D&D Edition Wars

For all your tabletop & board game needs.
Bah! They don't even play at physical tabletops anymore.
MadPreacher

D&D Edition Wars

Post by MadPreacher »

Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 00:56
5e in itself is not awful,
Generic Fantasy 5E Superhero Edition is not D&D which means it automatically is awful due to its claim to being D&D.

Concentration is in AD&D 2E as a NWP. It helps spellcasters avoid being interrupted after being hit with an attack.

Advantages and Disadvantages are not needed since they're mostly there for role playing reasons and to give extra mechanical benefit. AD&D 2E has a constrained limit on everything which an ad/disad system would break really easily and turn it from heroic to superheroic.

Bounded accuracy/proficiency breaks the strict limits imposed upon the system that enforces heroic play. You have now created superheroic characters that run contrary to what Gary and company wanted and publicly stated.

As I said this is Generic Fantasy 5E. It is not D&D and that means a hard pass for anyone that loves Real D&D™.
User avatar
Lhynn
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 254
Joined: Feb 5, '23

Post by Lhynn »

Gotta disagree there. Concentration was good in AD&D, but being able to have 50 spells on you was not good. In fiction most wizards only ever prepare with one spell, this shit about "buffing" has been decline since day one and needs to stop.

Advantage/disadvantage belongs there because it provides a tangible mechanical benefit to roleplaying the situation. It encourages it, players now think about positioning and get creative with ways of getting that advantage. And its great because it depends on the DM, so you cant propose cheesy shit, but stuff that makes sense, otherwise the DM can just say no, and he can say no anyway. I noticed right away just how much more invested my players were in everything happening in combat when advantage became a thing.
It really is the one true genius idea in 5e and I believe its the reason its seen so much success.

Bounded accuracy, generally speak, does 3 things:

- It makes level more important than build. Incline in my book
- It in no way creates heroes. Before bounded accuracy modifiers from weapon, armor, feats, buffs, race, kit, etc got out of control. With it you make an even playing field in a way that makes sense.
- By tying it to weapon proficiency and skills it gives you a way to improve on level up without having to assign X amount of skillpoints that add up to a mountain that dont make sense.It also softlocks characters into skills that form a part of the characters personality, you are what you know, etc.


Oh, before I forget, remembered one more shit that I couldnt stand from 5e, saving throws. Absolute rubbish.
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:17
Concentration was good in AD&D, but being able to have 50 spells on you was not good.
What the fuck are you going on about? At level 20, a wizard would have a maximum of 37 spells. Which most tables stopped at level 12. The maximum amount of spells memorized was 21. Priests had more spells at level 20 with 49 without bonus spells. At level 12 they had 23 spells.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:17
Advantage/disadvantage belongs there because it provides a tangible mechanical benefit to roleplaying the situation.
As someone that has written a Hero System setting and have played/GMed it for numerous years I can tell you that you are so full of shit. Advantages and Disadvantages are there for purely mechanical benefit. In Hero System, the entire system is geared for it, but Real D&D™ is not. That's why Gary and company never incorporated it into the game.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:17
- It makes level more important than build. Incline in my book
Level is irrelevant when your table is limited to level 12-14. Plus, there wasn't any builds in Real D&D™. So you are referencing Generic Fantasy 3.x then. Pure decline and DANDINO.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:17
- It in no way creates heroes. Before bounded accuracy modifiers from weapon, armor, feats, buffs, race, kit, etc got out of control.
You're talking about DANDINO which is Generic Fantasy 3.x+. That is not Real D&D™. Real D&D™ has very tight constraints on it from the AC being 10 to -10 and the best weapons were the rare +5. Kits weren't in any of the 5 editions that comprise Real D&D™ or AD&D 1E. They were completely optional in AD&D 2E. Real D&D™ didn't have feats.

Thanks for admitting that it creates superhero characters.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:17
By tying it to weapon proficiency and skills it gives you a way to improve on level up without having to assign X amount of skillpoints
More Generic Fantasy 3.x bullshit here. In Real D&D™ the original 5 editions didn't have weapon proficiencies. AD&D added them to differentiate the different fighter types and to ensure that they were limited in what they learned. Also, there weren't any skill points. You had as an optional rule Weapon Proficiencies and Nonweapon Proficiencies. Both were very limited that ensured that you had a heroic character not a superhero.

You are making my point for me. This is Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG 5E and should be avoided since it's not Real D&D™.

