Why do "those munchkinny powergaming minmaxing rollplaying hack and slashers who want to do nothing but kill things" get such a bad rep when there are classes (barbarian, fighter, etc.) that are pretty much 95% dedicated to fighting and barely have any utility outside of a fight?
I mean, you've got to play to your strengths, right? And it's not like they're the REALLY narrative-breaking, hyper-versatile classes.
>>46844805
The mechanics of your character are not the end all be all of the character.
>>46844805
Because your characters are supposed to be more than their stats.
>>46845078
The combat mechanics are not your end-all be-all.
Don't facilitate the troll into thinking that no customization exists outside kill-moves.
>>46845078
>The mechanics of your character are not the end all be all of the character.
>>46845229
>Because your characters are supposed to be more than their stats.
>>46845285
>The combat mechanics are not your end-all be-all.
That's probably the shittiest argument for this type of discussion.
"Hey, I think I wanna try negotiating a better deal for my armor."
"You sure you wanna try? CHA is your dump stat."
"Hey, I'm starting to feel like maybe we're on the wrong side of this fight."
>"Your character's intelligence is 9, please avoid metagaming in the future."
"Hey hey hey, a bar wench. Think I'll try and score some action tonight."
"You sure you wanna try? CHA is your dump stat."
"Hey paladin, i know you feel pretty bad about that last fight. It took a lot out of you. Why don't we make it a point to stop off at your temple on our next trip back to town?"
>Uhhh, bro, your WIS is waaaaaay too low to be offering that kind of advice. Stick to what you're good at.
>>46845656
>below 10 Int/Wis is suicidally retarded
>not giving a bonus to a guy who has cool battle stories to woo wenches with
Oh shit nigger, what are you doing?
>>46845656
I hate situations like this with a burning passion. It is everything wrong with D&D summarized in one post.
>>46845656
>Fighter who dump statted wisdom, int, and cha
>DM dictating what the player can and can't do
>Bitching about a game system he chose to play.
Shit player in a shit group.
>>46845656
Oh look, another RPG experience ruined by an atrocious man-child GM that refuses to believe that characters are more than just what's written on a character sheet.
>>46845656
Oh, I see you also have my DM.
>>46844805
are we being raided
>>46845656
That's why all my characters have all 14's in every stat.
>>46845656
this shit is exactly one of the reasons why i don't play DnD/PF with my friends anymore
>>46846635
No I just go on shitpost sprees from time to time, and also bump shit threads close to death.
Literally all me.
>>46845656
>tell any lie
>"roll a deception check"
>anything less than 15
>"he tells you to get the hell out or he'll call for the guards"
>ripped barbarian with battle scars, trophies from his enemies, etc trying to impress girls at the pub with battle stories
>"roll performance", says the DM coyly
>anything less than a 13
>"she believes you, but you didn't impress her"
>13-16
>"she's impressed, but she isn't interested"
>literally only success on 18-20
meanwhile
>scrawny bard, not a bad ass at all
>"hey bitch, wanna fuck?"
>"roll persuasion"
>expertise in persuasion, +4 to +5 to charisma
>basically impossible to fail
>likely enough to succeed that he can just roll a d20 per wench present for an orgy
>>46845078
>>46845229
>>46845285
>>46845656
>play dnd
>make cool character with stats that reflect fluff
>is useless and dies quickly because hes not hyper-specialized for his role like the rest of the group
>players complain with this shit >>46846472
>play almost any other game that isnt heavily influenced by dnd
>make same kind of character
>fits in with the rest of the group just fine because the system itself focuses on roleplay over stats
it should be ordinary individuals in extraordinary situations, not the other way around. If your system is not based on this idea then your system is shit.
>>46852130
Aren't difficulty ratings made for this exact kind of situation? I'm pretty sure stuff like trophies and such give situational bonuses anyway.
>>46852681
I was just detailing exactly what my DM does.
Anyway, what exactly do you mean?
>>46844805Don't play D&D.
>>46844805
1)A fighter/barb/etc who does nothing ever except stab things and tunes out to play on his phone when there's nothing to stab is absolutely boring to have on the table.
2)REAL minmaxing powergaming hacks play actually OP classes and will wreck the game the moment they get bored by nuking any plothooks out of existence.
>>46852732
Well, that if the situation gives you an advantage or a disadvantage (for example, wooing a nun and wooing a bar wench) the difficulty of the roll should be modified by such factors, the same way that simple locks and very complicated locks require different skill checks, or climbing a rocky slope and an oiled, levigated marble wall.
