Favorite D&D Edition
Original DnD
0.9% (1)
0.9% (1)
Advanded DnD (1e)
0.9% (1)
0.9% (1)
2nd Edition (AD&D2e)
9.3% (10)
9.3% (10)
3rd Edition (Original)
2.8% (3)
2.8% (3)
3.5 Edition/Pathfinder
33.3% (36)
33.3% (36)
4th Edition
5.6% (6)
5.6% (6)
5th Edition
39.8% (43)
39.8% (43)
This Poll does not have my answer
7.4% (8)
7.4% (8)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Let's Talk about D&D!

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Schadrach:
snip

crimson5pheonix:
FUCK D&D, PLAY GURPS!

GURPS is for people who want to simulate a universe more than play a game.

HA! I'm running a GURPS game right now! Show's what you know!

(please help me)

crimson5pheonix:
Another question, if I may hijack this thread a bit, what is everyone's favorite D&D setting (or another RPG setting if you're feeling saucy)?

Personally I've always been a fan of Dark Sun because I like the idea of post-apocalyptic 'ard mode.

Planescape, easily.

snip

Planescape seems really popular. I did really like the original art to Planescape.

Souplex:

BreakfastMan:

Schadrach:

Ave satanas, motherfucker. =p

SATAN

The D&D lore on the lower planes is far more interesting than the new Testament.
And there is no Satan in D&D, there is Asmodeus though.
Also: Demons, Devils, and Daemons are all separate things, and all hate each other.

Oh man so interesting. You just have one big war that goes on forever and ever... Never seen that one done before.

Souplex:

BreakfastMan:

Schadrach:

Ave satanas, motherfucker. =p

SATAN

The D&D lore on the lower planes is far more interesting than the new Testament.
And there is no Satan in D&D, there is Asmodeus though.
Also: Demons, Devils, and Daemons are all separate things, and all hate each other.

I decided that the Hells and Devils are actually the same beings as Demons and that a bunch of them decided Law and Order is better, took over part of the Abyss, turned it into the Hells, and reside there but otherwise its the same place, even if no one wants to admit it.

Here's one for my fellow GMs.

Do you prefer running more narrative-driven campaigns or an open sandbox style?

My preference goes to the former. I like how it gives me tighter control over the ebb and flow of the game, building atmosphere as the story progresses until it reaches a crescendo in a (hopefully) satisfying conclusion, and finely tailor encounters for maximum effect, since I already have a general idea of where things are likely to go. Players can also count on there being clearly defined goals to work towards. Because of this, I think it is the better approach for a group of less experienced players. Overdoing it does run the risk of railroading.

But, the sandbox style also has merits. Assuming they're the type to strike out on their own, player have more agency. They can go anywhere, do anything. They can craft their own stories and make an impact on the world as they see fit, with the GM basically just there to fill in the details as needed to keep things moving. It does more or less require more experienced players who know the possibilities of the game well enough to set goals for themselves. If not, the game can really grind to a halt.

I'd say it's possible to do both, but I admit I'm not a good enough GM to pull it off.

Chimpzy:
Here's one for my fellow GMs.

Do you prefer running more narrative-driven campaigns or an open sandbox style?

My preference goes to the former. I like how it gives me tighter control over the ebb and flow of the game, building atmosphere as the story progresses until it reaches a crescendo in a (hopefully) satisfying conclusion, and finely tailor encounters for maximum effect, since I already have a general idea of where things are likely to go. Players can also count on there being clearly defined goals to work towards. Because of this, I think it is the better approach for a group of less experienced players. Overdoing it does run the risk of railroading.

But, the sandbox style also has merits. Assuming they're the type to strike out on their own, player have more agency. They can go anywhere, do anything. They can craft their own stories and make an impact on the world as they see fit, with the GM basically just there to fill in the details as needed to keep things moving. It does more or less require more experienced players who know the possibilities of the game well enough to set goals for themselves. If not, the game can really grind to a halt.

I'd say it's possible to do both, but I admit I'm not a good enough GM to pull it off.

