How does a complete beginner go about getting into Dungeons and Dragons?
As a warning, people will tell you not to play D&D. What they mean is not to let it and/or Pathfinder be the only things you ever play.
Start with AD&D or 2e if you're interested. They're more simplistic and easier to get a hold of than the newer, more needlessly complex ones.
>>45525462
Depends on how you want to do it, check your local card shops, round up a few friends, and/or find a DM who is willing to help out new players.
>>45525462
Easy, just google for gaming stores near you, then show up and tell the employees (most of whom will be widely knowledgeable about role-playing games in addition to being friendly and approachable) that you're a newbie interested in getting into tabletop. They'll direct you to an established group. Now don't worry, as I'm sure you've picked up on from browsing /tg/, experienced tabletop guys are famously welcoming to new players. Your first game will probably be D&D 3.5 or Pathfinder, don't worry if you don't know what these terms mean yet. This is great because D&D is the perfect game for RPG newbies, being well-balanced across all player classes and intuitively simple to just pick up and play. But the most important step of all: have fun!
Find a local group, ask to join.
>>45525801
ADnD and 2e are the last you'll want to play. They trained an entire generation of shitty roleplayers, has backwards ass stupid rules(even for dnd), and almost no options for anything. If you MUST play dnd, do 5e, it's the most streamlined and beginner friendly.
>>45525871
You had me going until pathfinder.
Take a look at 5e.
Here's the short and simple.
https://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop/players-basic-rules
When you want to learn more, head over to the 5e general, download the books, and learn the rest of the game.
Convince your friends to try it out. Think about purchasing the Basic Set (a packaged set of dice, character sheets, basic rules, and a designed-for-beginners adventure).
>>45525801
2e is probably my first or maybe second favorite edition but "simplistic and easier to get into" is not a phrase i would use to describe it. Maybe if you have a 2e veteran on hand to teach you the game, but then every edition is easy to get into if you have somebody to show you the ropes.
>>45525871
This dude is surprisingly accurate with only baiting you about balance of classes.
Also if you are in university there should be a decent /tg/ club closeby that can set you up with a nice game.
>>45525462
Most game stores host "encounters"- which is a free demo campaign basically (a few stores charge admission, they are dicks). Thats the easiest way to join an existing group and learn the game.
If you have a group of interested friends but no experienced people, get the 5e starter box, its cheap and is a great way to jump into the game.
>>45525801
What are some good tabletops besides DnD? I mean, I've heard of several but don't know enough about any to really decide to try one.
>>45525462
If you want specifically high fantasy, go to your local store and look for a group for D&D 5e.
If you can't find one, see what people ARE playing in your area, and ask if you can join.
>>45526991
It really depends on what you're looking for. I know there's a few Star Wars tabletops (never played them), there's Call of Cthulhu (1920s-ish horror), etc.
>>45527039
Fantasy, really. Though, Call of Cthulhu sounds good.
>>45525462
Get into an already running group, or get your friends and buy the 5e books/starter set. Learn and play along together. Try other editions later if you want, 2e is a bit archaic but good, 3.PF (3, 3.5 and Pathfinder) are interesting. 4e is a good for combat focused games and 5e is pretty good for all aspects, not as in depth rulings as 3.PF but a lot more balanced and less ability based then 4e.
>>45527088
The only ones you have much chance of finding a group for are:
>DnD 5e (Which is streamlined, and somewhat designed for beginners- it's a pretty decent starting point)
>DnD 3.5/Pathfinder (They're pretty much the same as for core rules. A lot heavier on rules, has some pretty gross class imbalance, but it's pretty much all free online!)
DnD 4e got a lot of hate because it was so different from every other DnD edition, but it's a fine game in its own right.
>>45525462
5e's well balanced but somewhat shallow--great to cut your teeth on and not a bad game for most people most of the time, but it doesn't have the colossal library of expanded rule options that people expect from D&D.
Though that's changing slowly, because of that online marketplace for 3rd party content and the relaxed production schedule for official stuff.
>>45526991
Fantasy flight games makes a series of star wars RPGs that I strongly recommend. "Edge of the Empire" lets you play as smugglers and scum, "Age of Rebellion" is about Rebel soldiers, and "Force and Destiny" lets you play as jedi.
Pic related is the unique dice mechanic that works well as a narrative tool- giving benefits and drawbacks you have to improvise rather than a simple hit-or-miss.
Another really popular series is the "World of Darkness" games, wherein the players are usually monsters of some type: Vampire court politics, warewolf eco-warriors, Mages fucking with the underpinnings of reality, and so forth.