Plus any DM worth its salt will give you bonuses to talk skills if you can come up with something convincing as a player, since it makes the game more fun for players and encourages interpretation.
>>46844805
>And it's not like they're the REALLY narrative-breaking, hyper-versatile classes.
The thing is, in fact, that players that are minmaxing rollplaying hack and slashers will play a high tier class like, I don't know, mage in D&D, not the low tier classes like fighter.
In fact, fighters usually get a lot of talents and can function as utility since they're not bound to a specific build like shadowkin-necromancyforbidden-prestigeclassed-metamagic-technomage who would fall apart if it didn't get the right talent at the right level.
>>46853383
>fighters usually get a lot of talents and can function as utility
Maybe in, like, 2e.
>>46844805
Being a combat character does not preclude you from being an actual person, instead of a stick figure with a one-line MP3 player taped on and a sword.
Just don't make your character "here for the money." People who are just here for the money are boring IRL and they're boring as characters. Even if your fighter is just chasing glory and wealth because he saw a knight in shining armor in battle when he was 8 years old and wants a knighthood so he can be that, that's better than an all-out mercenary mindset.
Now, playing a class system like D&D is your other problem. If you play something like Traveller, or Savage Worlds, or GURPS, and still make a character with no contacts, no social skills, no goals, etc., you're probably trying too hard, because that kind of person is also unfun to be around and unfun in game.
Hell, I'm saying this as someone who basically is there for the combat. I've never played a noncombat-focused character in my life.
Why is everyone assuming that the hypothetical character in the OP is never adequately roleplayed and is just a pile of stats?
All OP is saying is that fighting dudes should play to their strengths.
>>46844805
>I mean, you've got to play to your strengths, right?
There's a difference between "playing to your strengths" and "doing nothing but using those strengths to the point of fucking everything up."
For example, what if the Bard whose strength was lying decided to lie to everyone, all the time? The cleric would ask if he needed healing, and he would look at his 1 remaining hp on his sheet and say "No." Or what about a wizard who knew that his strength was casting spells, so he decided to cast all of his spells in the morning the second after he got them back from the previous day, and then the player would sit on his phone until the next time he could blow all of his spells?
People don't have a problem with Fighters fighting or Barbarians raging - they have a problem with retarded players that only focus on an extremely small part of a very large game and refuse to do anything else, the only reason being that "There's nothing else on my sheet."
>>46853491
>traveller
>get a bunch of really cool contacts worked out during char gen
>die literally just before we finish character gen
I have never had more fun than when I made a Traveller character.
>>46853646
Traveller might be the exception to my rule, tee bee ach. Half the fun is rolling for chargen and seeing what pops out.
>>46845656
>playing D&D
>>46853646
I have never played traveller before, and now I am confused. You can die in chargen? Like, before the game even starts you can be killed?
I've only ever seen this kind of thing in Paranoia, and Paranoia is mostly a joke game.
>>46853788
One of the random events during your term of service (every character in Traveller has done at least 2(?) terms in either the military or the merchant navy) is 'KIA', at least in Classic Traveller.
>>46853788
>>46853818
Also, what version of Paranoia can kill you in chargen? 2e and XP can't.
>>46853834
I am not sure what version we were playing, but there is the survey from friend computer that the players fill out in order to get their role assignments. If you answer the gray box questions a certain way or do something stupid like actually list your secret society on the survey form when it asks you, you die.
>>46853818
Wait, I tell a lie. When you do a 4-year term, you roll for survival (5+-7+ on 2d6). Failure means either that you die, or, if using an optional rule, you retire from the service after two years with a serious injury.
>>46853862
Depends. In XP, the test has certain answers shaded. In Troubleshooters (the version after), the WHOLE TEST is shaded, but they didn't change the text referring to 'shaded answers'.
>>46844805
The point of roleplaying is not to "win", it's to roleplay. Your character does not have utility, they have traits.
If you choose a pea-brained barbarian as your character, you're not just choosing a set of combat stats, you're choosing to approach the game as a pea-brained barbarian.
People who pick classes, races, etc for the crunch and ignore the fluff might as well be playing videogames.
>>46853984
>People who pick classes, races, etc for the crunch and ignore the fluff
But muh 4e, muh refluffing!
>>46845078
They are when you're playing a game that's dominated by the numbers and the only way around that is to play a mage.
Even then, it's a pretty shitty argument when most places like /pfg/ talk about nothing but builds and the devs themselves treat it like you're playing a game of MtG.q
>>46854128
>3.PF
Maybe if you didn't play the absolute worst form of D&D on the planet, you'd find something different.