If I piss down your back and call it rain is it really rain?
User avatar
Lhynn
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 254
Joined: Feb 5, '23

Post by Lhynn »

MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42




What the fuck are you going on about? At level 20, a wizard would have a maximum of 37 spells. Which most tables stopped at level 12. The maximum amount of spells memorized was 21. Priests had more spells at level 20 with 49 without bonus spells. At level 12 they had 23 spells.
Manner of speaking. You could go around with 5-7 active spells easily. Which to me is absurd and gamey.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
As someone that has written a Hero System setting and have played/GMed it for numerous years I can tell you that you are so full of shit. Advantages and Disadvantages are there for purely mechanical benefit. In Hero System, the entire system is geared for it, but Real D&D™ is not. That's why Gary and company never incorporated it into the game.
Doesnt match my experience at all
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42

Level is irrelevant when your table is limited to level 12-14.
It really isnt.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
Plus, there wasn't any builds in Real D&D™. So you are referencing Generic Fantasy 3.x then. Pure decline and DANDINO.
Thats fair
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
You're talking about DANDINO which is Generic Fantasy 3.x+. That is not Real D&D™. Real D&D™ has very tight constraints on it from the AC being 10 to -10 and the best weapons were the rare +5. Kits weren't in any of the 5 editions that comprise Real D&D™ or AD&D 1E. They were completely optional in AD&D 2E. Real D&D™ didn't have feats.
Only ever played AD&D, I played with proficiencies and armor didnt feel like it protected you much past level 6. Leather was pretty insignificant early on, and later on you would get nailed on a 2+ on a d20 no matter your armor class. Touching on bounded accuracy, thanks to it, even the lighter armors are kept relevant and will offer some measure of protection.

MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
Thanks for admitting that it creates superhero characters.
In 3.5? yeah, in 5e action economy became the name of the game, meaning low level creatures at high level were still dangerous because they all got their turn. The problem with 5e is that you start out fairly strong, so you never get to feel as frail as you do in the early AD&D levels. But in AD&D you definitely got to be a lot more powerful in higher levels.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
You had as an optional rule Weapon Proficiencies and Nonweapon Proficiencies. Both were very limited that ensured that you had a heroic character not a superhero.
And in 5e it became even simpler and more straightforward. As a fighter you knew how to swing a sword, part of the training. And you got progressively better at it as your proficiency grew. As a wizard you didnt get it, but if you went out of your way to get a proficiency, suddenly you are very competent with a sword.

MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
If I piss down your back and call it rain is it really rain?
You are not going to convince me some 5e ideas were not good and couldnt improve the AD&D experience. While I will grant you the system was rubbish, some of it is salvageable.
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:12
Manner of speaking. You could go around with 5-7 active spells easily. Which to me is absurd and gamey.
That's been a part of Real D&D since the 1974 White Box Edition. Are you saying that Gary was being gamey?
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:12
Doesnt match my experience at all
Yet, I pointed out the rules and how it is a mechanical benefit. Don't take this the wrong way, but I don't give a shit about your experience since it's statistically insignificant.
It really is. Level maximum at the table determines the style of play.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:12
Only ever played AD&D, I played with proficiencies and armor didnt feel like it protected you much past level 6. Leather was pretty insignificant early on, and later on you would get nailed on a 2+ on a d20 no matter your armor class. Touching on bounded accuracy, thanks to it, even the lighter armors are kept relevant and will offer some measure of protection.
Then you were playing it wrong. Leather is strong for a thief and bard classes. They get more benefit from it due to having a high Dex than any other armor.

Leather gives a +2 AC which drops you from 10 to 8. Add in the -4 Defense Adjustment for 18 Dexterity your character now is AC 4. To hit on a 2+ by a standard monster would require it to be 16+ HD. That is a level 16+ monster. According to Table 39 in the AD&D 2E DMG Premium Edition that AC 4 of your character is good up until 8+ HD for the creature. That is a level 8 monster. By that time you should have magic items that increase your AC by +1 or +2 be it ring of protection, bracers of defense, or even leather armor +1 or +2. That drops your AC down to 3 and 2 respectively.

This sounds like you had a shitty DM that didn't know what the fuck they were doing.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:12
But in AD&D you definitely got to be a lot more powerful in higher levels.
And you could still die to a lowly 0 level farmer. That's why Real D&D™ is heroic not superheroic.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:12
As a wizard you didnt get it, but if you went out of your way to get a proficiency, suddenly you are very competent with a sword.
Wizards are more powerful at higher levels due to the spells they sling not due to the weapon they don't fight in melee with. If your wizard is fighting in melee then you are doing it wrong.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:12
You are not going to convince me some 5e ideas were not good and couldnt improve the AD&D experience. While I will grant you the system was rubbish, some of it is salvageable.
None of it is salvageable and it's not Real D&D™. Are you saying that you could make a meal from maggot infested garbage?
Last edited by MadPreacher on February 23rd, 2023, 02:46, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
GhostCow
Posts: 1514
Joined: Feb 3, '23

Post by GhostCow »

This thread did not go very long before I was reminded why I stopped reading the BG3 thread on the codex
User avatar
Lhynn
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 254
Joined: Feb 5, '23

Post by Lhynn »

MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:42



That's been a part of Real D&D since the 1974 White Box Edition. Are you saying that Gary was being gamey?
Clearly, yes. In most fantasy fiction you see a character cast very few spells, when they do these spells are enough to shift the tide of the battle. You dont see a character with stone skin, protection against all elements, protection against magical arrows and non magical weapons all on him. A whole scene can revolve around the usage of a single spell, 3 at most, and never are they all maintained. A fireball and a grease can be used in conjunction. Dnd was a reflection of folklore and tales, its the reason why fighters only ever really swung their swords with little else to do. Always felt rubbish to have a wizard "buff up", didnt feel organic at all.

MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:42

Yet, I pointed out the rules and how it is a mechanical benefit. Don't take this the wrong way, but I don't give a shit about your experience since it's statistically insignificant.
I mean, you havent given any argument against it other than some vague "Gary didnt do it."


MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:42

It really is. Level maximum at the table determines the style of play.
No, current level does.

MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:42
Then you were playing it wrong. Leather is strong for a thief and bard classes. They get more benefit from it due to having a high Dex than any other armor.

Leather gives a +2 AC which drops you from 10 to 8. Add in the -4 Defense Adjustment for 18 Dexterity your character now is AC 4.
Wasnt easy to roll an 18 in anything back then. Unless you went with 4d6 and drop the lowest, so I wouldnt count attributes as expected to be part of anyones defense.

I played characters with a bunch of 12s and maybe a 14. Some died, some thrived.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:42
And you could still die to a lowly 0 level farmer. That's why Real D&D™ is heroic not superheroic.
Thats never not been the case.


MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:42
Wizards are more powerful at higher levels due to the spells they sling not due to the weapon they don't fight in melee with. If your wizard is fighting in melee then you are doing it wrong.
Dumb argument to make, fiction is full of spell casters that are proficient with a sword. Its nice to be able to emulate that with some investment.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 02:42
None of it is salvageable and it's not Real D&D™. Are you saying that you could make a meal from maggot infested garbage?
Like I said, advantage turns combat into a more narrative experience.
Concentration makes wizards have to actually think of what to prepare instead of preparing for everything.
Bounded accuracy makes all armor worth it at any level, it gives characters a clear "You get better at what you are good at" in a very simple and effective way, and it keeps numbers from getting out of hand.
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

Then our conversation ends. If you don't want to play Real D&D then I suggest you play Fantasy Hero by Hero Games. It has what you want.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 03:44
I mean, you havent given any argument against it other than some vague "Gary didnt do it."
Yeah let's just ignore me stating this three times.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
Advantages and Disadvantages are there for purely mechanical benefit.
Are you going to lie some more?
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 03:44
No, current level does.
Incorrect, level maximum combined with current level does, but then you went for the stars and said maximum book level. I corrected you. Shall we continue?
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 03:44
Wasnt easy to roll an 18 in anything back then. Unless you went with 4d6 and drop the lowest, so I wouldnt count attributes as expected to be part of anyones defense.
Sounds like you had shitty DMs or you were a shitty player. Your choice. I've played every method of rolling stats and the one that gave the best stats is 5d4 and 6d4 as per Dark Sun. Those die roll methods make superhero characters. However, Athas is very lethal and you need all the help you can get.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 03:44
Thats never not been the case.
Yes it has been the case.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 03:44
Dumb argument to make, fiction is full of spell casters that are proficient with a sword.
I'm making the argument based on the rules of Real D&D™. If you want to play melee wizard it's called a Fighter/Mage. If you want to play a Mage that can swing a sword then go play Hero System. The only one making shitty arguments here is you in defense of Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the Fifth Shitting.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 03:44
Like I said, advantage turns combat into a more narrative experience.
You know what turns any game into a narrative experience? Not having lazy fucking players like you that can't role play shit. No amount of rules will make you narrate anything so stop with that lie. You're just a power gamer that can't act.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 03:44
Concentration makes wizards have to actually think of what to prepare instead of preparing for everything.
Jesus look at the fucking strawman on display. Mages and Priests always had to choose their spells wisely as they have quite a limited selection. At first level, both groups cast 1x1st level spell. At level 5 Wizards get 4x1st level, 2x2nd level, and 1x3rd level. Priests get 3x1st level, 3x2nd level, and 1x3rd level.

There is also the matter that you had to either find new spells in treasure, buy them from a mage, or research them. You just didn't get a whole new set of spells on level up.

Have you actually played Real D&D™? So far you've lied about everything that it is.
Lhynn wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 03:44
Bounded accuracy makes all armor worth it at any level, it gives characters a clear "You get better at what you are good at" in a very simple and effective way, and it keeps numbers from getting out of hand.
Which I showed that you and your DM don't know how AC and THAC0 works. You flat out lied about Leather armor being worthless from the get go. I showed that according to AD&D 2E that leather is good up until level 8.

Do you have anything else that is relevant to this discussion about Real D&D™? No, you do not. I have the rules and you have your fucking idiotic retarded drooling opinion. I hate opinions because they are often wrong and full of lies.
User avatar
Lhynn
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 254
Joined: Feb 5, '23

Post by Lhynn »

MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 08:52


Then our conversation ends. If you don't want to play Real D&D then I suggest you play Fantasy Hero by Hero Games. It has what you want.
Muh "No true scottsman".
Fact is, some fiddling with the rules can improve the experience depending on the table and setting. This is not only an option, it is expected.


MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
Advantages and Disadvantages are there for purely mechanical benefit.