>>45527179
A lot of people fall into the trap of only wanting to play what they know. Also, many groups already have games in motion when you join, so D&D has wound up being the most popular because its the most popular.
>>45527209
>>45525462
Oh right--
>How does a complete beginner go about getting into Dungeons and Dragons?
The starter set's a good choice, or you could find a game or comic shop nearby that runs public games (pretty sure it's called Adventurer's League). There's a store locator on their website that you can plug your zipcode into.
Like others have said, you should eventually try out other systems too just to get a broader idea of how you can run things or interpret things. Less necessary as a player, but important if you want to be a really good DM.
>>45527179
>>45527209
I'm not familiar with OD&D or 2e, but here is the rundown on the more recent D&D editions:
3 and 3.5: Was popular for a good while, particularly during the youth of people who are now veteran players, so many of them look on it fondly. Has a million and one expansion books, a veteran who owns and has memorized them all can find absurdly broken combos, but can be kind of daunting to a newbie. Many of the classes and options are very imbalanced, and sometimes even intentionally bad to "reward system mastery."
4e: Was an attempt to win players away from video games like WoW by making D&D much more video-game-like. Lots of old fans hated the new direction and a promised online component fell apart. Wizards also unceremoniously cut ties to all 3rd party companies and writers, which drew even more ire from old fans. Objectively a perfectly workable system, but did not rise to its ambitions of gaining new players.
Pathfinder: When switching to 4e, Wizards abandoned independent publishers, including a company called Paizo, who responded "Well, we're going to make our own RPG, with blackjack and hookers!" Pathfinder is very similar to 3.5, but with a few flaws hastily patched and a few new flaws added.
5e: Is Wizards attempt to rebuild the brand with a system that is easy enough to attract new players, but with enough "old school" features to bring back the veterans. So far it seems to be working.
>>45526991
If you ever get a chance try Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, Second Edition.
It's a brutal, grim experience but by god is it fun as hell. It's an RPG where you can start the game off as a rat-catcher, a baker, or a prostitute, among many other professions (some of which are actually made for combat, obviously).
I'd only recommend playing it with the right group though. If the people you're playing it with would be turned off by the possibility of losing a limb or an eyeball, sometimes in the first session of play, then avoid this game like the plague (which, incidentally you can also get very easily).
>>45527638
>4e: Was an attempt to win players away from video games like WoW by making D&D much more video-game-like.
People say that but I don't really see any mechanics that were taken from Vidya that were not already in D&D.
>>45525462
>No experience in DnD
>Existing groups don't want new players
>Experienced players tell you not to just start a campaign with friends without knowing what you're doing
Basically, the game was made to die.
>>45527693
You have a group of color-coded abilities with long, medium and short recharge times. You launch your big stuff (or save it for the boss) and then plink away with your weaker at-will attacks until they recharge.
There are defined roles like tank, healer, control, and DPS.
I started tabletop with 4e. At the time I was a regular City of Heroes player and found it to be very familiar in feel, with most of my knowledge immediately transferable.
>>45527709
>Experienced players tell you not to just start a campaign with friends without knowing what you're doing
What asshole told you that? If you can't find a group to join, make your own. As long as they actually read the rules, it's not hard for newbies to learn unless they try something like 3e.
>>45527693
Mechanics are mechanics. The issue is more about presentation.
>>45527693
>Every class has the exact same number of spell-esque abilities. Fighers and wizards both have the same number of "encounter" and "daily" abilities
>Higher emphasis on cooldowns and combat in general
>removal of any 3e multiclass min-max gobbledigook that was very core to the identity of 3e
>Increased amount of abilities that are unique to specific monsters, including a slew of unique movement abilities that changed the feel of combat
>Healing could now be done reliably without a player being forced to play a dedicated heal bot
Its not that it was "video game-y" its that by reducing the variation of classes and putting huge emphasis on "ability trees" it appeared video game-y from the perspective of anyone from 3e
>>45527925
>Healing could now be done reliably
...i mean, I GUESS.png
It's not like wands of Cure (X) Wounds didn't already exist.
>>45527925
>>removal of any 3e multiclass min-max gobbledigook that was very core to the identity of 3e
and nothing of value was lost
>>45527693
That's just a meme 3.PF players state repeatedly to discredit any interest in 4e
It's happened every new edition, "This isn't anything like the source material!" "It just doesn't feel like D&D anymore!" "It's a simplied 3.5!" "Why are there cheezits in my DMG?"