>>46852681
Most DR is dildos because the devs either low-ball what your character is able to accomplish with a maxed out stat or the bonuses you receive through roleplay is only half as useful as popping a spell.
>>46852794
>1)A fighter/barb/etc who does nothing ever except stab things and tunes out to play on his phone when there's nothing to stab is absolutely boring to have on the table.
When you have to dump most of your mental stats and the GM is anal retentive about what you can and can't do with an 8-10 rating on a stat, what else can you do?
You get shit for skill points, you can't contribute to most conversations, most people won't even give you the time of day since you're not charismatic enough, and a lot of INT/WIS/CHA skills aren't going to be on most martial's skill list, so they'll be dirt even if you invested points into them.
Why become engaged and end up ruining something or being laughed at anyways because you were forced to build a dipshit to play your class?
>2)REAL minmaxing powergaming hacks play actually OP classes and will wreck the game the moment they get bored by nuking any plothooks out of existence.
Honestly, most boredom comes when the GM leaves the party to their own devices and they have no idea on how to proceed with a given issue.
If the game is being nuked by one player and nobody is able to stop them then the game was already doomed to fail anyways.
>>46853320
>Plus any DM worth its salt will give you bonuses to talk skills if you can come up with something convincing as a player, since it makes the game more fun for players and encourages interpretation.
That's the thing though.
The whole of 3.5/Pathfinder's playerbase are a legion of THAT GUYS who focus on nothing but the numbers, to the point where they're unceremoniously booted from every other group for being massive bellends who want to win and nothing more.
Most DMs you run into just want to kill your ass as quickly as possible and see roleplaying as something only hipsters and acting dropouts do since it offers no mechanical benefit.
>>46853998
Even 4e has a degree of fluff attached to it, it's just that it doesn't have cancer like ivory tower design and trap options and everyone can play relatively well no matter which class they choose.
Just because it focused on combat doesn't necessarily mean that it took away all the fluff and shit.
>>46854151
I thought that was what we were talking about since third edition is the only edition where this shit happens to this degree.
>>46854259
It has fluff, but that fluff is designed to be easily removed and replaced with other fluff.
>>46854271
Nah, retards who think that mechanics are everything can be found in lots of RPGs.
>>46853899
In Mongoose Traveller failing the survival roll leads to getting kicked out of the career and a mishap table (which can be anything from "you DON'T get kicked out but get a negative thingy because you just barely fucked up," "you found criminal corruption in the [job] so you get a bonus but also lose your job in the ensuing chaos" to "you are severely injured") and the "you die if you fail a single roll" is only the optional IRONMAN mode.
The chargen is still a lot of fun. I've tried to make a secret agent and have gotten fired in the first term and ended up with a dude that went from one job to another getting a huge number of contacts but very little skills because he always got fired before managing to advance in the careers. And one time my character tried to join the marines but wasn't accepted so he instead joined the draft and was forced to join the marines. ...Wait what?
>>46854282
What other RPGs put this much focus on the crunch just to be viable though?
I mean, I've played in several RPGs and mainly built whatever and got through it marginally unscathed while 3.5/PF requires you to know how to build correctly or else your character will die around level 3-5 once the real shit starts hitting you.
>>46854259
Still hyping this bullshit hmn?
>>46854214
Yeah, that's not even close to true. I won't say they don't exist, but out of the hundreds of games I have been in, I have only met one That Guy, who actually tried to argue with the DM that he should be allowed to kill the final boss with one move.
>>46854272
It still has fluff and even if it can be easily refluffed to whatever, that's still preferable to whatever the fuck 3.5/PF was trying to do with adding shit like robots, aliens, kaiju, and fucking Cthulhu to the later monster manuals and adventure paths.
>>46854321
Was it online or in person though?
>>46854307
>And one time my character tried to join the marines but wasn't accepted so he instead joined the draft and was forced to join the marines. ...Wait what?
>be marine recruiting officer
>some chucklefuck shows up, wants to join the marines
>he's a useless shit
>tell him to fuck off
>two weeks later, orders come down to draft 50 dudes
>chucklefuck gets caught up in the draft
>add note to make sure drill sergeant is extra tough on this guy
>>46854314
It's true though.
>>46854326
>shit like robots, aliens, kaiju, and fucking Cthulhu to the later monster manuals and adventure paths.
>not loving gonzo fantasy
Nig, D&D was born in gonzo. One of the things that can happen to your party in the original '74 box is being transported to Mars.
