Part of me wants to look up to see if there are any groups looking for players in my city, but I'm not sure I would want to be playing with a complete group of strangers. Plus I don't have any material newer than early 4th edition and I'm not about to buy new books only to attend one meeting and give it up due to not meshing with the group.
Only reason to play 4.0 is if you don't have any 3.5 materials
or if you think 4th edition is better.
Well, yeah, if you don't have 3.5 materials
Quick! Let's incite an argument over which version of D&D is better, instead of laughing about some one making the least topical movie ever.
People like the D&D they like.
Movies about D&D have historically been absolutely terrible. I can't think of one I like, or found worth watching.
Part of me wants to look up to see if there are any groups looking for players in my city, but I'm not sure I would want to be playing with a complete group of strangers. Plus I don't have any material newer than early 4th edition and I'm not about to buy new books only to attend one meeting and give it up due to not meshing with the group.
Only reason to play 4.0 is if you don't have any 3.5 materials
or if you think 4th edition is better.
Well, yeah, if you don't have 3.5 materials
Quick! Let's incite an argument over which version of D&D is better, instead of laughing about some one making the least topical movie ever.
People like the D&D they like.
Movies about D&D have historically been absolutely terrible. I can't think of one I like, or found worth watching.
Just wait until I complete my D&D porn parody epic.
dude, c'mon. everyone has their preferences, it doesn't make one edition better than the other.
Alright, I'll give you that 4.0 is fine if you don't play a rogue.
when was the last time you checked 4th edition out, out of genuine curiosity
and what do you want in a rogue
because in general, 4th edition has been kind to martial classes, giving them stuff to do besides "i hit them with my axe" and being a meat shield for casters
dude, c'mon. everyone has their preferences, it doesn't make one edition better than the other.
Alright, I'll give you that 4.0 is fine if you don't play a rogue.
when was the last time you checked 4th edition out, out of genuine curiosity
and what do you want in a rogue
because in general, 4th edition has been kind to martial classes, giving them stuff to do besides "i hit them with my axe" and being a meat shield for casters
He wants the Pathfinder rogue (which is why he likes 3.5). In Pathfinder the rogue can operate very much as a "master key" to all problems with a good player and a min/max'd character.
In 4e they are more toned down, and generally just an assassin/DPS type of character with limited skill options.
The two systems just play very differently. Which is why people tend to have preferences. They like the way a certain version plays as opposed to the other. Neither is superior. Mostly because they are so different, it's hard to rationalize how one game system can be better than another when they are wildly different. Their core mechanics aren't even the same.
The problem arises when folks just can't let other people like things.
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
I don't dig 3.X, so I don't play 3.X. Older D&D looks even less appealing to me. Doesn't necessarily mean they're bad, I'm pretty sure all the variations of the game have flawed mechanics somewhere in there. I like the tactics of 4e combat, the paring down of skills, and the fact that aside from poorly designed classes (Assassin, I am looking at you), pretty much everyone can be effective at something.
So, you know, people can like 4e, Mysst. It's fine that you like 3.X, even if I don't.
More than 100,000 DVD inserts were recalled within days due to the jacket's philosophically incorrect description of "Ayn Rand’s timeless novel of courage and self-sacrifice.
Uh-oh I accidentally deleted my signature. Uh-oh!!
What is your favorite type of comedy?
I really like Stephen Colbert and the Onion. When a comedian really knows his material and can present a situation that sounds pretty ludicrous but instead of just jumping up and down and saying, "I'm making fun of this!" he instead presents it completely straight-faced and in a serious manner while never breaking character, that is when true comedic genius can occur.
What is your favorite type of comedy?
I really like Stephen Colbert and the Onion. When a comedian really knows his material and can present a situation that sounds pretty ludicrous but instead of just jumping up and down and saying, "I'm making fun of this!" he instead presents it completely straight-faced and in a serious manner while never breaking character, that is when true comedic genius can occur.
