Am I just unlucky with groups or do people play D&D more for some kind of combat dungeon crawl rather than narrative...

Am I just unlucky with groups or do people play D&D more for some kind of combat dungeon crawl rather than narrative and roleplay? I feel hesitant to roleplay because I feel like I'm taking too much time. I know the DM likes that I'm doing it but I'm usually taking up like 70% of the attention when doing this.

Also,
>group is clearly playing Neutral Good characters
>kill bunch of cultists in a cemetery for nobles
>everyone wants to start looting the large tombs of rich people
>my character speaks out, says we aren't graverobbing hooligans and this is pretty fucked up
>group looks at me like "Come on man..."

better to just not play than to have to play with people who don't have the same fun as you

DnD isn't designed for non combat especially 5E

Obligatory "Have ou tried not playing DnD" response.

But for serious, DnD has it's roots as a wargame later turned Dungeon Crawler. It is NOT a Roleplaying game. It doesn't attract the kind of player who likes to roleplay. It's mechanics aren't good for anything except combat.

In before the DnDrone Defense Squad shows up to relentlessly shitpost against the idea that people should play anything else ever.

I do kinda hate how DnD gets hated for being a bad game because it dungeon crawls.

What would you suggest?

more like inb4 people argue that other systems are good but so is D&D and all have their own merits. Then some autists come in here screeching that everyone should only play [insert niche game with 8 players in the entire country] because muh contrarianism.

Like shit man, D&D, GURPS, FATE, D6, FFG Star Wars, whatever, find a group with the same ideals as you and you'll have fun.

D&D is fine for RPers, especially 5e, you just need the right group.

>D&D is fine for RPers
Yeah, so is FATAL if you ignore all the rules.

DnD literally has NOTHING in the rules supporting out-of-combat RP. Maybe a page or two mentioning it's a thing you can do and then providing no framework or rules for the interactions that take place.

Plus, y'know, the whole "Level 5 wizard with level 3 spells can literally shit on every non-combat encounter in the entire game" thing.


DnD is a combat simulator. Trying to claim it's anything else is retarded.

Well, except for all the abilities pertaining to out of combat stuff like persuasion, deception, perception, insight, investigation, etc.

Also don't forget the fact that if you need rules in any RPG to tell you how to roleplay out of combat then you're probably doing something wrong.

Yea, FATAL can work for RPers, too if they want it too, though they'd probably prefer something else.

OPs problem has nothing to do with the system and more his group. If his group all want a hard tactical combat game then no system will push them into roleplaying.

Then again, you're probably just a troll and/or contrarian going on a random anti-D&D tirade.

OP, if you're group does want to RP, D&D is fine, if you want to try something else there's always things like Savage Worlds or something like FFG Star Wars which are less crunchy and more narrative focused.

>Well, except for all the abilities pertaining to out of combat stuff like persuasion, deception, perception, insight, investigation, etc.

Abilities that have no instructions on how they're used, no mechanics attatched, and no supporting material except "maybe make it up as you go, assuming the wizard doesn't magic the problem away anyway."

>DnD literally has NOTHING in the rules supporting out-of-combat RP.
5E has inspiration for playing out personality/ideal/bond/flaw, and while you can say that inspiration is weak metacurrency (and thus weak incentive to RP). Award conditions are vague described. Tiger mechanism is entirely GM dependent and often ignored. Saying it's has NOTHING is objectively wrong.

>make it up as you go

Yes, that is how RP works. What game are you playing where RP is a structured event not made up by the GM and players?

Polaris? Apocalypse World? Like half the stuff that comes out of the forge?

There's a difference between "scripted structured event" and "hey, we have a skill system with actual mechanics and guidelines on how to both train and use skills and incorporate them into the rest of the game".

Strawman harder, DnDrone.

DnD is shit, alignment is doubly shit, and you are a faggot for playing a skirmish wargame like an RPG.

They tell you what the skills do and how to use to them but the actual details of RP is still as much up to the players and DM as any other RPG.

Once again, none of that will help OP as having more detail and definition on skill used and mechanics probably won't encourage RP.

5e has similar things to Apocalypse World, but less of it. Things like the Folk Hero background. You'd know what I mean if you'd played both.

Honestly D&D 5e has RP focused stuff, aside from inspiration, tons of the backgrounds give stuff. Not that any of you care as you're so firmly entrenched in the "omg D&D is the devil" contrarian bullshit or just trolling.

I've played quite a few RPGs now and they all have their benefits, RPing with a good DM works just fine in D&D, especially 5e. Then again, most of you idiots probably have terrible neckbeard DMs.

