>>97636843
> I want to learn from your viewpoint
No you don't.

>>97636843
They're all basically different games. If you want to play one of them, play it, otherwise play something else or keep plugging away at your shit novel.

>>97636843
It depends on what you mean by "theatre kid focused".
If what you mean is having your character be more than a stat block, than I'd say its better for the hobby. Narrative freedom is what makes TTRPG so much better than vidya. I find myself having more fun in groups where people make characters with story hooks and can give the DM a break as we all act in character.
I find combat to be the most boring part of TTRPGs and no GM can make combat better than what I can get playing vidya.
I understand others prefer less story and more of a focus on mechanics and thats okay too.

>I want to learn from your viewpoint
Like fuck you do. You want to hear the things your peers have told you are crap get called crap again, so you can have it reaffirmed that your adopted opinions are indeed the Cool Kid Approved™ ones.

>>97636843
It's pretty silly. The reason there was such a market for White Wolf in the early 90s is because both groups have ALWAYS been part of our hobby. From Basic and AD&D through to 5e. It's always been a spectrum between hardcore crunch and full-on free-form roleplay. There hasn't been one "right" way to play since the second table sat down. The whole point of Basic was to cater to the people who wanted more RP and less crunch.

>>97637011
>The whole point of Basic was to cater to the people who wanted more RP and less crunch.
Don't talk about things you don't know anything about, please.

>>97636843
Gygaxian DnD was neither the original premise of DnD, nor remotely competitive with Arnesonian DnD, which people invariably preferred because it didn't rely on so many contrivances as to situations you face, could do more, and was flat out better at simulation work.

3.5e or 5.e is closer in many ways to the original design brief of what would become DnD, prior to Gygax.

Gygax made a system with good mechanics, but it's a system that's designed around a very specific type of play and you can't question why you're slogging your way through an underground series of basements called 'dungeons' full of monsters.

If you like 1e you like 1e, but it's flat out outcompeted by newer editions.

Also >>97636951 is based and true.

>>97637096
Anon those of us who were aliving and playing these games "back then" are just middle-aged. It really wasn't long enough ago for you to make up stories about "how it musta been."

4e ran so 5e could jump into a cauldron of bubbling acid called brand identity

>>97636843
That's three separate and unrelated sentiments in that sentence you're asking about, though. Old DnD being simply better is something I'd consider objectively wrong as different systems have different systems have different strengths and weaknesses and no system us just straightforwardly the best at everything. Whether ir not newer systems are for you or not us obviously 100% subjective and something everyone has to decide for themselves, though "all these new systems" are a very variee bunch including everything from super light one pagers to autistically crunchy and complex games, and it'd be kind of surprising if anyone felt the same way about literally all of these systems. Some newer systems definitely are geared towards theatre kinds, others aren't, and whether being geared towards theatre kids is a strength or a weakness is, again, subjective, a matter of taste

>>97637127
>4e ran
you mean fucking stumbled

>>97636843
>old D&D is simply better
No. Old D&D sucks ass. 5e ALSO sucks ass but for different reasons. However, I have some respect for older D&D because game design is an iterative process and we were relatively early on in the iterations.

The two good versions of D&D are 3.5 and 4e, and they are good for different reasons.

>they are too "theatre kid" focused.
This is a meaningless statement.
I kind of get the vague direction you're going in, but honestly? No, I played various white wolf games with literal, actual theater kids while I was in high school. It was fine. They were fun games with fun people.

But like, again, I kinda get it. I hate, say, Pbta games, because there is no meat on the bones for the game. And for the kind of person I am, I like there to be something I can kinda chew on mechanically. Also I like feeling like my character have some kind of mechanical identity and games like that are a bit too "on rails" in terms of what characters do mechanically and I feel like I have no ability to express creativity.

>>97636843
No.
Either extreme of too old or too new don't feel as good to me as good old 3.5e.
I learned that when I finally got off the 5e train and got invited to a 3.5e table a couple years ago.
It's a glorious mess and it's great.