So...I have a feeling this is going to be extremely tongue-in-cheek, and ultimately satirical of the anti-D&D era.
So... Probably all the characters will be the "joke" combinations, like a gnome barbarian or something.
Part of me wants to look up to see if there are any groups looking for players in my city, but I'm not sure I would want to be playing with a complete group of strangers. Plus I don't have any material newer than early 4th edition and I'm not about to buy new books only to attend one meeting and give it up due to not meshing with the group.
Only reason to play 4.0 is if you don't have any 3.5 materials
or if you think 4th edition is better.
Well, yeah, if you don't have 3.5 materials
Quick! Let's incite an argument over which version of D&D is better, instead of laughing about some one making the least topical movie ever.
People like the D&D they like.
Movies about D&D have historically been absolutely terrible. I can't think of one I like, or found worth watching.
Just wait until I complete my D&D porn parody epic.
"We gotta stop the Fuckomancers!"
+1
KwoaruConfident SmirkFlawless Golden PecsRegistered Userregular
Part of me wants to look up to see if there are any groups looking for players in my city, but I'm not sure I would want to be playing with a complete group of strangers. Plus I don't have any material newer than early 4th edition and I'm not about to buy new books only to attend one meeting and give it up due to not meshing with the group.
Only reason to play 4.0 is if you don't have any 3.5 materials
or if you think 4th edition is better.
Well, yeah, if you don't have 3.5 materials
Quick! Let's incite an argument over which version of D&D is better, instead of laughing about some one making the least topical movie ever.
People like the D&D they like.
Movies about D&D have historically been absolutely terrible. I can't think of one I like, or found worth watching.
Just wait until I complete my D&D porn parody epic.
dude, c'mon. everyone has their preferences, it doesn't make one edition better than the other.
Alright, I'll give you that 4.0 is fine if you don't play a rogue.
when was the last time you checked 4th edition out, out of genuine curiosity
and what do you want in a rogue
because in general, 4th edition has been kind to martial classes, giving them stuff to do besides "i hit them with my axe" and being a meat shield for casters
Haven't since launch. Combat is the primary focus of it and completely turned me off.
Part of me wants to look up to see if there are any groups looking for players in my city, but I'm not sure I would want to be playing with a complete group of strangers. Plus I don't have any material newer than early 4th edition and I'm not about to buy new books only to attend one meeting and give it up due to not meshing with the group.
Only reason to play 4.0 is if you don't have any 3.5 materials
or if you think 4th edition is better.
Well, yeah, if you don't have 3.5 materials
Quick! Let's incite an argument over which version of D&D is better, instead of laughing about some one making the least topical movie ever.
People like the D&D they like.
Movies about D&D have historically been absolutely terrible. I can't think of one I like, or found worth watching.
Just wait until I complete my D&D porn parody epic.
They tried to get some sort of 'viral media campaign' thing going by having people post 5 second youtube videos of themselves saying "I am John Galt" to try and hype the film
The only dudes who took part in it were all giant stereotypes
Nothing but an army of socially awkward, fedora wearing neckbeards, filming themselves with shitty webcams
One dude held onto a samurai sword as he said it
Another dude recorded himself saying it while holding up his digital camera in front of his bathroom mirror
A lot of those videos have since vanished, unfortunately
Tasteticle on
Uh-oh I accidentally deleted my signature. Uh-oh!!
Part of me wants to look up to see if there are any groups looking for players in my city, but I'm not sure I would want to be playing with a complete group of strangers. Plus I don't have any material newer than early 4th edition and I'm not about to buy new books only to attend one meeting and give it up due to not meshing with the group.
Only reason to play 4.0 is if you don't have any 3.5 materials
or if you think 4th edition is better.
Well, yeah, if you don't have 3.5 materials
Quick! Let's incite an argument over which version of D&D is better, instead of laughing about some one making the least topical movie ever.
People like the D&D they like.