I love giving the illusion of free reign but keeping them on the rails as best I can. That being said you can never fully prepare for what a group can ruin.......
A Homebrew world helps as you can free ball the lore a bit. But yeah I really like letting the players think they are driving the story forward.

Dr.Susse:

Chimpzy:
snip

I love giving the illusion of free reign but keeping them on the rails as best I can. That being said you can never fully prepare for what a group can ruin.......
A Homebrew world helps as you can free ball the lore a bit. But yeah I really like letting the players think they are driving the story forward.

Ay yes, that's somewhat of a favorite trick of mine as well. "Oh, they want to go to City B? Guess the next big event will take place there, instead of City A as planned."

Chimpzy:
Here's one for my fellow GMs.

Do you prefer running more narrative-driven campaigns or an open sandbox style?

Good question! I usually roll with my mood at the time, followed by the mood of the room. I mean, if I have been planning out a series of encounters and roleplaying moments, including reveals and specific traps or eureka moments, then I'll do my damndest to keep the story on the rails (though, as has been mentioned, I can adapt this to allow for the sense of freedom for the players).

On the other hand, sometimes I come to the game and just say, "hey, you guys want to go on a hunt?" Or even ask the players what they want would like to play, cart blanche, and let a loose story form around their choices (including the general vibe of the room- I mean, if player X has been having a shitty day, I might try to specifically throw them something fun or engaging, depending on their personality type, of course). Some of our best games start out like that, where the DM rolls with the desires of the characters the players have chosen.

I've never played D&D or any other PnP game before. I'd very much like to, but I have no friends and in no mood whatsoever to find groups. It seems as though most of those groups would be composed of people who have been friends for years, and it would be incredibly awkward entering that kind of setting. I'm not what you would call an extrovert.

RedRockRun:
I've never played D&D or any other PnP game before. I'd very much like to, but I have no friends and in no mood whatsoever to find groups. It seems as though most of those groups would be composed of people who have been friends for years, and it would be incredibly awkward entering that kind of setting. I'm not what you would call an extrovert.

I know that my own core group has been playing together since High School, and I have heard from others that it can be intimidating, walking into an environment like that. But we try to take in new players when we find like-minded folks, and I have played in other groups over the years, but not recently, mainly because my personal life needed priority (I've had to cut back my regular sessions to once every two weeks instead of once a week, as it was in the past).

I'm not trying to goad you into tabletop, or anything, I'm just saying that some groups are not necessarily old timers and all friends for years, and many will gladly take on new players, if you go looking.

Also? Cons are a great place to jump into some open games in a (mostly) casual environment. Or they used to be? Last Con I attended was in 1997, I think... NovaCon, I believe it was. But I did play in several open games during that Con - some Vampire:The Masquerade, and a session of 2nd Edition D&D leap to mind.

I tend to end up running story-oriented campaigns, but I want to do that less, or atleast I want to build up to it. Too often I end up having alot of pseudo-rails, like time-limits or some other burden that keeps players from exploring...but I also blame my players because one, they seem fine with it, and two, dont tend to want to wander off.

My current campaign though, they have just delivered my recent psuedo-rail, and now I am attempting to let them do as they please. They are still on a hook, to hunt down one PC's wife who fled (cause he is an evil necromancer), but there is no time limit currently, and her escaping wont blow up my world (currently), so they are in no rush, and I am excited about it.

RedRockRun:
I've never played D&D or any other PnP game before. I'd very much like to, but I have no friends and in no mood whatsoever to find groups. It seems as though most of those groups would be composed of people who have been friends for years, and it would be incredibly awkward entering that kind of setting. I'm not what you would call an extrovert.

I keep intending on buying headphones or headset so I can run games online on roll20, since I want to play with others. Could always check that site out.

RedRockRun:
I've never played D&D or any other PnP game before. I'd very much like to, but I have no friends and in no mood whatsoever to find groups. It seems as though most of those groups would be composed of people who have been friends for years, and it would be incredibly awkward entering that kind of setting. I'm not what you would call an extrovert.