Any tables biggest issue is going to be the people sitting at it. Though 5e is shit.

>>97637120
The world existed before you were born. The people who made the game were in their 20s and 30s and probably knew a little more about their intentions than you and your retarded middle school friends making shit up as you went along.

Meh, I tried a lot of things and just keep going back to Risus+mods because of it's simplicity for casual play with my actual irl friends and family and ease in using for solo games.

Getting the average person to wrap their head around how to actually properly play old d&d with pen and paper is like pulling teeth and takes weeks worth of consistent sessions for them to finally actually get it.
Ain't nobody got time for that.

Sometimes you just got one night with all the bros together and want to play some TTRPG instead of cards or a board game.

>>97636843
How did this topic impact your last tabletop games session? Be detailed and specific since this event clearly made you want to make this thread.

>>97636843
>I want to learn from my strawman
That's not how it works.

>>97636843
>>I want to learn from your viewpoint
eat shit

>>97636843
Daggerheart is unironically a more broken, mechanically asinine game than D&D and it's kind of hilarious that they pitched it as a theater kid roleplay-focused game, when it's really just a poorly designed combat-focused system.

>>97636843
Daggerheart has that sickening 3.5 aftertaste that scratches my brain

>>97638351
Elaborate.

>>97636910
>I understand others prefer less story and more of a focus on mechanics and thats okay too.
This is the typical (usually willful)misunderstanding of the Theatre Kid and their delusional acolytes.

You're creating an artificial distinction that isn't meant to exist in order to justify acting like a flowery ponce instead of playing a game. The whole point of a role playing GAME is that you play a role using the mechanics of the game. The two are not distinct, and playing the game properly does not require you to abandon narrative and exclusively play Punching Orcs Simulator 5000. I'll try to illustrate it for you:

Correct:
>My character would do This in These circumstances, so I roll against the Appropriate Stat to determine if their action is successful.

Incorrect Poncefaggery:
>I, Florian Queer de Pooftoid Esquire, am a massive cockgobbler! Truely never has anyone gobbled more cocks than I! You, NPC, I intend to gobble your knob, come thee hence and let me kneel on the cold hard cobbled floor at thine feet! *proceeds to luridly describe gay sex for ten minutes*

Those are both "narratives", but one is actually playing a role playing GAME, and the other is pornographic self-aggrandizing poofery or as it is commonly known "theatre kid shit". Hope that helps you understand why everyone hates you.

>>97638507
>"I DONT PLAY GAMES!" Screamed the no-games from atop Giant-Fucking-Faggot Mountain, before he took the entire starting defensive line-up of the Jacksonville Jaguars into his greasy, prolapsed anus.

>>97636843
Pretty much. However, it doesn't help MMOs and Single Player RPGs like Skyrim and Zelda also kind of drain the players, where many modern TTRPGs push harder in the "social" part but bring a different group. Which see the game as "role play system" held back by rules. Doesn't help most of the "vocal groups in the community" are "drama club rejects" trying to use the game to be the star and are a total diva if you call them out on it. That and half of them are just activists that are trying to make it their latest platform against everyone they don't like. Though love to use buzzwords and phrases to act like the good guy. Remember "everyone is welcome" unless they don't like them. Then they just lie and try to purge them then whine when people don't want them around crying it cause they're gay or trans etc. (Not because they trying to groom kids and annoying everyone by talking about gay sex or acting like they're "passing"

>>97636843
>Do you agree with this sentiment?
No, because D&D always encouraged putting on a voice for your characters and other unnecessary stuff.
The only thing that's changed over the years is the target audience.