Movies about D&D have historically been absolutely terrible. I can't think of one I like, or found worth watching.
Just wait until I complete my D&D porn parody epic.
An oglaf movie?
MAKE IT SO
I have a feeling that movie would contain large amounts of penii.
0
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
Mysst, would you believe me if I said that there's more rules for combat, but the Dungeon Master Guides and the recent Rules Compendium detail how to do non-combat encounters and interaction with NPCs quite comprehensively? Plenty of skill challenge rules and tips, but bad dungeon masters run encounters focused exclusively on combat.
Part of me wants to look up to see if there are any groups looking for players in my city, but I'm not sure I would want to be playing with a complete group of strangers. Plus I don't have any material newer than early 4th edition and I'm not about to buy new books only to attend one meeting and give it up due to not meshing with the group.
Only reason to play 4.0 is if you don't have any 3.5 materials
or if you think 4th edition is better.
Well, yeah, if you don't have 3.5 materials
Quick! Let's incite an argument over which version of D&D is better, instead of laughing about some one making the least topical movie ever.
People like the D&D they like.
Movies about D&D have historically been absolutely terrible. I can't think of one I like, or found worth watching.
Just wait until I complete my D&D porn parody epic.
Dicks & Dildos
Advanced Dicks & Dildos
The Beastiary! (people dress like monsters)
Dicks & Dildo's 3rd edicktion
Dicks & Dildo's 3.5 (same as 3rd but with an extra scene and the dialogue changed in existing scenes to reflect new rules)
Dicks & Dildo's 4th ediction (have the same people from that World of Warcraft porn in it, because its like an MMO get it)
Dicks & Dildo's Essentials (greatest hits dvd)
Dicks & Dildo's NEXT!
dude, c'mon. everyone has their preferences, it doesn't make one edition better than the other.
Alright, I'll give you that 4.0 is fine if you don't play a rogue.
when was the last time you checked 4th edition out, out of genuine curiosity
and what do you want in a rogue
because in general, 4th edition has been kind to martial classes, giving them stuff to do besides "i hit them with my axe" and being a meat shield for casters
Haven't since launch. Combat is the primary focus of it and completely turned me off.
Mysst, would you believe me if I said that there's more rules for combat, but the Dungeon Master Guides and the recent Rules Compendium detail how to do non-combat encounters and interaction with NPCs quite comprehensively? Plenty of skill challenge rules and tips, but bad dungeon masters run encounters focused exclusively on combat.
I might. I'd be rather skeptical at first, perhaps scoff a few times.
Mysst, would you believe me if I said that there's more rules for combat, but the Dungeon Master Guides and the recent Rules Compendium detail how to do non-combat encounters and interaction with NPCs quite comprehensively? Plenty of skill challenge rules and tips, but bad dungeon masters run encounters focused exclusively on combat.
I've tried running a 4e campaign a few times. The skill challenge/dc/skill use system is way less friendly for the DM than in Pathfinder. I think it's just the depth of skills allows in Pathfinder, and how they all work pretty much the same. Fourth edition has skills so regimented it becomes a lot of "Search check 47".
Granted, you can break the system and kind of mesh the two together (what I ultimately did). But, it requires a lot of house rules your players are familiar with. By the book, having a heavily skill based campaign is not as easy.
Only in 4e have I had this happen:
"I need search checks from everyone right as this encounter starts."
*guy passes*
"Ok, now I need...<X skill> <Y skill> and <Z skill> checks."
"But <Y skill> isn't applicable in this situation."
"... Christ dude, just roll the dice."
I think it's just an attribute of the 4e books being written very explicitly, where as Pathfinder skill descriptions are much more open for player/DM interpretation.
0
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
edited April 2013
There is plenty of room for improvisation in 4th edition, especially Gamma World.
I remember running a game with someone who got the Exploding origin, and used it to wipe away a pentagram with fire.
There is plenty of room for improvisation in 4th edition, especially Gamma World.
