Is it petty to quit a game because of the system being used?

If you're petty enough to quit because of a system, then the other players are better off without you.

I'd say give them a chance, then excuse yourself if both the game and the other participants are a pain in the ass.

Not necessarily. It's your time thats being invested, if you don't enjoy it, you shouldn't be forced to continue it. As long as in quitting you don't ruin the game for everyone else, or do it in a petty manner, like "This game is fucking dumb, I aint playing"

Not at all. If you can't stand the system and there's no way for you to enjoy the game, there's no benefit to the group for you sticking around. If you're not having fun, it'll just make the game less fun for everyone else.

There are many, many systems I'll straight up refuse to play, your picture being an excellent example.

It's not. However, it is petty to leave if you've already been integrated into a group without giving it a chance just because you don't like the system. I'm playing PF for the first time with my current campaign and I can say the memes were true and I absolutely hate it, but I can put up with it because the campaign and the group are super fun.

My group still loves 3.pf when I have grown well beyond it - but I still have fun with that group even starting at level 1. At least I am playing Path of War for the first time... it’s still an entirely mediocre system.

i tried playing this and didn't get it. Maybe I'm low IQ.

Disliking Pathfinder is not a sign of low intelligence.

Actually considering IQ important is, however, a sign of low intelligence.

Yes.
Unless it's Fatal, then no.

Nope. If the system isn't fun it isn't fun, and if your GM and players use it heavily then you probably aren't having a good time.

If you're quitting because of the system, why did you start in the first place?

If you haven't started then you aren't quitting.

If you played for a bit and are quitting, it isn't because of the system.

This is how you keep Pathfinder parties together: by guilt-tripping them hostage.

>Is it petty to quit a game because of the system being used?

Only if you really really dislike that system and your friends tricked you into play it (how fiendish!)

not if it infiltrates the story-telling. for example, if a system ramps up the power level of characters the way D&D and direct descendants do, and you don't like high power play, it's fine to say: this does not interest me.

>Pathfinder is too hard

Are you really dumb enough to think that would be the reason?

>Is it petty to quit a game because of the system being used?

3X isn't hard, it's just bad.

Being fair, it's also harder than it has any right to be, conveying relatively simple mechanics in incredibly obtuse ways.

Why did you join it in the first place if you don't like the system?

I unironically can't see what's so wrong with PF aside from thoss problems most editions of D&D also have

Gratuitous balance issues is a simple place to start, even if that only scratches the surface. Slightly more egregious in PF's case, since it claimed to fix and improve 3.x when it failed to address basically any of the most severe problems with the system, and exacerbated some of them.

See 5e and 4e kiddos think the system is to bloated and want d&d lite.

Why do you lie like this?

I guess that's true we always play with PHB only to avoid the cheesy aasimar synthesist swashbuckler. It works ok, it's basically 3.5 with decent grapple mechanics

Except the worst imbalance in the system is present in the core book.

As everyone else pointed out, you would know the system before you started so you couldn't "quit" something you never joined.

However, if your group switched systems mid campaign, then I dont think its petty. I have quit for that reason.

>Playing 3.5
>Level 12 Party that started from 3
>1 year ongoing campaign
>"End" of Campaign final fight
>BBEG rips open a portal, we all get sucked in
>Characters are lost in time and space for many IG years.

>Okay guys, I want you to make new characters in Shadowrun
>This campaign will pick up 20 years after you get sucked into the portal. Your characters have acclimated to the new enviornment and the world is under the control of BBEG. You have been hiding out, picking up new skills for all this time and you can start your characters at X level.

Cool idea, but I never played shadowrun before, and I have no interest in the Futuristic Fantasy setting. He never discussed this idea with us, never asked how we felt about shadowrun or playing other systems.

Also seemed to be shamelessly stolen plot from Samurai Jack.

Because 90% of these threads and podcasts of pf vs 5e this is the main gripe. Ill take the system that has more gameplay an character options to the system that guts the game and barely fixes the problems.

Why are those the only two options?

Can you give an example? The biggest problem I've met is encounter balance. Usually the "genius" strategy players come up with ends up backfiring cause they didn't read the rules properly.

I'm almost certain I'm being trolled at this point. Look up caster supremacy and the prevalence of trap options in 3.PF, things which are presented as mechanically equivalent when some are explicitly worse than others. And why not look up the various examples of how broken the CR system is for good measure.

Mind, these only really matter in groups that care about how the mechanics actually work. I've seen a lot of groups run 3.PF as more of an 'Improvise on the themes' game, which seems to make things work a lot better, but at that point you're not really talking about the system.

>90% of the threads go 3.pf vs 5e
It’s cute that you think 5e is in an edition war and it’s not 4e vs 3.pf that every thread turns into. Seriously, you guys have gone so far to tie 4e to 5e like to get people to take bait.