File: 381097776.jpg (53.5 KB)

53.5 KB JPG

>>97636843
First) your question i fucking retarded, you're putting a narrow choice (old d&d) vs a vague as fuck ones (a nebulous whole of new systems);

Second) given the former observation you're forcing me in taking into account your picrel, which puts specifically RC vs DH, in order to figure out wtf are you blabbing about. I have to infer you want to put the BECMI line vs DH in your question? 90s d&d in general vs the games developed around the time of DH? Or specifically the shit produced by CR and sources of inspiration? If the latter that's very narrow (fidt and fantasy flight games wrapped in some 5e-ism).

...at best your vague divide would be about pre Forge philosophy game design and post Forge philosophy game design which is a can of worms in itself.

That said i reject your question on the ground you specifically pointed to old d&d which i consider fucking shit (a mess of byzantine rules stapled together from wargaming barely working in emulating the pov of a single character) with some redeeming qualities that are unique of it (specifically they were games with clearly defined loops, phases and rule completeness at least focused on these defined aspects). Conversely the systems you're referring to as "new" manage to be shit without any redeeming qualities because, subscribing the forge-ist philosophy of forcing the story out of the game through dissociative means, they're overly mechanized on the abstraction layer (which doesn't mean they're crunchy just that they try to force story weaving inside narrow rails through mechanics) which in my experience rarely works (requires a very specific type of players to be pulled off and even then the game doesn't sustains itself for long). So comparatively speaking "old" d&d is better on the ground that at least had some idea about the game focus while nu-games are more about enforcing a way of playing over a specific game.

>inb4 what do you like?
Simulationistic games that originated from Traveler, RQ and TFT.

>>97638693
>specifically they were games with clearly defined loops, phases and rule completeness at least focused on these defined aspects

Man, this is one of the things that frustrates the shit out of me. There are good things to take from old d&d, but people are so completely obsessed with aesthetic choices that they miss the forest for the trees. I wish that the takeaway from OSR was "these games had very well defined play structures, something that we strayed far away from, and should look into ways that we can reintegrate those ideas back into the hobby." But instead, its become either this weird purity spiral bullshit about playing "the one trve game the correct way," or sort of glomming onto the concept of "rulings not rules" as an excuse to not have to build a system as much as vaguely motion towards one.

>>97638507
Is this what tradfags actually believe?

File: 91JbBCoCL5L._SL1500_.jpg (287.9 KB)

287.9 KB JPG

Play the game written in the books without house ruling. You'll be surprised at how much fun it is.

>>97638530
Yes, that's exactly how theatre kids are.

This whole "you can have story or you can have mechanics" dichotomy is absolute bullshit.

File: 1604802337192.png (322.5 KB)

322.5 KB PNG

>>97636843

I love the clean vibe of 90's era basic DnD. Much better than scratchy "I know a guy who can draw" 70's/80's DnD and modern Tumblrcore slop.

I'd probably run Rules Cyclopedia DnD if I wanted to do a dungeon crawl. Just the race as class thing alone is a good filter.

I guess my main concern would be even people who like oldschool vibes getting bored though. I hate skipping levels 1-2 but in basic DnD clerics don't get spells until level 2 and everyone is of course super fragile.

>>97639293
>This whole "you can have story or you can have mechanics" dichotomy is absolute bullshit.
They're not mutually exclusive, but having the story you want with the rules you've got can be tricky.
There's a lot of reasons for this, but I think these are the biggest:
- Big picture thinkers have strong ideas about how the game should be formed but tend not to be naturally good at rules minutiae, and that means it takes a lot of effort to master the whole role. If you consider a GM to have finite time for prep, then every minute spent on error checking the mechanics or number-crunching is a minute not spent on setting, narrative, etc.
- There's a degree of eating your cake and having it. People want "cinematic" but "grounded" but "meaningful" but "tactical" and don't realise that certain decisions about healing or combat must clearly favour one and not the other. Games can do anything, but not everything.
- OSR style games tend not to have a good story unfold by accident. I don't mean a planned story, but the events viewed in hindsight. If the moment-to-moment gameplay is only so-so and the events of the game amount to "we dicked around and shot a boar with a crossbow" every week, the game's going to founder. It's much easier to graft a compelling narrative into the setting than it is to find a ruleset that a whole group enjoys playing every turn.