Unlike my melanin enriched brethren I don't think 5e is purely antithetical to role-playing in the way all its predecessors have been.

But boy, it sure is boring, ugly, and slow.

>Grasping at straws so hard he thinks "Backgrounds" is a substitute for actual gameplay mechanics and well-designed non-combat content.

>If I'm not rolling dice it isn't roleplaying

Lol, just start entering "strawman" in the name field.

>Literally being so brainwashed by DnD'isms that he can only see things in black and white DnD mechanics.

>You'd know what I mean if you'd played both.
I have played both and I have no idea what you're on about.

I think you're just unlucky with groups. I'm in two groups for d&d, one's pretty heavy roleplay, and one's more of a mix but we all generally act reasonably "good" and try to be in character.

Both are over the internet, and one's a friend group I knew before D&D, so IDK. Try the game finder threads?

Yes, because a +2 proficiency bonus that makes my character only 10% better at something he's been doing his entire life than a completely untrained random sure is the height of good non-dice-rolling roleplay rules.

Fuck off.

That feeling when you have to roll a dice to do a thing your character should be good at.

That feeling when you still have nearly as much of a chance to fail as succeed after investing super heavily in the skill (which is to say, not much, because you're either proficient or you're not, there's not much else).

>That feeling when the wizards get to succeed with no skill investment and no dice roll at all as long as they have spell slots to spare.

>Tell me what to do because I don't have any imagination

When three people think your opinion is retarded and zero people agree with you, your opinion is probably retarded. Stop shitposting.

Gorramn, DnDrone are the worst community on Veeky Forums right now.

Literally a non-argument.

WarhammerFantasyRP, Warhammer 40k RPGs, GURPS, Apocalypse World, L5R to name a few.

>That feeling when you have to roll a dice to do a thing your character should be good at.

>what is taking 10 HURR DURR DADURR DURR I'M A RETARD DURRRR

Tell me which page in the PHB or DMG has rules for Taking 10.

Go on, I'm waiting.


Oh right, there are no rules for that, it's a shitty homebrew rule, and thus not a valid argument. Try again, DnDrone.

Basic Rules, page 59.

Different user; I don't even play that piece of shit. You're just a retard.

>Look at page 59 in the PHB
>Is literally about spellcasting for the cleric.
>Check the DMG
>Is literally a description of different planes.

Holy shit, you just made up a number. You made up a number to win an internet argument. Holy shit. DnDrones are so bad. I'm crying!

>implying anyone in this thread has made an argument

Cracked open the books to check myself, can confirm, at least if we're talking about 5e.

Furthermore I looked in the actual rules section of the PHB and there's nothing about Taking 10 in 5e.

Basic Rules, not PHB. Learn to read.

They didn't say PHB or DMG, they said the Basic rules, which is a document literally called the Basic rules.

I'd rather keep playing D&D than play with people as far up their own asses as the ones in this thread.

>DnDrones constantly claim all you need to play is the PHB
>Start pulling new stuff out of their asses when people point out all the holes in the PHB.

>Am I just unlucky with groups or do people play D&D more for some kind of combat dungeon crawl rather than narrative and roleplay?

Those things are not mutually exclusive. You are making a distinction where there is none.

>group is clearly playing Neutral Good characters
>everyone wants to start looting the large tombs of rich people

They aren't "Neutral Good" then, are they?

5e doesn't even have alignments. It has bonds and ideals. If anything, you are the one who is being too autistic, bringing in rules about character behavior that don't actually exist.

You basically have an idea of what "roleplaying" should look like, and hold others to that imaginary standard. You are probably too far gone to change your view on this, so it's probably best if you find a different group.

I don't have the PHB, so I can't look it up, but everything in the Basic Rules is in the PHB.

>5e doesn't even have alignments.

Literally a lie.

There is absolutely nothing on that page that even remotely resembles "taking 10."

The only reasonable conclusion is that you got extremely confused by the section about passive checks.

OK, give me a page number then.

I'm waiting... again.

>Out of combat abilities with pass/fail rolls
Yeah, bro! They're great for RP! Like when I told the king I was literally God and he believed me because I rolled a 20 and have +10 persuasion!

>Check this document too
>No mention of "taking 10" anywhere

Wow, another lie to win an internet argument after your first one got called out AND you decided to double down and samefag this time.

I'm laughing so hard it hurts. Thanks, you've been great entertainment.

>tfw pic related is all that's going on in a thread
Then again, OP was baiting really hard.