I remember running a game with someone who got the Exploding origin, and used it to wipe away a pentagram with fire.
That game is, or at least should be, the official bad ass shit.
0
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
Gamma World is my favorite version of 4e. It's fun, dangerous, engaging, and lacks the bloat that 4e gets at later levels because Gamma World mutants only go up to level 10.
I actually really liked 4E, but I'm not really well-versed in prior versions D&D so can't really comment too much on them.
Speaking of Assassins, we actually had one in our party for a while. I didn't remember him seeming bad. He ended up betraying the party and getting killed. The player had benched his normal character to play this one for a while to "try it out" but really it was a plan by him and the DM for story-purposes. The funny thing was he had his alignment written as Evil on his character sheet the whole time and we had never bothered to check since we took his "trying it out" excuse at face value since we were in the middle of a campaign about to head to a new location.
Though from then on, any time that player started a new character, he got grilled relentlessly about his motivation and alignment until the DM cracked down on it for metagaming reasons.
Also, I remember plenty of non-combat stuff going on in our games. Maybe it depends on the DM?
Of course, we also had a rules expert in the group so we could just go "Hey, what skill checks do I have to pass to grab this guy who keeps knocking me in the creek, and then hold his head under the water until he drowns?" and the guy would instantly know so we could just roll it and keep going without having to pause and look through the books.
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
can we at least all agree that D&D Next is superfluous when prior editions exist and instead of attempting poorly to make a patchwork homunculus out of bits and pieces of prior editions it should try to do something new
I actually think we managed to sidestep that pretty smoothly, and are now just talking about the virtues of D&D. The only person being a goose was Mysst.
can we at least all agree that D&D Next is superfluous when prior editions exist and instead of attempting poorly to make a patchwork homunculus out of bits and pieces of prior editions it should try to do something new
They should outsource it to Fantasy Flight. Those guys can make a pen and paper RPG.
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
it's hasbro's fault that the shit is going on
core brands initiative
D&D 4e, love it or hate it, sold better than any other edition of the game, but it didn't sell enough to please the corporate overlords
so, scrapping it, starting over, trying to combine all prior versions of the game, making three versions of D&D Next, and adding in optional modules to try to make enough money
if D&D Next doesn't sell well enough, it will be scrapped, and no more D&D for 10 years
Posts
Quick! Let's incite an argument over which version of D&D is better, instead of laughing about some one making the least topical movie ever.
People like the D&D they like.
Movies about D&D have historically been absolutely terrible. I can't think of one I like, or found worth watching.
We gotta stop persona
Just wait until I complete my D&D porn parody epic.
Alright, I'll give you that 4.0 is fine if you don't play a rogue.
Bret Hart screwed Bret Hart.
when was the last time you checked 4th edition out, out of genuine curiosity
and what do you want in a rogue
because in general, 4th edition has been kind to martial classes, giving them stuff to do besides "i hit them with my axe" and being a meat shield for casters
He wants the Pathfinder rogue (which is why he likes 3.5). In Pathfinder the rogue can operate very much as a "master key" to all problems with a good player and a min/max'd character.
In 4e they are more toned down, and generally just an assassin/DPS type of character with limited skill options.
The two systems just play very differently. Which is why people tend to have preferences. They like the way a certain version plays as opposed to the other. Neither is superior. Mostly because they are so different, it's hard to rationalize how one game system can be better than another when they are wildly different. Their core mechanics aren't even the same.
The problem arises when folks just can't let other people like things.
So, you know, people can like 4e, Mysst. It's fine that you like 3.X, even if I don't.
Uh-oh I accidentally deleted my signature. Uh-oh!!
Okay yeah definitely tongue-in-cheek.
So... Probably all the characters will be the "joke" combinations, like a gnome barbarian or something.
"We gotta stop the Fuckomancers!"
An oglaf movie?
Haven't since launch. Combat is the primary focus of it and completely turned me off.