Are you going to lie some more?
Its a mechanical benefit born from narrative actions and connects the two. Thats the point ive been making.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
Incorrect, level maximum combined with current level does, but then you went for the stars and said maximum book level. I corrected you. Shall we continue?
Never said that. Game has always been about what level the party is on. Thats what determines roughly what they can do. Doesnt matter if the max is 6, 12, 18 or 29.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
Sounds like you had shitty DMs or you were a shitty player. Your choice. I've played every method of rolling stats and the one that gave the best stats is 5d4 and 6d4 as per Dark Sun. Those die roll methods make superhero characters. However, Athas is very lethal and you need all the help you can get.
I let players roll with the punches and figure it out. If they get low scores, then they got low scores, its gonna get harder to succeed for them, but thats a good thing.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
Yes it has been the case.
Barring some extreme cases. Standing there and taking whatever is thrown at you will get you killed sooner or later in any edition, even by a solitary peasant.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
I'm making the argument based on the rules of Real D&D™. If you want to play melee wizard it's called a Fighter/Mage. If you want to play a Mage that can swing a sword then go play Hero System. The only one making shitty arguments here is you in defense of Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the Fifth Shitting.
This whole argument makes no sense at all "If you want to be absolute shit at something, you better compromise your entire progression". Isnt a good argument. Its far more elegant to use proficiency for it, its also simpler, easier to track and more character defining.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
You know what turns any game into a narrative experience? Not having lazy fucking players like you that can't role play shit. No amount of rules will make you narrate anything so stop with that lie. You're just a power gamer that can't act.
This whole argument makes no sense, if you encourage and reward something it will happen more often. Thats human nature.
Now if you want to stand up a pulpit somewhere and preach that it isnt the case be my guest, you are wrong and in doubling down you can only be more wrong.


MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
At level 5 Wizards get 4x1st level, 2x2nd level, and 1x3rd level. Priests get 3x1st level, 3x2nd level, and 1x3rd level.
Thats plenty of spells to be honest, and they are all fairly powerful, even the level 1 ones. Nothing wrong with telling them "You cant concentrate on keeping 2 spells alive at the same time.", like I said, in fantasy wizards usually have one spell active if any at all, because it makes more narrative sense and keeps things interesting. "Buffing up" was always such a retarded and gamey concept.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
There is also the matter that you had to either find new spells in treasure, buy them from a mage, or research them. You just didn't get a whole new set of spells on level up.
Thats neither here nor there, another argument entirely.
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
So far you've lied about everything that it is.
Thats a provable lie, tells me you are arguing in bad faith.

MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
Which I showed that you and your DM don't know how AC and THAC0 works. You flat out lied about Leather armor being worthless from the get go. I showed that according to AD&D 2E that leather is good up until level 8.
I didnt lie, I claimed leather armor is only useful at low level, then you tell me leather armor stops being useful at mid levels :smug:
MadPreacher wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 01:42
Do you have anything else that is relevant to this discussion about Real D&D™? No, you do not. I have the rules and you have your fucking idiotic retarded drooling opinion. I hate opinions because they are often wrong and full of lies.
Yeah, no. I think you hate opinions because you hate anything new and refuse to see the implications of some mechanics. Some 5e ideas are good, though they arent really 5e, they were stolen from better systems and I think AD&D would benefit from some of them being implemented.
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
Muh "No true scottsman".
No, I'm citing the actual rules as they have been since Gary and Dave wrote the White Box. You hate that. I suggested you play a game more to your liking and not change what already is. It must be too difficult for you.
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
Its a mechanical benefit born from narrative actions and connects the two. Thats the point ive been making.
It's only a mechanical benefit since you can't force players to narrate shit. You've already proven that.
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
Never said that.
You actually did, but I'll let you off the hook this time. I don't feel like making you look like a bigger ass.
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
I let players roll with the punches and figure it out. If they get low scores, then they got low scores, its gonna get harded to succeed for them, but thats a good thing.
Finally we agree on something. Almost all of the characters in my current game have one or two really good stats out of 7 with the rest being between 7-10 as the lowest.
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
Barring some extreme cases. Standing there and taking whatever is thrown at you will get you killed sooner or later in any edition, even by a solitary peasant.
Thanks for admitting that even a lowly level 0 peasant can kill you in Real D&D™. Nobody said anything about standing there and taking it either. This is a strawman.
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
This whole argument makes no sense at all "If you want to be absolute shit at something, you better compromise your entire progression". Isnt a good argument. Its far more elegant to use proficiency for it, its also simpler, easier to track and more character defining.
Wizards are shit at melee combat regardless of the weapon they use. However, that's not the point you were making. I gave you the fucking rules on how to play a wizard that uses swords in Real D&D™. You aren't happy with that and threw a temper tantrum. I even told you the system that allows you to play a wizard that can swing a sword. You weren't happy with that suggestion either.
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
This whole argument makes no sense, if you encourage and reward something it will happen more often. Thats human nature.
Now if you want to stand up a pulpit somewhere and preach that it isnt the case be my guest, you are wrong and in doubling down you can only be more wrong.
I'm been a player and a GM longer than you've been alive. Back in the old days players actually role played. Since the 2000s players roll play. What I said is true. In order to get a narrative experience then you need players willing to narrate their actions. This means I'm not wrong.
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
Thats plenty of spells to be honest, and they are all fairly powerful, even the level 1 ones. Nothing wrong with telling them "You cant concentrate on keeping 2 spells alive at the same time.", like I said, in fantasy wizards usually have one spell active if any at all, because it makes more narrative sense and keeps things interesting. "Buffing up" was always such a retarded and gamey concept.
Level 1 spells are powerful for level 1-2 for the most part and that is based on if they scale with the wizard's level. You do understand that Real D&D™ magic is Vanican and fire and forget unless you house rule it. Like I have a rule in Myths that spellcasters have to make a Spellcraft check to actually cast the spell.