You know if something is literally impossible, you are not even supposed to roll, right?

>this guy corrected me on what someone else said
>that means they're making the same argument!
Be careful not to burn yourself on all these hot takes.

Passive checks = Take 10
Passive checks work under the exact same circumstances as Take 10 and work exactly the same as Take 10, they've just been called passive checks since 4e.

>Moving the goalposts this hard to try and half-assedly cover up the fact that you were talking about something completely imaginary before.

Passive checks aren't "taking 10" unless your DM is doing it wrong. Passive checks create a baseline that the DM rolls against, rather than the players rolling against. E.g. stealth vs. passive perception.

Both. D&D has most of its tools geared for combat though nothing stops players from being narrativist.

The system's biggest weakness is that many narrativist tools are locked away into magic.

I will be assuming you aren't baiting, which is probably not what is happening but whatever, here goes.
>D&D more for some kind of combat dungeon crawl rather than narrative and roleplay?
It says Dungeons and Dragons. What about the title isn't clear to you?

You are even calling the storyteller "DM" (Dungeon Master) so what is it that you don't understand about DnD being about Dungeoncrawling?

What you need to understand is that DnD is a game that is more focused on combat than interaction between characters.

And that's Fine.

You just need more effort than other games if you want to have some mechanical crunch about characters interacting with each other.

How would you describe taking 20?

Except that's not at all what passive checks actually are... they're meant to be an average to weigh skill checks against, not a score you get to automatically take (except for Perception).

Some versions of D&D have pretty good support telling narratives with shared rules and tools. 4e and 5e abandoned that pretty hard though.

The only way we'd be able to get more arguments in poor faith is if this was a thread about religion or race. This is some mind-numbing shit.

Completely irrelevant, nice attempt to change the topic though after getting called out making up absolute bullshit twice in a row.

Not him, but in my mind, it would be like taking an hour to make sure you have done something right.

>Need to do my homework
>I'll take twenty instead of taking 10
>I sit one hour more than what I would normally be, to check and re-check and make sure that all the spelling errors and everything is corrected before being done with it.

>4e and 5e abandoned that pretty hard though.
And 3.5.

Basically everything after 2e.

I'm not , and it's explicitly the same topic (whether 'take 10' or 'take 20' rules exist in 5e).
So, how would you describe taking 20?

Fuck off back to the OSR containment cell.

>especially 5e
You mean 3.5? 5e has the most non-combat stuff of any edition.

Welcome to every thread that dares to talk about alternatives to DnD or the flaws with DnD ever.

At least in 3.5 you could actually train up your skills in a meaningful way aside from the piddly useless "proficiency bonus" of 5e that doesn't do jack shit until the end-game (and even then, does far less than it should).

Can you expend on that? I don't quite understand what you meant by it.

>GURPS and L5R
why is it always these systems that get shilled so hard on DnD threads

2e probably has more, because it has multiple optional rulesets for pretty much everything. There are 4 different skill systems that I know of, the last of which was the test bed for 3.0.

Dunno about GURPS, but L5R is actually a fun well built system. Hard concept to grasp for someone who's only ever played DnD though.

You know damn well both sides of this "debate" are full of retards.

yeah, by autistically stacking bonuses

That behaviour is that of murderhobos. They should behave like good people and not rob graves. They’re bad players and that is not the game’s fault. This isn’t hard.

it's not that the systems are bad, it's that whenever someone makes a d&d thread immediately the GURPS and l5r shills come out

>Implying somebody believing something improbable is impossible in a land of magic and wonder
>Implying what I posted is not RAW and RAI
>Missing the point entirely
The problem is that the game has no nuance in interactions. Either he believes you, or he doesn't. There's no "he sort of believes you, but is going to make sure". Or "not only does he believe you, he's going to give you an escort and the best room in the palace".

L5R isn't really competing with other systems though. It's pretty well tied to it's own singular setting and is terrible for anything else.

Yes, because not being able to get meaningful bonuses at all is soooo much better.

Well, aside from playing a caster. Thats where all the real agency and roleplay options are.

4e has uatistically stacking bonuses like 3.5.

5e still has expertise.

You are acting like an angry 3.5 grog, conflating stuff that has nothing to do with roleplaying.

>it's not that the systems are bad, it's that whenever someone makes a d&d thread immediately the GURPS and l5r shills come out
then it's not me, this is the first time I've actually suggested using L5R in a thread that started off being about DnD.