1 google later...
https://boardgamegeek.com/wiki/page/Friendly_Local_Game_Stores_(FLGS)_of_the_USA#toc24

Pathfinder is my favorite, but I have an appreciation for all the different editions of DnD and what they tried to do, good and bad. 4th is the one I dislike the most, but even then I don't hate it. It just never jelled for me.

Chimpzy:
Here's one for my fellow GMs.

Do you prefer running more narrative-driven campaigns or an open sandbox style?

This depends entirely on the system for me. If a system has a very front loaded character creation (like Traveller or Shadowrun), then making a true sandbox is much easier: the characters' power level will not fluctuate wildly, and thus populating a sandbox is easier because you don't have to give the extra thought of "Will my guys run into this when they're scrubs and get pasted?" all that much consideration.

Games where the players' abilities dramatically increase as they play (any d20 derivative, Dark Heresy, Earthdawn, to name a few) makes creating a sandbox more of a chore if you wish to create an engaging game. If you populate the sandbox a la what most videogames do (easy encounters nearby, harder ones further away), it can feel pretty...well, video-gamey. But if you don't do that, there's high chances of your players stumbling into something they cant deal with. And there ain' no quicksave in PnP games if you accidentally went into the cave of Morgoroth Citybreaker at level 1 when he's a challenge for level 10. Some players love that, some players hate it, it's up to you to know your group's preferences.

I personally like a bit of both. An overarching narrative that provides a start and an end goal, and then making things pretty open ended, letting the players decide how to tackle things and where to go.

The closest I've ever come to experiencing DnD is through isometric RPGs like Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale I & II, Pillars of Eternity, Neverwinter Nights, and Fallout.

...Not for lack of interest, but because I'm lonely and none of my friends, within reasonable driving distance, are down.

So, so ronery.

Character heavy stuff like Pathfinder and White Wolf's World of Darkness have always been especially intriguing though.

This is a good Saelune thread.

Marik2:
This is a good Saelune thread.

Indeed.

I'm surprised Basement Cat hasn't popped in yet. You'd think he'd be all over this.

Did someone lock the basement door again?

I prefer 5e but I only learned how to play when 5e came out so pretty biased over here. Also moonbeam is a great spell. Enemies, friends, friends in the way of/next to enemies, doors doesn't matter. Its just fun to conjure a beam on moonlight from my sword that burns everything.

Chimpzy:
Here's one for my fellow GMs.

Do you prefer running more narrative-driven campaigns or an open sandbox style?

Depends on the game and the players. CP2020 I usually played a more sandbox style game. Seeing as it's basically our world with more cool toys, once people get used to the mechanics they can pretty much make their own fun and I can just add in my own creations when I feel like it.

Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay being more fantastical generally needs more of a plot to nudge people in the right direction, even if I do tend towards the more mundane human/urban based stories. You can dump people in downtown LA and they know what to do, downtown Marienburg is another matter (unless they are veterans of course). Wilderness adventuring is generally not a good idea.

Twilight 2000 was kind of a mix of the 2, while it is set in our world, it is distinctly more nuked than reality, so you have to do a lot more world building.

Overall I have fonder memories of Cyberpunk, but that's not necessarily to do with the type of campaign.

Marik2:
Wow this is actually a good thread in the wild west

Don't worry, I'll fix it soon enough.

Personally, I prefer 3.5 because that's the version I learned to play. It has just the right amount of customization for my taste. I'm partial to the lawful end of the alignment spectrum ("Lawful good", "lawful neutral") and enjoy playing with unexpected personalities. For example, a Lawful Netural Bard (even though that's not normally permitted) with a background as a diplomat. Or a literate barbarian with a high int stat who enjoys painting (with blood) and writing poems about his feelings.
Personally I like Forgotten Realms but that's the setting I was first introduced to.

So these rules can be used for any other setting, correct? Because medieval European fantasies usually bore me to death.

Marik2:
So these rules can be used for any other setting, correct? Because medieval European fantasies usually bore me to death.

Thats why I like DnD, cause I find it the most 'generic' in a good way that you could shape it into any setting.

I voted 2nd edition, but I think 3.5/Pathfinder is just as good, depending on what you are going for with your game.

Both have a really good sense of balance and customization, wile still getting the job done with making the game playable.

