Am I the only one who finds nu-D&D combat incredibly boring? It's just swing and plink over and over again...

Am I the only one who finds nu-D&D combat incredibly boring? It's just swing and plink over and over again. 1d6 damage on a monster with 20 HP. Oh, boy, you might crit and do TWO WHOLE DICES of damage. Either go full 4e with powers and forced movement or go full OSR with high lethality meatgrinder. 5e just kind of sucks.

Does it really matter how much damage you deal when in all editions (but maybe 4e) casters are going to shut down encounters left and right? oh, you deal 1000 damage, monster is immune to it or has 20 times that HPs, so who cares. D&D sucks anyway, go play another system

>this thread
>again
>and again

Let's see how many newfags you snatch up this time.

All these threads do is show me how shit a lot of people's DMs are, that they can't even make 5e combat enjoyable.

Every class has a way to interact with combat that isn’t just 1d6 damage. Martials besides battlemaster however still have the issue of only adding more damage to their repertoire rather than more interesting things.

Depending on your subclass you add a little something or your feats, but really it isn’t much.

Casters however have interesting combat.

I'd never go as far as claim DND is a garbage system, but boy did I learn quickly that it's not for me. The things that it did will were all stuff I'd rather be doing ok a videogame, especially the combat that is just repetition and drags on and on... Point is, I'm into this hobby because I like things that dnd didn't provide, and as a result I don't play dnd anymore. No hard feelings.

The average DM and player are shit, if the system doesn't help either you get ubershit games.

You can push it to a point that you delete three enemies round 1, being as effective as a caster since enemies immune to straight damage are essentially nonexistent, or have glaring holes in that immunity that you can bypass.

Just one tiny facet in the beautiful gem that is ttrpgs dawg

Copy paste from previous threads:

When I rolled three 18s, my lowest stat was a 12, I made a monk and still was outclassed hard by the Druid's pet.

Sounds like someone wields all the imaginative tactics typically applied by toddlers, and surrounds himself with those of similar acumen.

Everything around here is shit. The GMs are shit. The players are shit. The systems are shit. The games are shit. It's all shit. IT'S ALL SHIT JERRY!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

What edition?

Wait no, I literally can’t think of an edition where this would happen unless you had purposefully made your character build awful beyond the initial stats.

3.5, he had some kind of acid/poison deinonychus with 6 attacks and some feats that increases it's damage, bonus to hit over the roof (had like 30 str when I had 18)

It was like my 2nd char ever and even with the help of my GM it was completely a 0 to the left compared that pet. I made the mistake of having TWF, Imp TWF and Snap kick though but wouldn't change much

Among the feats that druid had were natural spell, greensomething that gave +8 str +6 con, DR, etc to all his summonings, double time to his summonings and other stuff

...

In PF druids can start with an Allosaurus or Bear with 3 attacks that hit with a +7 and deal 1d6+5 each. A monk with 18 str starts with 2 attacks +3 attacks that deal 1d6+4 each.

I was very young when I realized that D&D had problems. It began with a very simple observation: you couldn't become stronger by training. There was no way to increase your STR score, or any of your attributes for that matter, except by magic (the 1 point every 4 levels thing didn't exist yet). My exploration of other systems began with a search for a game that would let my character simply lift weights and become stronger.

>Does it really matter how much damage you deal when in all editions (but maybe 4e) casters are going to shut down encounters left and right?

You can say that about 3E but you have never played any other edition if you think that's remotely true in any other edition.

Here's how it actually works in old D&D:n casters don't cast any spells whatsoever unless they're about to die because "they might need them later".

Yeah, you fucked up then. Your build was awful and you could have easily outclassed the pet. It was your own fault more than anything but forgiveable bevause it was your second character.

Shit happens, but you are the victim of a class that is hard to build well and being new vs a very easy to build class and someone with a better build.

Also you were the victim of a GM who didn’t know what to ban. 3.5 is the worst offender of niggling bits that need removal.

Problems with groups plus a bad luck that doesn’t work when a single dice roll is the deciding factor came to a head a short while ago. I’m liking the ST system much more


If only I could find an actual game of Exalted though

And better defense across the board compared to the bear. Animal companions are front loaded to be their strongest at level 1 and drop off severely beyond that due to poor HD progression.

>you couldn't become stronger by training
Oh man, that shit hit me so hard when I started playing this ttrpg
>My char has weights, puts rocks in his backpack, trains, cuts wood, helps people carry heavy stuff, etc
>Get nothing but the +1 every 4 levels
>Other players just spend their free time drinking and talking
>They get NPC friends, allies, lots of charecter development reflected in the game and the same +1 every 4 levels as me
I learnt to never roleplay a hardworker again

Found a system that does that yet? If so which ones?

Also D&D does have a system for training to become stronger. You can level up without combat and gain new abilities. You get an ability score up every 4 levels.

Does it really matter? you get a new one after 24 hours, so who cares if it dies? The animal companion is also like 1/4th of the Druid's class, they also have spells, wildshape and same HPs and BaB as a monk (not that it can compare to monk just with HPs and BaB but it's there)

Today I wouldn't do much better though, 1 level in spirit lion barb and the +1d12 on charges feats is probably the best you can get. And that assuming the GM is not going to fuck you up over alignment restrictions barb/monk.

Even if you go decisive strike (dobles all damage at the cost of making a single attack on your turn till 9th level) with karmic strike would only matter at medium-high levels so the animal companion will outshone you till then.

Maybe tashalatorra but then is not anymore "monk" because you only dip 1 level on it and becomes just "psion powers".

5e isn't that hard to make interesting, you just have a lame DM.

3e is a tougher prospect because it's so wildly dependent on party composition (even compared to other editions) but also because of the shitload of rules compared to 5e's more freeform nature.

4e has good combat if you take into account the errata. It's main issue is the mechanics can be really awkward to narratively justify at times.

I prefer lower HP values in general. In WFRP the creature with the most HP is either a Bloodthirster or a Great Unclean One, with a whopping 69 hit points. Still, good luck killing it.

>system is terrible
>blaming the player for not knowing how to min/max properly
3.PF players are the worst.