The thing about 4e was that fact it takes a step back to Chainmail. People became invested in 3.5e and bought a shit load of books. People also become invested in MMORPGs and facebook games.
4e isn't 3.PF, it took a modern & gamist approach to balance and a lot of people dislike that.
"Why does that peasant with a sword have as many abilities as me?! I am the archmage of the universe! I don't care if he is the same level as me!"
>>45528110
To be fair, releasing a new edition every few years kind of sucks. It was understandable that WotC would release 3rd edition after buying out TSR. By that point, 2nd edition was some sort of weird out of print mess. Now though, it just feels like a cash grab.
>>45528213
3e was 11 years after 2e, 4e came 8 years after 3e, and 5e was 6 years after 4e
Wizards has to make money, and there isn't money to really be made in RPGs so they release shit until it doesn't make 'em money. It's why 5e came out so quickly, 4e flopped but didn't fail.
If 6e comes out anytime before 2020, then yeah.. Wizards is Hasjew'ing for money.
>>45528006
>That pic
This is honestly completely accurate.
>>45527638
>>45527925
>video game presentation
Is making material more familiar to the target audience such a bad thing, though? Original D&D was aimed for war gamers, that's not such a huge group in the 2010's any more. It's not like video games are inherently evil.
>>45525462
Watch the movie. Seriously.
>>45528006
GURPS is more like "Do you have the patience to look it up and have the character points to dump into it? Then sure."
Now if we're talking the HERO System, THEN you can get into filling out forms and waiting four to six weeks for correspondence from your local certified RPG Bureau.
>>45528110
Anybody have those screens of the discussions on Usenet from when 3e came out? That were saying WotC ruined D&D forever by making it a Diablo videogame for babies? Good times.
>>45525462
Check out what systems are available with local game groups, and choose from those.
D&D is universally pretty crunchy(meaning it focuses on numbers and the mechanics of his those numbers interact), although 4e and 5e are slightly less so.
>>45526991
It depends on what kind of experience you want. GURPS is attractive to some people because it's a Lego bin of RPG mechanics: almost anything you would want to build there's something in there for. But because of that it's best saved for when you know what you like and how you like to play it.
White Wolf games have a lot of focus in morality and humanity, with insane number games beneath that.
...I'm drawing a blank otherwise. I'm sure other people have helped too.
>>45529500
Oh good god, FUCK hero system. I just want to make a goddamn. specops rifle and I have to pointbuy six goddamn perks and seven attributes for it, each of which has a point modifier/multiplier, sometimes THREE, and if I want special ammo that's extra character points with MORE modifiers, when I could just punch a man better and be done in ten seconds.
I hate that needlessly crunchy bullshit so much now fuck you miguel for doing that.
>>45525462
Roleplaying games is a lot like drugs in that it's not something you usually get into on your own, but rather you get initiated into it by more experienced people.
>>45529500
HERO is really just 'roll 3d6 to do thing' and one book, honestly less crunch and special casing than GURPS.
>>45530466
It sounds like your GM either had autism and/or failed to understand the divide between Heroic and Superheroic rules. Heroic meaning 'equipment is bought with money, not points' meaning none of that shit should matter.
But just in case
Specops Rifle- 2d6 RKA Variable Advantage(scopes and ammo), Obvious Accessible Focus, 30 Charges
that's all that sort of gun needed to be, seriously. I've played HERO for 12 years and I have no idea what bullshit your GM was smoking to require all that other nonsense.
>>45530367
>4e
>not crunchy
what
>>45526991
There are lots of systems, but it's best to find a system to fit your game rather than try to fir a game into a system. Some games that work with certain settings include:
Shadowrun 3/4th ed: Cyberpunk
Mutants and Masterminds: Superhero
Call of Cthulu: 1920's Gaslamp horror
World of Darkness: Gothic horror
Exalted end edition: Extremely high fantasy God roleplaying
Warhammer 40k rogue trader: Space Pirate captain harlock
Warhammer 40k Only War: Future trench warfare, realistic in how many grunts die
Kult: D20 contemporary horror with religious themes, there are some fantastic modules written for this one
Pathfinder/DnD: Standard tolkienesque fantasy. Many modules for other styles like robots and spacetravel, but they work only as a support to standard fantasy exploration and not a full game.
Cthulutech: Evangelion the tabletop
Rifts: A lot of everything, post apocalyptic world with portals to many parallel worlds/timelines. Had different damage rules for Mega damage (Laser gun) and normal damage (sword)
Star wars roleplaying game: Pretty self explanatory.