In regards to 4th, my friend and I came to a consensus while talking to a local game shop owner in regards to it. He was adamant it was the best RPG system ever created, and made this argument from the position of "if you just don't think of it as D&D". This led my friend and I talking and I think this was the large problem: it isn't really D&D, except in name.

Honestly, it's more MMORPG the PnP game. That isn't necessarily BAD (I've recently been looking into the FFRPG PnP systems to run), but if the game is such a vast difference mechanically, it isn't really the same game to a lot of people.

Chimpzy:
Here's one for my fellow GMs.

Do you prefer running more narrative-driven campaigns or an open sandbox style?

I'm honestly only good at making sandboxes, which is why I mainly only run either Vampire or stationary campaigns in D&D, and somebody else does the story-driven ones. Our group always plays Sabbat campaigns in VtM so a nice sandbox full of targets and enemies is both fun and challenging. And I love encouraging the use of home-base protection type spells in D&D :3

As an author, I'm terrible at making story-based campaigns... and then having players do unexpected things. So the sandboxes work way better for me!

I had to vote 2nd edition. Its the one I played first, and specifically Ravenloft was the first game I was gm for. I've played original, 2, 3, 3.5, and 4. They all have their strengths. But I prefer several other systems. Palladium is good for heavy on the specific numbers games. There's a rule a stat and a roll for basically everything you want. But my favorite is Pinnacle's Deadlands Classic. Its just a great setting, different and interesting mechanics (playing cards as much as dice.) And the wacky and dark American west setting is just a personal favorite. Its Ravenloft's attempt at Gothic Earth + steampunk + the man with no name trilogy... I love it.

Schadrach:

The lack of this is something I dislike about 4e. The expressive space of the rules is much, much narrower than in 3.5 or Pathfinder. Or to put it another way, I could build more varieties of "Wizard" in Pathfinder that are all conceptually and mechanically distinct to one extent or another than you can in 4e.

I've never played 4e before, but I think that the spellcasting classes are actually pretty good for customization in 5e. Particularly the Wizard. I like 5e wizard better than 3.5, they do a lot more to distinguish based on the specialized school, and the Diviner specialization just looks interesting as hell.

Hell, I once built a 3e sorcerer who believed his powers were a divine gift because of his background (by chance the right song happened to be playing while I flipped through the right page of the Forgotten Realms books and I noticed the asterisk on Kossuth [fun fact -- the fire god Kossuth counts as being two different alignments in the Forgotten Realms because he himself is true neutral, but his temples are very rigid and hierarchical to the point of being functionally lawful neutral] and had the idea of an orphan taken in by the temple of Kossuth who was temperamentally unsuited for the temple and would become a sort of zealous reformist apostate), and was built to reach as close to cleric as possible while still being a sorcerer.

I also once played a weird shapeshifting build that if it had been forced into it's natural would have been just as surprised as you are as to what it might be -- it changed form so often for so long that the idea that you are *really* something specific underneath seemed "quaint." Used "it" as a pronoun because it also thought the concept of being tied to a specific gender was "quaint." Omnisexual, flirted with literally every living thing it could because it could be your "type", whatever your type might be so long as it wasn't size Colossal or Fine. Got (Ex) abilities, so could produce venom and the like, and made spare cash by selling exotic bodily fluids.

I get such a kick out of interesting character directions, particularly ones that turn a class on its head and try to massage it into something it's typically not. Rogue's on the face of it say that they support "Thug" archetypes, but I've never seen someone go all in on it, so one of my recent-ish characters was a Rogue with high strength and con, but no dexterity or ranks in hide. Took every ability I could that would help him fight dirty. Also managed to roll up a ranged paladin in Pathfinder which was pretty fun.

Right until this sentence I was going to reply to you and suggest you might like something FUDGE based, but apparently you already found FATE.

Another possible contender is Dungeon World, which is built off the same core mechanics as Apocalypse World. http://www.dungeonworldsrd.com/

I really need to play more FATE. I've only done one game so far and it was great. I've heard of Dungeon World and Apocalypse World, but I don't actually know much about them. What's the idea behind it?

crimson5pheonix:
Another question, if I may hijack this thread a bit, what is everyone's favorite D&D setting (or another RPG setting if you're feeling saucy)?