Thank for the explanation, I think playing it enough makes you a bit blind to these things

>it's basically 3.5 with decent grapple mechanics
You mean exactly the fucking same except bonuses to grapple are even more important because the average CMD goes up by 2 nearly every single CR.

Vanilla isn't bad, but there's no ice cream favlor more boring than it.

Why would you play a game you don't like?

It's possible to start playing a game and realise you hate the system a few sessions in. It's happened to me a few times.

>and it’s not 4e vs 3.pf
But no one plays 4e they are to busy playing world of warcraft.

Repeating dumb memes only makes you look stupid

Not as stupid as 4e looks at least.

>Implying I care about coming off smart wile arguing about what is the best edition of a system to play make believe with on an anonymous chinese cartoon image board.

But really every one knows 4e is trash.

5e is very bland. Why someone would play a bland or generic system instead of getting people together to play a specialized one that suits their group taste makes no sense to me.

Can you not at least make the effort of having an argument? Or even just a factual point? Repeating memes adds nothing to the discussion and makes you look like a moron.

As someone who likes 4e, there are plenty of fucking reasons to dislike 4e, both mechanical failings of the system and design decisions as a whole, and if you've done enough looking into the system to legitimately say you dislike it, then you are probably capable of articulating that.

Here, I'll give you an easy one- 'I don't like abstract narrative mechanics in games'. It's a very common preference for people, and one that I can understand despite not sharing it. Powers are an abstract narrative mechanic that are used as a cornerstone of the whole system, so it only makes sense that not being a fan of that kind of mechanic would put you at odds with the system.

A simple line or two like that is all it really takes to explain your preference and establish your position without looking like a moron whose only arguments is bizarre comparisons to an MMO, which have never made any sense.

>bizarre comparisons to an MMO, which have never made any sense

Memes aside user. 4e is baced off WOW TTgaming was on the decline and wotc thought it was because people enjoyed mmos more. WoTC then made 4e to try to attract these people back by making a simpler game with cooldowns (encounters, and dailies) for all classes and focusing the game on combat, then adding more fantastic races like dragonborn and tieflings. No one is memeing you. The game is very combat focused and every class is almost identical with very little options. This is what 5e reverted back more.

But almost everything you said is a lie, a meme or both.

hahaha

It's usually the groups. For some undefined reason, every pathfinder group I've been in always creates builds, not characters. They focus so hard on optimization that they forget why what we're even playing. They refer to their characters as their class, not their names or even race. And those DMs that do ban all the splats to lessen this problem are so fucking autistic about it, you may as well be playing that GoT rpg.
I have never had that problem in any other rpg I've ever played, just Pathfinder for whatever reason.

>WoTC then made 4e to try to attract these people back by making a simpler game with cooldowns (encounters, and dailies) for all classes and focusing the game on combat, then adding more fantastic races like dragonborn and tieflings.
>No one is memeing you.

gr8 b8 m8 I r8 it 8 out of 8

I like Pathfinder but 3.5e and PF are bloated, you can't deny it. The only reason people cling to 3.5 is because it has more content.

I actually don't really get the "powers are abstract" thing. Maybe you could make the case for martials, but otherwise it's not any more or less abstract than special abilities in D&D always had been.

>"As far as I know, 4th edition was the first set of rules to look to videogames for inspiration. I wasn’t involved in the initial design meetings for the game, but I believe that MMOs played a role in how the game was shaped."

-Mike mearls

Guess the lead dev is memeing also.

How many groups?
They might just be bad at roleplaying
I certainly am

It's easier to just gloss over it rather than pointing that out. The presentation is different enough that people actually noticed, but pointing out it's not actually new just makes people angry and defensive, which tends to just result in more stupid meme arguments, not less. How 4e treats powers, a mechanically ubiquitous and consistently applied building block of the system, is different enough that it's easy to see why it would turn some people off.

>I believe that MMOs played a role in how the game was shaped
>4e is baced [sic] off WOW
Not exactly the same now, is it?

I mean, why would you even join the game in the first place? I don't like d20 systems so I just join other stuff

Out of context quotes, really? That's just pathetic.

Although honestly, even that's really weak. Are you really backpedalling from 'Based on WoW' to 'MMOs played a role in how the game was shaped'? The same is entirely true of 3.5.

Yeah, I certainly agree with that.

He is. He is also lying through his teeth, he was actually part of the initial design meeting. Combined with talking out of his ass, as they cribbed a bunch of things from Fallout for 3e.

űIn conclusion Mearls is an ass-face.

>Well ya it is like MMOs but you said WOW specifically so your point is wrong
The fucking goalpost

No kidding. 3.5 has fucktons of skills, subsystems, monsters, modifiers for monsters, a broken crafting system, billions of expansions, billions of races, billions of classes, metric tons of individual items, and nobody gives a single fuck about the lore. That is more MMO than most MMOs.