GURPS: Has pretty much everything, find a specific rulebook for your setting if you like the way the game plays
That's all the Tabletops games I remember playing (seems my group had a hardon for horror games), I'm sure I've tried more but they didn't make an impression on me or I simply forgot. Other's should be able to give you suggestions if this list doesn't cover a setting, as it assuredly leaves much to be desired.
5e. Trust me bro, 5e.
>>45528006
>the thing is treason
made me laugh harder than it should have
>>45530909
It's less fiddly than other editions due to better presentation. Though I'm not sure I'd call that less crunchy.
>>45531178
>>45528110
>It's happened every new edition,
2e grognards complained about 3rd, but they were a tiny minority. No matter what change, there will always be grumblers, but that doesn't mean that 4e wasn't a specially flawed mess that resulted in enormous backlash from the majority of the community.
4e was terrible not because it "wasn't 3.5", but because it was an awful game that seemed to have learned nothing from the previous editions. Instead of fixing old issues and progressing the game as a new edition, it abandoned everything except superficial names, introduced a bizarre system with a slew of new issues to iron out, and to top it all off, had some of the worst lore and fluff ever printed, clearly written by people who had little to no experience with the fantasy novels that were the genesis of D&D.
Also, when 4e came out, its focus on combat was laughable considering that it had some genuinely terrible math that made the battles boring and tedious.
It was a mistake, and it shows.
What your mental flaw happens to be is assuming that 3rd edition was bad, and that people only played it because it's all they ever played. Your next mental issue is thinking that people hated 4e because it wasn't 3rd edition. While you juggle those contradictions together, you can't really get a sense of the truth of the matter.
People liked 3rd edition.
When people tried 4e, they found it to be awful.
They then went back to 3rd edition, over to PF, or on to other games.
My recommendations would be D&D BECMI which is available free as the retro clone Labrynith Lord. I've also been enjoying 5E but have had to incorporate some AD&D 2nd Ed monster rules as I have found some classic monsters missing certain powers in 5E probably for the sake of simplicity/brevity. I welcome the OP to a great hobby. Suggest finding small local cons and game stores to find players. I really don't enjoy online play as much as playing in person.
>>45531979
>Also, when 4e came out, its focus on combat was laughable considering that it had some genuinely terrible math that made the battles boring and tedious.
>The memers still believe 3.PF *wasn't* a wargame disguised as an RPG
>They even believe that "HP bloat" was even half as big a problem as the hideous shlock that was the CR system
>>45531979
>4e abandoned everything
Nice to see another confirmation that Vancian casting is the only thing 3aboos care about.
>>45531979
Is that image accurate? 5th edition was released in 2014, a whole year and a half ago and there are STILL more people playing 3.5/PF than the current fucking edition of D&D?
>>45532688
5e didn't beat 3.5 until quarter four of 2014, and it didn't beat Pathfinder until quarter one of 2015.
Most likely, 5e won't be dominating 3.5/PF numbers until 2017.. 5e is barely beating the combined 3.5/PF numbers.
>>45532470
>>45532505
>delicious tears
I love how you try to present an argument but instead only offer up a glass.
Buy the 5th Edition starter set and start DM-ing. Then download the free rulebooks and make a real simple "Loot the dungeon, kill the baddies, save the girl" story to get your feet wet and go from there. I had a white board I would draw out dungeons on for the group.
And the most important rule, if you don't know a rule, make it up. Keep up the flow and just figure it out later. A chill friend group helps too.
Thats what my friends group did. No one had any roleplaying experience, and just had fun with it. If you have a lightheart group, it's a blast.
>>45532688
There's a lot of overlap and redundancy when it comes to the player count (people who list themselves as playing 3.5 can also list themselves as playing PF, as well as any other game for that matter), and it also doesn't really keep track of people who still play it, only who have played it.
The Games stat is a a bit more useful, since it tracks active games. From there, we see that 5e is the most popular, if only by a slight amount.
>>45532885
The arguments have been debunked repeatedly on different sites, including this one.
Hey, it's alright if 4e wasn't your cup of tea, you don't see people lining up to play 2e either, despite having seniority in both edition length, size, growth, and arguably popularity and modularbility than anything afterwards.
But kindly don't come out trotting half truths in an attempt to try and "knock" the game. People who played it know it's weaknesses, and none of them ever show up when the game is talked about by people who clearly haven't played it.
>>45533032
>The arguments have been debunked repeatedly on different sites, including this one.
>I've convinced myself, that means I actually debunked something!