Personally I've always been a fan of Dark Sun because I like the idea of post-apocalyptic 'ard mode.

Planescape and Ravenloft. I really want to say Spelljammer as well, but I can't. As for favourite rpg setting in general, I'm kind of digging our Great War-era CoC game. Doesn't really have a setting per se, given our investigators have been to another nightmarish plane of existence, and we're literally growing old on ships. It had gotten so bad at one point, my character specifically notes down on her sheet that she has luggage merely for books and reference materials for all those ships we end up downtiming on.

It was pretty cool, howeer. One of our characters got into a pulp-ish fistfight with a hired assassin and got to roleplay almost a 'panning shot' as his character and cultist wannabe ended up taking the fight through the kitchens and into the dining section. It was a pretty wicked scene.

First time I ever saw a person explain in detail how he was going to blind his assailant with a pot of boiling water and stab him with a carving fork.

My next character as a player is going to be a Goliath Way of Tranquility Monk. While not going to be full pacifist, they are going to try to turn every single potential combat encounter into a "Lets all hug" encounter. The campaign of what I know is going to be the party are all followers of some God. My brother's character is going to be a 'Witch Hunter' type, and I expect much of the game will be our characters conflicting. I look forward to it.

Marik2:
So these rules can be used for any other setting, correct? Because medieval European fantasies usually bore me to death.

Oh, hell yeah! Campaign settings like Oriental Adventures, Al Quadim (and more exotic ones like Dark Sun, Spelljammer and Planescape), and many supplements and addons gave stats for weapons, npcs, cultures and monsters from mythologies and time periods all over the world.

Souplex:
1 google later...
https://boardgamegeek.com/wiki/page/Friendly_Local_Game_Stores_(FLGS)_of_the_USA#toc24

Maybe you didn't get the part where I said I'm not an extrovert? How about I give you my name, birth date, SSN, and driver's license? Is that enough info to find a nice, succinct rundown of my personality? Google that, smartass.

I did check the link out though.

Im still getting messed up because of 3rd Edition. I only just now realized that preparing spells is different in 5e. I did not realize that you have a list of spells prepared creating a small list you can -choose freely- from for your spell slots, rather than preparing a spell per slot.

=. =

Changes how I play spellcasters now.

(Its not a bad thing, I just didnt know I was holding myself back)

Moved with OP's permission to Gaming Discussion.

Saelune:
Im still getting messed up because of 3rd Edition. I only just now realized that preparing spells is different in 5e. I did not realize that you have a list of spells prepared creating a small list you can -choose freely- from for your spell slots, rather than preparing a spell per slot.

=. =

Changes how I play spellcasters now.

(Its not a bad thing, I just didnt know I was holding myself back)

Why not just become an edgy rogue instead?

RedRockRun:

Saelune:
Im still getting messed up because of 3rd Edition. I only just now realized that preparing spells is different in 5e. I did not realize that you have a list of spells prepared creating a small list you can -choose freely- from for your spell slots, rather than preparing a spell per slot.

=. =

Changes how I play spellcasters now.

(Its not a bad thing, I just didnt know I was holding myself back)

Why not just become an edgy rogue instead?

Cause rogues is chumps.
Fighters, Paladins, and Barbarians is where it's at.

RedRockRun:

Saelune:
Im still getting messed up because of 3rd Edition. I only just now realized that preparing spells is different in 5e. I did not realize that you have a list of spells prepared creating a small list you can -choose freely- from for your spell slots, rather than preparing a spell per slot.

=. =

Changes how I play spellcasters now.

(Its not a bad thing, I just didnt know I was holding myself back)

Why not just become an edgy rogue instead?

Cause magic, duh.

Though in 3.5 I almost always multiclassed rogue. Wizard/Rogue, Fighter/Rogue, Psion/Rogue, etc. I havent multiclassed in 5e yet, but 5e kind of has built in multiclassing with backgrounds and subclasses.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here