Buffing up was the result of the CRPGs and save scumming not done at the table.
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
Thats neither here nor there, another argument entirely.
You're the one that brought up the fact that wizards and priests got newer spells. You just left out the part I highlighted. What's the matter is it hard for you to admit that you were actually wrong about the rules?
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
Thats a provable lie, tells me you are arguing in bad faith.
The only one arguing in bad faith is you. You refuse to use the rules as written and create strawmen to "allow you to win". I'm shoving your bad faith right back at you. You get what you dish out from me and you know this.
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
I didnt lie, I claimed leather armor is only useful at low level, then you tell me leather armor stops being useful at mid levels
Yes, you did lie and I proven it with the rules. Now you act all smug. It's hilarious that we're all laughing at you over your retardation and failure to admit you were wrong.
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
eah, no. I think you hate opinions because you hate anything new and refuse to see the implications of some mechanics. Some 5e ideas are good, though they arent really 5e, they were stolen from better systems and I think AD&D would benefit from some of them being implemented.
I don't hate opinions. I hate people with opinions that use lies to argue in bad faith like with calling Gary's original rules for spellcasters being gamey.

I've played and run well over 50 RPG systems. How many have you played and ran? How many rules systems did you write? I've written dozens.

You came to me to argue that Generic Fantasy Superhero the 5th Shitting was good. I said it wasn't because it's not Real D&D™. You proceeded to trash Real D&D™ like the fucking retard you are.

AD&D 2E is the closest thing to perfection for Real D&D™. It runs smooth and gives the group a lot of options for narrative gameplay. It rewards you for coming up with creative solutions to the problems you face. You get xp for overcoming the obstacle which means you have parlay, flee, ambush, fight, or whatever you can think of to overcome it. You have actual resource management as well. Oh you can die and lose levels to monsters that have energy drain. Your character is a mortal hero not an immortal superhero that at first level is more powerful than a 1st level AD&D 2E character. In fact, Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the Fifth Shitting first level character is the equivalent to a 5th level AD&D 2E character.

Never mind the fact, that you are unshackled in your bonuses and you can easily improve your stats. Not so in Real D&D™.

Hey you like shit. Nothing wrong with that, but you can't call Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the Fifth Shitting D&D because it's not. Real D&D™ died when TSR did. Nothing in Wizard's piss poor imitators has any of the original mechanics in it. That was my fucking point and it flew right over your thick head.
Last edited by MadPreacher on February 24th, 2023, 10:06, edited 1 time in total.
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
because you hate anything new
I missed replying to this comment last night. Let me be clear. I hate products put out by racist companies. Wizards of the Broke made it clear that they don't want white men playing their games. As such, anything that bears their logo and rulesets are something I automatically fucking hate. If you buy this game then you hate white people and you agree with Wizards of the Broke that there should be less white people playing their games.
User avatar
Lhynn
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 254
Joined: Feb 5, '23

Post by Lhynn »

MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
No, I'm citing the actual rules as they have been since Gary and Dave wrote the White Box. You hate that. I suggested you play a game more to your liking and not change what already is. It must be too difficult for you.
Do you have a cognitive problem?

MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
It's only a mechanical benefit since you can't force players to narrate shit. You've already proven that.
How? Youve proven nothing.
MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
You actually did, but I'll let you off the hook this time. I don't feel like making you look like a bigger ass.
Youd have quoted me if I did.

MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
Thanks for admitting that even a lowly level 0 peasant can kill you in Real D&D™. Nobody said anything about standing there and taking it either. This is a strawman.
If you are high level and able to defend yourself in AD&D theres no way a peasant can take you down.


MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
Wizards are shit at melee combat regardless of the weapon they use.
Yes, but some wizards want melee to be viable regardless, a relatively small opportunity cost for it is fine. Proficiency facilitates that and a lot more.
MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
However, that's not the point you were making. I gave you the fucking rules on how to play a wizard that uses swords in Real D&D™. You aren't happy with that and threw a temper tantrum. I even told you the system that allows you to play a wizard that can swing a sword. You weren't happy with that suggestion either.
They are all shit options that set you back tremendously.

MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
I'm been a player and a GM longer than you've been alive. Back in the old days players actually role played. Since the 2000s players roll play. What I said is true. In order to get a narrative experience then you need players willing to narrate their actions. This means I'm not wrong.
You just said it yourself, newer players dont roleplay in combat, or they come up with ridiculous flavor for their actions, either way I want to have a handy tool that lets me punish bad behavior and reward good behavior. Advantage/Disadvantage offers this naturally


MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
Level 1 spells are powerful for level 1-2 for the most part and that is based on if they scale with the wizard's level.
Some level 1 and 2 spells always remain fairly powerful/useful.
MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
Buffing up was the result of the CRPGs and save scumming not done at the table.
Really depends on the encounter.
MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
You're the one that brought up the fact that wizards and priests got newer spells. You just left out the part I highlighted. What's the matter is it hard for you to admit that you were actually wrong about the rules?
I didnt.
MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
The only one arguing in bad faith is you. You refuse to use the rules as written and create strawmen to "allow you to win". I'm shoving your bad faith right back at you. You get what you dish out from me and you know this.
Im not refusing to do anything, you are imagining things.


MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
Yes, you did lie and I proven it with the rules. Now you act all smug. It's hilarious that we're all laughing at you over your retardation and failure to admit you were wrong.
Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:18
I didnt lie, I claimed leather armor is only useful at low level, then you tell me leather armor stops being useful at mid levels


MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
I don't hate opinions. I hate people with opinions that use lies to argue in bad faith like with calling Gary's original rules for spellcasters being gamey.
Some of them are.
MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
I've played and run well over 50 RPG systems. How many have you played and ran? How many rules systems did you write? I've written dozens.
Played and DMed plenty, but you resorting to asking for credentials tells me you realize you are talking a lot of nonsense.

MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
You came to me to argue that Generic Fantasy Superhero the 5th Shitting was good.
No I didnt, I said expressly 3 rules that were poached from other, better, systems, are actually good and can work well in AD&D 2nd edition.

MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
I said it wasn't because it's not Real D&D™. You proceeded to trash Real D&D™ like the fucking retard you are.
Wrong again, Ive only praised these 3 newer rules and said they bring benefits without any real drawback.
MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
AD&D 2E is the closest thing to perfection for Real D&D™.
Zealots, really shouldnt be arguing with zealots. Its the better edition, but there are improvements that can be made.
MadPreacher wrote: February 24th, 2023, 00:45
Never mind the fact, that you are unshackled in your bonuses and you can easily improve your stats. Not so in Real D&D™.
What are you even talking about?
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

Lhynn wrote: February 24th, 2023, 21:02
What are you even talking about?
This is the extent of what Lhynn can argue. He lost the plot already. Have a good day you fucking retard.
User avatar
Trithne
Posts: 25
Joined: Feb 26, '23

Post by Trithne »

I'm not even sure you two are necessarily always talking about the same things. It sounds to me like Preacher is thinking of Merits/Flaws/Benefits/Drawbacks when he talks about Dis/Advantage, while Lhynn is referring to 5e's "Roll with advantage" mechanic (roll 2d20 and take the highest, or the lowest if rolling with disadvantage), which I believe can be rewarded by GM fiat.

I do think that edition warring should be ideally constrained to the tabletop area and this thread used to discuss BG3 specifically, because otherwise every single thread on a D&D game newer than the goldbox is going to be derailed into the same thing.
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

Feats are for retards that lack the imagination to do really creative things. They are a crutch and really turned You Can Try of Real D&D™ into If You Don't Have X You Can't Do Y of Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the 3rd through 5th Shitting.
User avatar
Acrux
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 1829
Joined: Feb 8, '23

Post by Acrux »

MadPreacher wrote: March 3rd, 2023, 20:59
Feats are for retards that lack the imagination to do really creative things. They are a crutch and really turned You Can Try of Real D&D™ into If You Don't Have X You Can't Do Y of Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the 3rd through 5th Shitting.
I've heard that complaint, but I have to say that I've never played, refereed, or observed a game where feats were treated that way. I'm sure there are feats like that, especially with the stupid number of splatbooks that exist. But as far as I am aware, most feats give a bonus to an action or allow a modification to how a class feature works.
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

Acrux wrote: March 3rd, 2023, 23:45
MadPreacher wrote: March 3rd, 2023, 20:59
Feats are for retards that lack the imagination to do really creative things. They are a crutch and really turned You Can Try of Real D&D™ into If You Don't Have X You Can't Do Y of Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the 3rd through 5th Shitting.
I've heard that complaint, but I have to say that I've never played, refereed, or observed a game where feats were treated that way. I'm sure there are feats like that, especially with the stupid number of splatbooks that exist. But as far as I am aware, most feats give a bonus to an action or allow a modification to how a class feature works.
It happened to me when Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the 3rd Shitting came out. I wanted to do something that required a feat unskilled and the DM tells me I can't since I don't have the feat to do it. I don't recall exactly what it was, but I looked at the DM and said, "Well in Real D&D™ the DM would tell me to make an ability check to see if I succeeded or not."