Oh, and don't forget the houseruled "private server" run by Paizo.

>The fucking goalpost
What about it? Where did you put it now? Up your own ass again?

Well, at least you're being honest about moving it to try and save face, even if it isn't working. Try actual arguments next time, you'll look less stupid than when you just spout dumb memes.

Don't forget a list of modifier types a mile long, homogenous save/BAB scaling, and elemental types that could be renamed to custard, soup, and gravy without any loss of functionality

I do wonder at times how it'd actually work, if you made an RPG actually based on MMO mechanics, with aggro management, cooldowns and the like. Just conceptually, I think it'd likely end up a fucking nightmare, but it's an interesting thought experiment to play with.

>stop memeing and post proof
>proof
>*autistic screaching*

rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=8309:

Nothing in that remotely approaches or supports your claim that it was 'Based on WoW'. Can you stop lying now?

Well, at first I tried on my campus, so maybe about 4 different groups? One guy was in all of them. He was kinda like me, disgruntled at the lack of roleplaying.

Then I swapped to Roll 20, yeah, not a good idea. About 3 different groups in I realized that Pathfinder just attracts the worst people. And never touched it again.

There was a japanese one based on SAO I think.

To add onto this, while I campus, I found a group GMing shadowrun, and have been with them for...about a year now. You'd think a game built solely on build optimization would be even worse, but nope, my group rocks, and the GM encourages roleplaying above all else.

It's more like hating discount Walmart vanilla ice cream. Getting proper Blue Bell vanilla is just fine.
Both 4E and 3.5 are pretty good, just aiming to do different things. 5th edition though is just some idiot trying to import even more bits of AD&D into 3.5, with even less knowledge of math than the original designers of 3.5.

My main jam is OD&D/OSRIC though.

Somehow the people who claim this the hardest are always fans of RIFTS, 5th edition, or FATE, all objectively terrible games.

>objectively

I don't think you understand what that word means

Spotted the RIFTS fan.

I'm not particularly fond of any of those games. That doesn't stop you using that word wrong.

They're all worse at doing what they want to do than other readily available systems. 5th edition wants to be used for OSR-style gameplay, but also import 3.5 style mechanical baggage. There are any number of OSR but more complicated games that are just better than it in every way.

RIFTS really wants to make a comic book from the 90s as a TTRPG. It is obviously bad at doing this, and this is made even more obvious by its own spinoff being better than it in every way. Seriously RIFTS is a cool idea, but uses a system very bad at realizing the idea. Hence why Savage RIFTS is just flatly better than normal RIFTS.

Then with FATE there is no reason to play it instead of just doing freeform roleplaying.

>Muh 3.x

soo samurai jack

>Then with FATE there is no reason to play it instead of just doing freeform roleplaying.

Confirmed for not reading the book.
A game that codifies everything, narration included, in specific mechanical functions to you is akin to freeform roleplay?
Don't believe the maymays man, read a book.

People are idiots. They associate the blank sort of color vs other flavors as "boring" despite the fact that in terms of actual taste, it is one of the most popular flavors.

And the funny thing about that? It's all entirely subjective.

So, good job, you have an opinion. Don't make the mistake of calling it objective next time.

It's not petty; it's called having a preference. Nothing wrong with not participating in a game if you don't like the system.

Is it petty to leave a meal because of the food?

Well that's good at least

I'm pretty new to tabletop stuff, just Pathfinder so far, so I suck at roleplaying above all else
My group isn't the greatest either, with the GM as the exception
The others spend their time memeing at each other in and out of character

Its a bad example
3.x is more like walking in a icecream store and having many flavors to chose from even if you don't like most.

5e is the icecream store only serving vanilla. Boring but okay.

4e is the icecream story serving you frozen mayo and telling you its vanilla. Then being told after you call them out, that vanilla is subjective and you have just have shit taste.

Those are all bad examples

Got the FATE fan :D. For real though I don't really hate FATE I just like Feng Shui better.

Please explain why sir.

First reply is best. I don't know why we're having a thread.

>"I'm running a nasuverse game, you in?"
"Hell yeah mother fucker."
>"We're running it in Pathfi-"
"AAAAAAAAAAND I'M OUT."

Somehow you only point this out about the guy saying 5th ed is bad though. Are you planning on replying to everyone saying 4th ed is WoW baby game or 3.P is garbage to let them know "that's just like your opinion man"? Or does the word objectively just trigger the shit out of you?

Synthesist is just a step above fighter and after a while it's just a weaker fighter with a bulwark of hitpoints.

The only game systems properly equipped to simulate the enormously boring and overexplained story structure of Nasuverse stories are HERO and GURPS. Even then you might not have enough autistic bored to really get to the core appeal of the Nasuverse.