>>97639845
>OSR style games tend not to have a good story unfold by accident.
skill issue

>>97637120
I moved on, D&D was great as a baby's first RPG to get into it and introduced me to TTRPGS but i moved on past D&D when i realized it was all the same campaigns, the same level locked enemies, you're playing the same wizard over and over, the same bard over and over. I'm surprised there are people who still play D&D while middle aged (it's a different thing if you're introducing new people to TTRPGS and using D&D) and haven't moved past it or tried looking for other systems

File: 0vm22PRG1spsojg.jpg (19.8 KB)

19.8 KB JPG

>>97636843
>It's yet another OSR wank thread
You are at this point worse than pony faggots back in 2010.

>>97640275
no one cares about your opinion

>>97636843
Daggerheart names time increments for certain abilities to recharge "scenes".
Of course its massively theatre kid focused.

>>97640275
Let's not go that far, OP is not expressing a desire to have sex with animals, which is never to be taken for granted on nu/tg/.

>>97640358
heavily implied, at least, no? just me?

>>97638481
Daggerheart has very little, if anything, that makes it character focused, more than combat focused. The damage system is more granular than you'd expect with a clunky damage threshold system. Nearly all abilities and cards characters have are focused on combat and combat alone. The arbitrary restrictions placed on what cards people can have, because you're not allowed to have two characters with the same card, even though you can print more, just introduces completely arbitrary game-y-ness to the logic of the game. So instead of being narrative-first, it's mechanics only in ways that are often baffling because many actions and rational extrapolations of what kinds of abilities and features your character has are tied to the cards they are allowed to hold. And since combat is the only thing that really matters or offers any kind of threat to players, you're incentivized to run combat-heavy loadouts with the highest chance for broken combos that trivialize battles anyways.

And then there's the hope and fear system, which is just a totally arbitrary meta-currency that controls when or if you are allowed to use many cards. The GM can't really do shit unless you build up some fear, but the loose initiative system usually means the players just do whatever they want, killing everything in sight, until they accidentally roll enough fear for the GM to retaliate. And if you're not rolling fear, that means you've got tons of hope to activate and trigger tons of abilities and synergies on each other's turns, allowing you to snowball harder. Because Initiative order is whatever THE PLAYERS want it to be, they can freely set up the most effective combos.

As for the parts that are seemingly roleplay or character focused, most of them aren't much deeper than D&D's backgrounds, except it's up to the players to make up whatever they want and then choose when they get to give themselves a bonus or when a connection with another PC matters.

>>97640358
Animal fucking still beats masturbating to the Platonic ideal of a late 70s DnD session

>>97640661
LOL fucking kill yourself, nogames.

>>97640709
>nogames
Ironic, given your hobby is masturbating to an idea of a game and brag about doing so

>>97640838
so you admit you dnot play? Im in three OSR games weekly, bruv

>>97640859
How many real games

>>97640912
one IRL, one online with IRL friends, one online with /osrg/ dorks

>muh theatre kids
>muh osr gamers
Just with group that aligns with your playstyle. You guys act like they just randomly show up at your tables

>>97637199
Checked. Most hinged post ITT IMO.
It's not even the theater kids, it's the consoomers who are somehow dumber than the theater kids.

>>97640275
>>97640661
At least the average ponyfag actually watched their show. The average OSR/BrOSR cunt gets all his opinions from twitter culture war retards who can't actually keep a game going for more than one session, but still spend all their time bragging about how they play with all the best optional rules and hardcore mechanics that Gary Gygax told them about in a dream they had one time.

>>97636843
I have seen people play Daggerheart and it is pretty dumb.

File: Scene_-_Twilight_Wolf_16_9.png (687.2 KB)

687.2 KB PNG

>>97636843
No. I play, or at least try out, the newer stuff but having played the "narrative-driven" type of TTRPGs I can tell that it isn't for me.