The DM looked at me and said, "Yeah well that's no longer allowed under the rules."

I packed up all my stuff and went home. I'm a very creative player when I think of things to do within the spirit of my character. Like my swashbuckling thief that tried to leap from a balcony railing to a chandelier then cut the chandelier down to land in front of the party mage and Acrobatics wasn't a NWP yet. That DM told me to roll my Dex of 19 and see if I made it. I rolled a 20 which is a critical failure. My 1st level swashbuckler fell 1 story where he used his face as a landing pad.

The mindset is different when it comes to feats+skills and letting the DM judge the game when the rules don't cover it. This is why I have to remind my current players that in Real D&D™ it's a You Can Try system. If you think of something I have to let you try to do it. This means they have to think outside of the box and be creative. Games from the 2000s+ literally say you can't do something if you don't have the right skill/feat. The player is shackled and lose their creativity to do stuff.
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 8944
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by rusty_shackleford »

your character just doing whatever is called theater, skills are just a guideline for GMs, more of a formalization of what GMs would allow or reject without a skill list. It also allows characters to be more differentiated than just being a blob of possibilities. 3E skills sucked, yes, but that doesn't mean they're bad.

You can easily make the same argument for rejecting ability scores. A thief is dexterous, so why would they need to tell you that? Just roll your thief score and check to see if you succeeded at your thief action.

Oh, and feats are awesome.
User avatar
Lhynn
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 254
Joined: Feb 5, '23

Post by Lhynn »

Feats are awesome, they were awesome in fallout 1 and nothing has changed since. Another spergout from @MadPreacher
User avatar
Acrux
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 1829
Joined: Feb 8, '23

Post by Acrux »

MadPreacher wrote: March 4th, 2023, 00:09
It happened to me when Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the 3rd Shitting came out. I wanted to do something that required a feat unskilled and the DM tells me I can't since I don't have the feat to do it. I don't recall exactly what it was, but I looked at the DM and said, "Well in Real D&D™ the DM would tell me to make an ability check to see if I succeeded or not."

The DM looked at me and said, "Yeah well that's no longer allowed under the rules."
That sucks. Sounds like he was a shitty DM. All I can say is that tables where I've been at using 3.5 it would have been allowed.
MadPreacher wrote: March 4th, 2023, 00:09
This means they have to think outside of the box and be creative. Games from the 2000s+ literally say you can't do something if you don't have the right skill/feat. The player is shackled and lose their creativity to do stuff.
The only recent game I've seen that says something like that is - ironically - Castles and Crusades: "it is recommended that a Castle Keeper should disallow a character a chance of success in attempting a non-class ability" (p 167).

I do agree that newer systems lead players away from creativity. My biggest gripe with d20 systems is that they tend to turn sessions into tactical combat simulators.
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

Lhynn wrote: March 4th, 2023, 01:48
Feats are awesome,
Not in Real D&D™
Lhynn wrote: March 4th, 2023, 01:48
they were awesome in fallout 1
Which is not Real D&D™ and it's not a pen and paper RPG. Do you have anything relevant to say?
Acrux wrote: March 4th, 2023, 03:04
That sucks. Sounds like he was a shitty DM. All I can say is that tables where I've been at using 3.5 it would have been allowed.
Every DM I've met that has run Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the 3rd Point X Shitting has said the same thing. If you don't have the skill/feat you can't do the action.

I'm reading the 3.0 Shit Master's Guide and it literally says for rules contradictions to choose the rule you like. The only time a DM is allowed to make a ruling is when the situation isn't covered by an existing rule for starters then under Player-DM trust it literally says you have to use the rules consistently. Changing the rules is highly discouraged. I'm still in Chapter 1 of the Shit Master's Guide.

Reading 3.5 Shit Master's Guide it says the same thing as above.
Acrux wrote: March 4th, 2023, 03:04
I do agree that newer systems lead players away from creativity. My biggest gripe with d20 systems is that they tend to turn sessions into tactical combat simulators.
Ironically started by Rich Baker and Skip Williams in Player's Options: Combat & Tactics that most people barely used. Monte Crook baked it into Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the 3rd Point X Shitting. It's remained ever since.
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 8944
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by rusty_shackleford »

MadPreacher wrote: March 4th, 2023, 04:02
Every DM I've met that has run Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the 3rd Point X Shitting has said the same thing. If you don't have the skill/feat you can't do the action.
How do you climb a wall as a fighter in AD&D?
► Show Spoiler
What you're advocating for is nothing more than theater with the occasional dice roll.

As an aside, Oriental Adventures is what introduced skills to D&D — the last D&D book written by Gygax before he went on to design two entirely skill-based games. :king:
► Show Spoiler
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

rusty_shackleford wrote: March 4th, 2023, 04:23
MadPreacher wrote: March 4th, 2023, 04:02
Every DM I've met that has run Generic Fantasy Superhero RPG the 3rd Point X Shitting has said the same thing. If you don't have the skill/feat you can't do the action.
How do you climb a wall as a fighter in AD&D?

