What's your favorite edition of D&D and what makes it better than all the others?
>>46768982
Rules Encyclopedia.
All rules are optional and there are plenty if you feel like it.
>>46769003
Almost unquestionably the best (only?) 1-book solution to D&D. I can see why, from a business perspective, they stopped doing that.
5e is my favorite because it is simple enough to get my normie friends to sit down and play it
Otherwise they spend the entire session making character sheets
>>46768982
4e and nothing.
There is no "better" among unrelated games.
>>46768982
>What's your favorite edition of D&D
Fantasycraft.
>and what makes it better than all the others?
Everything.
>>46769248
Calling Fantasy Craft an edition of D&D is a grave insult to the game and its creators that is absolutely uncalled for.
4e.
And every system has her pros and cons, there's no system that is just "better".
>>46769323
Well, it's more "D&D-style game, but actually good", rather than edition.
This edition is shit
>>46768982
4e
Things just work without convoluted multiclassing, every class is useful.
>>46769351
There are still problems with that statement.
First, there is no such thing as "D&D-style", because each edition of D&D had an entirely different focus.
Second, there have been (relatively) good editions of D&D.
Third, it is more than a "D&D (3.5)-style game". The creators plucked the d20 system apart, took their time to understand it, then reassembled it to something functional.
3.5 because it is the only dnd system I played.
Don't really care to play another, never really play dnd nowadays.
AD&D 2.0
Fucking fight me.
pre 3.0 dnd, it can have a narrative focus, gm fiat.
3 has too much focus on balanced encounters, miniature wargaming, and attracts some of the worst in rules lawyering/exploiting autists.
5E. It's simple, clear, focused and has a beautiful presentation.
>>46769362
Kek
>>46769797
I'll agree with the very last part.
>>46769475
Lemme just find my glaive-guisarme-voulge-fauchard-batman-billhook.
>>46769797
I agree fellow anon. 5e simplifies everything that made 3.X good, so that you have reasonable rolls and not +20 to Move Silent because you dumped all the skill points into it. It streamlined the system and with the various optional rulesets you can customize your campaign with actual rules for whatever instead of having to homebrew or pull it out of your ass as a novice DM.
>>46769362
[heated rebuttal, calls you a faggot]
>>46768982
Favorite? 5th Edition. It's the 3E we would have gotten if back in 2000 Wizards had already learned all the lessons of 3rd, 3.5, Pathfinder, and 4th Edition.
It's tight, it's simple, but it still has enough rules to cover anything you might want to do.
Pathfinder because i don't know anything else.
>>46769475
Fuckin master race
>>46769211
>>46769797
This, no doubt.
In a single 4-6 hour session I can sit an old man, a 9 year old, and a dirty fucking normie down at the same table and teach them all the same game, make characters with them (not FOR them), and get them playing and having fun AND get them to come back for a few more sessions.
also
>>46769867
>+20 to move silently at level 1
This is something I absolutely do not miss. Number bloat upsets me.
>>46769475
This. Because nostalgia.
>>46771099
>PF is so unoriginal it counts
>>46769240
>>46769347
>>46769395
4E -- I have a reason I like it better.
THE HP AND DAMAGE NUMBERS WERE HUGE!
Thing just _felt_ epic.
>>46768982
Currently? Fifth edition. And I say this as a card-carrying grognard who has been playing since ADnD 2e.
It has all the complexity and customizability of late-second and mid-3.5 editions, but lacks the glaring rules glitches and oversights common to both second and third editions. It has the balance and clean systems of fourth edition without the generic blandness or excessive power creep.
Systematic customizability without munchkinism. Robust rules without kludge. It is a simple and elegant implementation. There are some improvements to be made, but nothing is perfect.
>>46774438
I'd prefer meaningful damage being more obvious (why can't more /v/idya RPGs use Paper Mario tier numbers?) and the fights to go a bit quicker. If it didn't take up so much of a session, sure. Otherwise it just feels like bloat.
B/X on paper, 5E in reality because people actually play it.
>>46769852
It's backward for me. Good game, presentation is poop.
>>46768982
The first one. Why? Because I love focusing on opening doors and trying to tell if the hallways are slanting downwards and into the next level without me knowing so that I will be brutally raped and wizards never survive past level 1.
5e = AD&D2e > PF > 3.0 > 3.5 > 4e
Never played white box or AD&D1e so I won't rank them.
Get this Pathfinder shit out of here. It's not D&D.
3e, there are rules for things besides combat so you're not just playing "mother may I" with the DM.