>>46845656
...what kind of DMs have you had, anon
Who hurt you so
>>46854361
There's a difference between adding shit that's self-contained to an adventure module that's not designed to be used in the main game and arbitrarily adding aliens and robots and old ones to the monster manual just because it'd be cool.
It breaks the verisimilitude and honestly just feels fucking lazy and stupid to have stats for shit that either shouldn't exist or shouldn't be capable of defeating (even when Cthulhu was statted in CoC, the rules pretty much just said YOU DIED and the stats themselves were just a formality).
Maybe I'm biased because of how adding all this random bullshit to fight all well and good but giving martials anything cool that'd allow them to stand up to mages isn't cool because it'd be "too anime" but it just doesn't sit well with me.
For christ sakes, there's a fucking succubus made out of shit. Not as in "your taste is anime a shit" but as in literally fucking shit and NOBODY at the paizo office stopped and thought "hey, am I the only one who doesn't think that this is the dumbest shit in the world?"
TL;DR: There's a difference between going gonzo and going full retard at the cost of verisimilitude.
>>46854447
Cthulhu was in the AD&D primary mythology supplement Deities and Demigods. He got cut out, along with some other copyrighted characters, for the '85 revision Legends and Lore.
>>46854334
By necessity I play online only, there are no gaming groups in the tiny-ass desert town I live in. I haven't been physically present at a game since high school.
>>46854307
Sounds about right, though. Bureaucracy is hell of a drug.
>>46852202
>it should be ordinary individuals in extraordinary situations, not the other way around.
I don't see the issue with PCs being stronger than other people. Sure, they gotta put in real work if they want to be actually renowned heroes, but for me at least average joe PCs seem like they'd start out too boring. I prefer PCs having distinguishable traits from the get-go, so long as they still have room for character growth
And as for them being in ordinary situations, even heroes go to towns, buy shit for adventures, go to bars, have drinks, have sex, etc. You can roleplay that between the extraordinary shit and still have it be fun because of the fluff, system be damned.
>>46854447
>verisimilitude
This word is for That Guys.
>>46844805
>Why do "those munchkinny powergaming minmaxing rollplaying hack and slashers who want to do nothing but kill things" get such a bad rep
Because /tg/ is not an accurate sample of the tabletop gamer population,
and /tg/ thrives on the "If they have fun with something I don't find fun, they're morally bankrupt, and should be banned from playing the game" mentality.
/tg/ is also full of "muh immershun" narrative story roleplaying rule-of-cool fans, for some reason. Not sure why. Must be all the quest threads.
>>46844805
Stop playing D&D. Play a genuine RPG and not some shitty half-baked video game.
That will solve all of your ridiculous problems, from alignment to class balance, instantly.
>>46845711
If you ask me, trying to stat and add DCs to EVERYTHING was a mistake.
Focus on the combat, it's what the system's built around and what it's best at.
>>46846472
"The GM's opinion on the game differs to mine! That means the GM is WRONG and is an atrocious man child and a horrible person!"
/tg/, mate, you're more closeminded than /pol/.
>>46852202
>the system itself focuses on roleplay over stats
I'm a bit wary of these because you can get screwed over if the DM and the other players share the same brand of idiocy and favor their style of roleplaying over your style of roleplaying.
Maybe I've just had bad experiences, but I've found narrative heavy systems end up in a circlejerk where 3 or 4 people control how you're 'meant' to roleplay, and 1 or 2 people end up completely screwed out of affecting the narrative.
>>46854907
Great argument.
A canonical shit demon, robots, aliens, and fucking Godzilla totally fits into a D&D fantasy setting.
Fucking 3aboo.
>>46852794
>2)REAL minmaxing powergaming hacks play actually OP classes and will wreck the game the moment they get bored by nuking any plothooks out of existence.
That's me!
Q. What if you just want to roll dice and stab things tho?
What if you find all this words, fluff and feelings stuff boring?
>>46853899
I don't get why backstories are valuable.
The past is in the past.
Your character suddenly exists at x moment in time and has a quest to kill goblins. Isn't that enough?
If roleplay should replace social skills, why have them at all?
>>46855150
>A canonical shit demon, robots, aliens, and fucking Godzilla totally fits into a D&D fantasy setting.
>what is Greyhawk?
Reminder that Greyhawk has a crashed spaceship, King Kong, and a cowboy demigod.
>>46854214
>The whole of 3.5/Pathfinder's playerbase are a legion of THAT GUYS who focus on nothing but the numbers, to the point where they're unceremoniously booted from every other group for being massive bellends who want to win and nothing more.
>Most DMs you run into just want to kill your ass as quickly as possible and see roleplaying as something only hipsters and acting dropouts do since it offers no mechanical benefit.