MAKE IT SO
I read that book in high school.
It was dumb, but the parts about the cops trying to track the kid down were cool.
They tried to get some sort of 'viral media campaign' thing going by having people post 5 second youtube videos of themselves saying "I am John Galt" to try and hype the film
The only dudes who took part in it were all giant stereotypes
Nothing but an army of socially awkward, fedora wearing neckbeards, filming themselves with shitty webcams
One dude held onto a samurai sword as he said it
Another dude recorded himself saying it while holding up his digital camera in front of his bathroom mirror
A lot of those videos have since vanished, unfortunately
Uh-oh I accidentally deleted my signature. Uh-oh!!
I have a feeling that movie would contain large amounts of penii.
Dicks & Dildos
Advanced Dicks & Dildos
The Beastiary! (people dress like monsters)
Dicks & Dildo's 3rd edicktion
Dicks & Dildo's 3.5 (same as 3rd but with an extra scene and the dialogue changed in existing scenes to reflect new rules)
Dicks & Dildo's 4th ediction (have the same people from that World of Warcraft porn in it, because its like an MMO get it)
Dicks & Dildo's Essentials (greatest hits dvd)
Dicks & Dildo's NEXT!
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/26104434/#Comment_26104434
sorry but you're completely wrong
I might. I'd be rather skeptical at first, perhaps scoff a few times.
I've tried running a 4e campaign a few times. The skill challenge/dc/skill use system is way less friendly for the DM than in Pathfinder. I think it's just the depth of skills allows in Pathfinder, and how they all work pretty much the same. Fourth edition has skills so regimented it becomes a lot of "Search check 47".
Granted, you can break the system and kind of mesh the two together (what I ultimately did). But, it requires a lot of house rules your players are familiar with. By the book, having a heavily skill based campaign is not as easy.
Only in 4e have I had this happen:
"I need search checks from everyone right as this encounter starts."
*guy passes*
"Ok, now I need...<X skill> <Y skill> and <Z skill> checks."
"But <Y skill> isn't applicable in this situation."
"... Christ dude, just roll the dice."
I think it's just an attribute of the 4e books being written very explicitly, where as Pathfinder skill descriptions are much more open for player/DM interpretation.
I remember running a game with someone who got the Exploding origin, and used it to wipe away a pentagram with fire.
That game is, or at least should be, the official bad ass shit.
Speaking of Assassins, we actually had one in our party for a while. I didn't remember him seeming bad. He ended up betraying the party and getting killed. The player had benched his normal character to play this one for a while to "try it out" but really it was a plan by him and the DM for story-purposes. The funny thing was he had his alignment written as Evil on his character sheet the whole time and we had never bothered to check since we took his "trying it out" excuse at face value since we were in the middle of a campaign about to head to a new location.
Though from then on, any time that player started a new character, he got grilled relentlessly about his motivation and alignment until the DM cracked down on it for metagaming reasons.
Also, I remember plenty of non-combat stuff going on in our games. Maybe it depends on the DM?
Of course, we also had a rules expert in the group so we could just go "Hey, what skill checks do I have to pass to grab this guy who keeps knocking me in the creek, and then hold his head under the water until he drowns?" and the guy would instantly know so we could just roll it and keep going without having to pause and look through the books.
I actually think we managed to sidestep that pretty smoothly, and are now just talking about the virtues of D&D. The only person being a goose was Mysst.
They should outsource it to Fantasy Flight. Those guys can make a pen and paper RPG.
core brands initiative
D&D 4e, love it or hate it, sold better than any other edition of the game, but it didn't sell enough to please the corporate overlords
so, scrapping it, starting over, trying to combine all prior versions of the game, making three versions of D&D Next, and adding in optional modules to try to make enough money
if D&D Next doesn't sell well enough, it will be scrapped, and no more D&D for 10 years
It's just like 3, but Bards get a tiny bump.
4 didn't have bards on release, but I guess they were in a supplement?