Repeating the same shit ad nauseum and pretending anyone other than the handful of 4e loyals believe it is adorable, but it seems like your braying doesn't really move as many people as you so desperately hope it does. Every day, less and less people still play 4e, and this won't change.
It's funny, because 4e gets hate for being the worst edition of D&D, and it's often said that if it were just published under another title, it wouldn't have gotten any of that hate. Then again, it also wouldn't have had any of that initial fame to drive its sales, and it would have been ignored from the outset and died all the earlier.
>>45533134
Says the guy shitposting anime girls.
>>45533147
Come back when you're less sensitive to people laughing at you for being stupid.
>>45533166
>continues shitposting
>>45533147
>>45533171
>bringing attention away from his actual words to try and pretend he isn't right.
ur cute
>>45533204
>samefagging
>>45525462
You must complete the secret rituals and drink the secret brew.
And wear gloves.
>>45532885
Considering you're basically just parroting the same tired memes that have been constantly disproven, the fact you're getting replies at all is being generous.
>>45533239
>disproven
You really want people to argue with you, but it seems like you fail to recognize the purest and simplest truth, the one you can do nothing to argue against.
4e is dying. You might as well call it dead.
You can tell people all your wonderful arguments, all the reasons it's not as terrible as it is, and do you know what that will get you in the end?
A few people to try it out, find out how wrong you are, and another scathing review that drives even more people away from the game.
I know it hurts to hear someone tell you this, because you can't admit it to yourself. It also hurts because the edition you hate so much continues to thrive despite all your efforts to complain about it, and the other edition you hate so much has achieved critical and popular acclaim as being "the next D&D done right."
Go on. Tell me you're not upset about that. Let me watch you lie with tears streaming from your eyes.
>>45533318
>all those words
Man, you're really defensive I see. I assume anyways, I'm not actually reading that.
>>45533329
Cool. Either way, you did more to support me than you probably realize.
>>45533318
You really take D&D way too seriously.
>>45533343
That's nice I guess.
I'm still not reading your post.
>>45531979
>4e was terrible not because it "wasn't 3.5", but because it was an awful game that seemed to have learned nothing from the previous editions. Instead of fixing old issues and progressing the game as a new edition, it abandoned everything except superficial names
Well that's just factually and insanely wrong. 4e was built on the basic D20 skeleton of 3e, itself a huge departure from any previous version of D&D, and the changes it made specifically addressed the most commonly voiced complaints that came up in the 3e years - awful class balance, wonky scaling, terrible presentation, no fun if you're not a spellcaster, that sort of thing.
I'm not even a fan of the game, but settle down, there's no need for hyperbole.
How hard is it to find games online that are decent for "newer" players? I've played a handful of times with friends but never done much past one shots and small campaigns.
>>45531979
>Instead of fixing old issues and progressing the game as a new edition
Literally everyone that has actually sat down with 'fixing 3.x's issues' as their chief goal has ended up with something that gutted more or less everything but the d20 and rebuilt from scratch.
And no PF is not one of these, they claimed to be, but did fucking nothing about the actual issues.
>>45532688
I have bought books for 3.5 well over 2000$ in value, I am not going to swap just because of that.
Plus we have literally written two or three books worth of house rules, settings, custom classes, items blabla for our games. Changing the rule system now would nullify the work we have done for 10 years.
>>45534097
>m-muh sunk costs
>>45534097
Okay I was giving you the benefit of the doubt for most of that bullshit, but fuck you now.
Nobody else cares that you dropped ridiculous cash and time on 3.5, and its not a good reason to hate newer editions.
>>45536334
>replying as if that wasn't a 4e poster
>>45536334
>and its not a good reason to hate newer editions.
I didn't say I hate newer editions, I just don't play them. We even take things from different editions and games and graft those to 3.5e. For all intentions and purposes, we are playing some kind of 3.5e/4e/2e/GURPS/5e/MAID/WoD hybrid and just keep calling it 3.5e.
>>45525871
3.5/PF
>well-balanced across all player classes
Nope
I enjoy playing Pathfinder, but you have to know what you're doing and actively work to make sure everyone is at approximately the same power level.
That said, asking someone from a game store and joining a game are great things to do.
>>45525462
Really the best game for you is the one with a decent group. Either try to find one somewhere, or get some friends of yours into this and find something that sounds cool in whatever genre you want. If it's not what you like, try another one (though for a bunch of beginners I'd suggest first trying downloaded copies of the books and printing out small sections to reference, before buying the books).