>>97642427
There's a reason why all talk about it dried up within a couple months of release. Critical Role won't even use it for their main campaign, and the people who were dumb enough to get scammed by Darrington yet again don't want to admit that they tried it and didn't have any fun with it.

>>97640661
kys nogames

>>97639993
It can get tired, but when you stop optimizing your character for performance and allocate them based on narrative and whimsy (because it really isn't a punishing game a lot of the time), it's still a solid fantasy TTRPG system.

File: hqdefault (1).jpg (13.4 KB)

13.4 KB JPG

>>97640358
TBF, 99% of bronies don't aspire to, or have, sex with animals.
While 99% of OSRetards don't aspire to, or play, games.

>>97643041
t. ponyfucker nogames

>>97643032
That is one of the things though unless the GM and players are going specifically for a different story style like a murder mystery in D&D a lot of D&D are more centered around combat and the encounter system with wandering group of adventurers running around exploring dungeons, killing monsters and looting their treasure and maybe magic items. A lot of things including spells, feats, equipment etc for D&D are built for more of the action/combat default style of D&D. I'm not saying you don't have a point, or that it can't be done. The default though and most common playstyle is action/combat oriented. I think i might go back to D&D at some point. Maybe if i have a bunch of people new to RPGs or just because i feel like returning to it. I don't completely hate D&D but it's more like eating a Mars Bar every day for a week. It just makes you kind of want to lay off them for a while. For now i'm content trying other systems.

>>97636843
4e is the only edition of d&d that's actually fun to play.

>>97637171
4e is literally the best D&D because it has actual design goals

>>97636843
Stop calling them theater kids.
They are adults responsible for their own maladjusted foibles.

>>97643041
>>97640661
>OSR haters are unironic zoophiles
lmao
genuinely cannot make this up
but you have to go back, disgusting furniggers

>>97636843
>daggerheart is le bad!

No

>>97636843
>Old Good, New Bad
Siteth down and thinketh. New things keep getting bad because you do nothing about it but the moment you do something about it it will turn into a new bad thing eventually for this board.

>>97645536
yes lol

>>97638507
Why are you so fucking insufferable? That anon didn't even describe a dichotomy, he said he prefers one aspect above others and understand some other people prefer one aspect over the others. Then you responded completely ignoring what he wrote because you want to piss and scream and masturbate about how right you are with your painfully unfunny examples instead of engage in a conversation. This website is nearly unusable because of your bullshit, fuck off.

>>97647315
>Why are you so fucking insufferable?
Same reason you apparently have the immediate impulse to crawl up everyone's asshole the second they say something you don't like.
Personality flaws.

>>97642669
I will never understand why people keep falling for that influencers crap.

>>97647501
Same reason so many people bought into the hype for Shadowdark and ICC RPG and Bastionland: Youtubers didn't shut the fuck up about and youtubers are two-faced shills who will gladly talk up terrible products because they're even worse than game journos when it comes to unconditionally gladhanding other people out of fear of being blacklisted or not being sent free stuff.

>>97637199
>The two good versions of D&D are 3.5 and 4e
you are genuinely fucking retarded and should kill yourself

>>97647690
>you are genuinely fucking retarded and should kill yourself
But he is right and you should you kill yourself

>>97636843
>old D&D is simply better, all these new systems are not for me,
Yes
>they are too "theatre kid" focused.
I don't think that's how I'd put it.

There's just very little meaning in classes beyond mechanical prowess, the system is too open and race and class are just a set of abilities you put together that you can use in combat.
A class by itself could imply a lot of your character in the past which isn't really true anymore. Instead what character you roleplay is a thing that is slotted into what build you want to play, which is maybe a theatre kid thing, I don't know.

>>97636843
No. They are just different. OSR games often have different goals and ideas than modern games. Neither is better.