>>46776525
I'd put 4e above PF and its kin (I consider "bland" less of a problem than "broken"), but otherwise agreed.
1e
>>46776590
Pathfinder is D&D 3.5 legally plagiarized.
They just filed off a few numbers and blindly replaced some parts.
DnD4e for tactics and crunch. It's the best-balanced edition of DnD, making sure everyone has fun.
Otherwise, BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia.
5e is just bland as hell. I'd sooner play 3e with tier restrictions than play 5e if I had the choice - 3e with tier restrictions is at least vaguely balanced and interesting.
5e, but only when the DM runs it like a Shadowrun/espionage game.
5e, 3.5 and pathfinder have too much shit in them. I was the only person not using a homebrew race and an ettera class. Fucking munchkins man.
>>46776525
>4E worse than 3.0, 3.5 or PF
autism
>>46778390
First time I've heard about that in fucking 5E. Seems more like a group problem. This alsosadly the unfortunate reality of fantasy races for many players. They're either human and any other weird race choice is just for powergaming.
>>46776525
>third edition as a whole
>Better than anything
I'll take easily fixable math issues and "blandness" over breeding more THAT GUYS and rules lawyers thank you very much.
Besides, I like combat.
>>46778623
This, the 3.PF Saga has probably done and continues to do more harm to the hobby than anything else. d20, OGL, creating autistic rules lawyer that guys, and overall perpetuating this idea of "we need minis, a battlemat and three hours to accomplish anything" is the standard in tabletop RPGs.
>>46768982
None because I'm not a NERD,you nerds
>>46779212
Are you lost?
>>46779212
>on 4chan
>on /tg/
>not a nerd
uh-huh
>>46769362
I angrily disagree.
>>46768982
4e and 2e because they were the most focused in knowing what they were doing.
3e was confused about what it wanted to be and 5e tried, and succeeded, in being as bland and unfocused as possible.
>>46768982
2e and 5e are my favorites honestly, never cared for 3 or 4 and only tried each once
>>46776525
>5e = AD&D2e
patriciano detectado
>>46769475
Yea this is what I grew up playing so I'll vote for it even though it's probably not technically the best
Which edition spawned the best vidya?
>>46776633
You mean like those sweet crafting rules?
Or the diplomacy check that allows you to skip all that boring roleplay?
>>46783481
2e by far... Baldur's Gate, man!
>>46783481
1e/2e, all those sweet gold box games. krynn and curse of the azure bonds.
you also had the nintendo dnd game, and all that other ssi stuff (frua, eotb, etc).
3.0 has drek like the new pools of radiance and ddo. bleh.
It's super disappointing that no proper 4e games were made (Neverwinter Mmo didn't count) because of how amazing they would have been. Especially if it was in Sharn, in the style of the Shadowrun Returns games.
>>46771099
Awful
>>46771099
5e would be easy to pick up for you, but you should find opportunities to branch out and try new sorts of games. There's a lot out there and who knows, you might find something you never knew you were missing.
Can anyone explain to me what people see in 5e? Aside from the words "Dungeons & Dragons" on the cover, that is.
I mean, blandness was not so much a side effect of the design, but an explicit design goal.
5e is intended to recapture the 3.5 audience they lost to Paizo while not turning away any 4e fans and at the same to evoke nostalgia from the pre-3e crowd. And as with anything that tries to combine wildly incompatible audiences, it was designed to be as bland and inoffensive as possible.
>>46787135
I like the new casting system, it tastes like 3.5 but is less broken with only one concentration spell and more flexibility in daily spell prep not having to worry about "how many copies of fireball do i need today".
I like the class subtypes. 3.5 druid was op because he could be a bear, summon bears while having a bear companion. 5e fixed this by splitting wildshape and casting into two subtypes which is ingenious as it kept all the flavours of druid and yet nerfed them at the same time.
I could go on but its clear a lot of thought went into 5e
>>46787135
It's a very easy system to both pick up and play, and modify to suit your tastes. Homebrewing is pretty easy to do: just work with your players to accomodate their goals and a moderate sense of balance.
My only complaint is that it's still tied to the archaic d20 and a binary success/failure roll. I'd rather see some sort of skill test/attack mechanic that incorporates the possibilities of success with complications and failure with upside. Something like FFG's narrative dice.
But other than that issue, which is shared by all editions of DnD anyways, I have no major complaints.
>>46769248
>comparing it to D&D
Hey, don't insult Fantasycraft like that.
>>46769475
True AD&D