Hint: You can't. It's a thief-exclusive ability. It was expanded to all classes in 2E, much like say... a skill system?
Funny, but the Player's Handbook on page 160 in the Climbing section it says:
Although thieves have specialized climbing abilities, ALL characters are able to climb to some degree or another. Climbing is divided into three categories: thief, mountaineer, and unskilled.

Thieves are the most skilled at climbing. They are the only characters who can climb very smooth, smooth, and rough surfaces without the use of ropes or other equipment. They are the fastest of all climbers and have the least chance of falling.

Mountaineers are characters with mountaineering proficiency or those the DM deems to possess this skill. They have a better climbing percentage than unskilled characters. Mountaineers with proper equipment can climb very smooth, smooth, and rough surfaces. They can assist unskilled characters in all types of climbs.

Unskilled climbers are the vast majority of characters. While they are able to scramble over rocks, they cannot use climbing equipment or negotiate very smooth, smooth, and rough surfaces. They have the lowest climbing success rate of all characters.
Page 161 has Tables 65 Base Climbing Success Rates and Table 66 Climbing Modifiers.
rusty_shackleford wrote: March 4th, 2023, 04:23
What you're advocating for is nothing more than theater with the occasional dice roll.
I did? AD&D 2E always had climbing checks and the allowance of players to do anything. Dice rolls are needed to determine success regardless if you have the necessary skill or not. Are all skill check theatrics Rusty? No, they're not. You know it and I know it.
rusty_shackleford wrote: March 4th, 2023, 04:23
As an aside, Oriental Adventures is what introduced skills to D&D — the last D&D book written by Gygax before he went on to design two entirely skill-based games. :king:

Err, plus a complete stinker everyone should forget. Eternal shame on Lorraine's TSR for killing Dangerous Journeys via lawsuits.
Your opinion on the proficiencies provided are meaningless as they were all carried forward into AD&D 2E still as an optional rule. In fact, they're the same list. Considering that you just made my point about Real D&D™ being a You Can Try system since all of the D&D Basic editions lacked a skill system entirely and left it open for the players to do anything with a dice roll. Was that also useless theatrics Rusty?

AD&D 2E DMG on the subject of you can try via Chapter 9 page 72.
Since this isn’t a combat game, the rules are not ultra-detailed, defining the exact effect of every blow, the subtle differences between obscure weapons, the location of every piece of armor on the body, or the horrifying results of an actual sword fight. Too many rules slow down play (taking away from the real adventure) and restrict imagination. How much fun is it when a character, ready to try an amazing and heroic deed, is told, “You can’t do that because it’s against the rules.”

Players should be allowed to try whatever they want—especially if what they want will add to the spirit of adventure and excitement. Just remember that there is a difference between trying and succeeding.

To have the most fun playing the AD&D game, don’t rely only on the rules. Like so much in a good role-playing adventure, combat is a drama, a staged play. The DM is both the playwright and the director, creating a theatrical combat. If a character wants to try wrestling a storm giant to the ground, let him. And a character who tries leaping from a second floor window onto the back of a passing orc is adding to everyone’s fun.

The trick to making combat vivid is to be less concerned with the rules than with what is happening at each instant of play. If combat is only “I hit. I miss. I hit again,” then something is missing. Combats should be more like, “One orc ducks under the table jabbing at your legs with his sword. The other tries to make a flying tackle, but misses and sprawls to the floor in the middle of the party!” This takes description, timing, strategy, humor, and—perhaps most important of all—knowing when to use the rules and when to bend them.
Is that all useless theatrics there @rusty_shackleford in those rules? I mean you just literally said that any time a player wants to attempt something in Real D&D™ that it's useless theatrics that slows the game down.
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 8944
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by rusty_shackleford »

You posted right after I got done splitting it into a new topic @MadPreacher :mad:
Thought I had a brief reprieve to get that done.
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

rusty_shackleford wrote: March 4th, 2023, 05:13
You posted right after I got done splitting it into a new topic @MadPreacher :mad:
Not my fault that you decided to split the topic as I was replying. That's a you problem. :P :bounce: :eyebrows: :king:
User avatar
rusty_shackleford
Site Admin
Posts: 8944
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by rusty_shackleford »

Nowhere did I mention 2E.

It appears you're the one using the watered down ruleset not for us purists. :king:
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

rusty_shackleford wrote: March 4th, 2023, 05:15
Nowhere did I mention 2E.

It appears you're the one using the watered down ruleset not for us purists. :king:
Nowhere did you mention 1E either, so you failed in your argument. Also, the rules of AD&D 1E allows for anyone to climb. You just roll what the DM tells you to while Thieves are better at it.

What purists? You're the one that likes Wizards of the Wokes DANDINO and the feats because you lack an imagination.

:lol: :Inspector:
User avatar
Tweed
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 1504
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by Tweed »

I've got a feat fetish, I'm into big feats of skill.
MadPreacher

Post by MadPreacher »

Tweed wrote: July 29th, 2023, 01:55
I've got a feat fetish, I'm into big feats of skill.
Don't let JarlFrank see that or he'll demand pics.
Post Reply