point

that was my point too, stop stealing it

Not sure what he's getting at, but the answer is wizard. Most fighty types have [W]+modifier in their damage line, to point out they use weapons that will vary in damage output

Well now that just makes it seem like a trick question.