I care way too little about what random idiots on the internet think: I just want everyone to have a good time and stop shitting up Veeky Forums

it's really odd when people shill systems meant for specific settings as an alternative to generic systems like D&D

>generic systems like D&D

Depends on DM

It's because those systems are a) fairly popular and b) vastly different from D&D. D&D has an overwhelming market share for RPGs, so in all likelihood it was a given player's first system. There are a lot of things that D&D does well, but there are a lot of things D&D does really badly. So, when people who have abandoned D&D for a system that's more to their liking, they come into these threads and try to enlighten the poor benighted masses to convert to the One True System. They're usually extra-rabid because they're former fans.

They aren't necessarily wrong, but they aren't necessarily welcome either. It's usually a system that's big at the time. Back in the day, this exact same thing happened all the time, but with White Wolf games instead. In ten years, I'm sure we'll see the same thing again with yet more different popular systems.

AKA the system has no rules for it

Look, I totally agree with you, having more granular results would be great, but the specific example you cite (and all the examples of "impossible to do thing but I rolled a 30 with bonuses!") simply don't fly, and aren't supposed to fly in 5e. 30 being in the realm of "possibly achievable" for low level characters (expertise+bard buff+guidance) is definitely one of the drawbacks of bounded accuracy that you have to play around as a DM, but it's not hard to actually do that, and, despite how often the arguments are made, it just doesn't come up often enough to be something that needs to be handled.

Does the system say that there are no degrees of success?

Or the low level wizard could just cast a spell that bypasses or automatically passes the obstacle alltogether.

Wizards of the Coast, not Martials who can Boast.

This is why I play 4e

I'm not asking to jump on clouds, dude. I'm trying to convince a guy of something highly improbable but actually POSSIBLE (in the world of D&D). I'm sure that has happened multiple times in our world, where it is IMPOSSIBLE

>inb4 tips fedora

I've played a bunch of different systems, and I can say without a doubt that systems that have extremely specific social rules are always shit.

Social interaction is complicated, and while I would definitely agree that D&D could use more rules in that department, it doesn't actually NEED them. The more rules you add to restrict how social interaction (or social combat) works the more you're restricting your players' ability to roleplay. Which is bad, obviously.

Even Exalted, which has very robust social mechanics, is vague as fuck on all the details. Because it has to be.

Does the system say that there are no roll for anal circumference?

>he doesn't know about reaction rolls
Unironically GURPs has the best social system I have ever seen, both on basic and the supplement Social Engineering

Then you agree. :*

>WarhammerFantasyRP

Still just a wargame

>40K RPG

Wargame, in space, with more EDGE

>Apocalypse World

ERP simulator. One character class literally has a rape gauntlet.

>Gurps

Hope you like spending 4 hours working out how to raft over a river.

>L5R
Hope you love weeb shit & magic the gathering because you're playing in the worst kind of both now.

What trash suggestions.

See, you can take any RPG system , make a bunch of unbased claims of it based on internet memes and call whatever system you're shilling superior as a result. You don't even have to have ever played the game or read the books or understood the design intent. D&D is no exception, it's just the most popular system so ripe for people to tell lies about.

Why in holy fuck is that piss yellow grainy jpg pdf still the only CRB available?

Whoever designed the 5e book should be shot, flat out.

>I know the DM likes that I'm doing it
Keep doing God's work, user. Your DM deserves nice things.

I'd not have the strength to go on were it not for the one enthusiastic and serious role player among my players. The rest are good folk, but they don't often feed my need for engaging role play. I need a break from saying "Are you sure? That is a chaotic evil action."

I'm agreeing with him that system has no rules for degrees of success. You can homerule whatever the fuck you want, but it won't magically appear in the rulebook.

>whoever designed 5e should be shot
FTFY

They should've gone back to a "remastered" version of the earlier editions. With the simplicity of a B/X core, able to be expanded to 1e/2e levels, with good formatting & organization and simpler/less draconian rules. Gosh that would be my dream D&D

You are an idiot friend. A strawman argument is when someone makes up their own counter points they can tear apart. He quoted you, it's in your post. He responded to what you said, just because you don't like it doesn't make it untrue. Nor will using your immature memes counter what they said. Maybe you should calm down and act like an adult if you want to partake in some dialog? Otherwise there is always /pol/ and /b/.

One of the most important things for a group to do before they start is to discuss expectations. People are very diverse in their desires. Some want combat, others want loot, a few want to exert power, and others want to roleplay. Even in that last group there can be a lot of different desires. You should talk to your current group, and see if others would be interested in what you want, if they are not, you can always find another group. Or you could just jump from random game to game, system to system, blaming other factors as to why you aren't getting what you want.