This sounds great! How do I join?
For anyone in your campaign, award extra EXP on good roleplaying etc. Don't tell them why you awarded them extra XP.
>>46855258
All of which were contained within modules and adventure books and weren't related to the base setting by default.
It's not like you could find stats for lasers and robots and aliens within the PHB.
>>46855255
Because rules bloat = more books to sell. This is d&d in a nutshell. Rules that only exist so you can sell them.
>>46854321
Did his one move deal enough damage to drop the final boss's HP to negative half maximum?
If the numbers say "the final boss dies" then the final boss dies, bro. You can't fudge the numbers for the sake of "muh narrative" or you might as well be freeforming.
Then again you might like freeforming. It doesn't have those annoying minmaxer munchkins because there are no numbers.
>>46855320
Murlynd is in the core box set.
If "That guy" is the person who plays the game like a number optimising dice rolling simulation, then WHY ARE YOU PLAYING D&D 3.5e? It literally fucking IS a number optimising dice rolling simulation. There are better systems out there for your amateur co-operative fanfiction escapism.
>>46854447
I don't understand your argument from either point of view.
In terms of statblocks and numbers, the aliens and robots are just statblocks and numbers. they have a CR, they provide the players a challenge, they can be defeated like anything else. Their description is irrelevant.
In terms of storybased roleplaying, you can throw the rulebook out if you want and just freeform + fiat + rule of cool it, so it's not an issue there either.
>>46855255
I don't really like when roleplay replaces social skills because then the DM (or the other players) can shut you down arbitrarily or make it so your social skills fail by fiat.
>>46855347
He was put in because his player died and Gygax wanted to honor him, it's honestly an exception to the rule.
>>46855310
Q. What if you give a roleplaying bonus to people whose characters are well optimised?
>what's a roleplaying bonus
Giving the player more of the spotlight, and letting them have their way in the RP, giving them more successes at whatever it is they're trying to do to your game world.
I figure if there's charsheet bonuses for roleplaying, there should be roleplaying bonuses for charsheet.
>>46855448
My argument is that third edition basically just threw whatever fucking stupid idea in without any regards to how well it'd fit with the established lore.
It's one thing to have space ships and aliens and old ones in an adventure book or module that's not meant to be used with the base rules but it's another thing when you arbitrarily throw in pop culture references into the monster manuals just because it's "cool."
I mean, it doesn't even do it in a tongue-in-cheek way or in a way where you could argue that it fits, it's just "here's motherfucking cthulhu and a succubus made of shit, have at it" and they just left it at that, as if nobody would stop to question why this is a thing in a fantasy style RPG with wizards, dragons, and lich.
>>46855635
3.5e has lore?
>>46855545
Roleplay bonuses only cause resentment among THAT GUYS who want the EXP but don't feel like putting in the effort to actually roleplay.
Either that or they roleplay in such a way that actively inhibits the campaign as they either do stupid shit "because that's what my character would do" or halt game to describe how awesome and gruff and no-nonsense their characters are in the hopes of getting a bone thrown their way for roleplaying.
>>46855635
You have already been informed that Cthulhu was in the original AD&D deity manual.
>>46855656
So what would people who earn extra roleplaying as a result of having good numbers do?
Begrudgingly stat their characters to be mechanically competent and then make the most complicated (but effective!) combat turns they possibly can?
>>46855081
>putting PC interactions in a straightjacket because of their mental stats
>not absolutelydisgusting.jpg
??
>>46855676
In that same post it was also stated that Cthulhu was also taken out as well and only added back in later.
>>46855731
Yes. You have learned that other people have different opinions and tastes to yourself, and that this does not make them "Wrong".
Good boy. Have a cookie.
PC Interactions aren't really the focus of the game, it's more on completing quests for exp and loot, that let your character get stronger, so you can go on tougher quests.
>>46855545
Original dude you responded to.
Don't give an exra bonus to those who are min maxing, and don't tell people who got extra XP that it was awarded for good roleplay. This will just encourage people to be try hards. I'm not saying extra XP should be meted out regularly, but only in very clutch moments. Character sheets say nothing beyond that they know the system, which honestly doesn't mean much when it comes to the context of the game you're trying to run.
They can't steal the spotlight if they don't know what's going on.
>>46855694
Accept that D&D/Pathfinder is not a game that's suitable for roleplay and try convincing their GM to try a game where gameplay and roleplay aren't mutually exclusive by design?
I mean, it's not like there aren't plenty of games that aren't D&D and allow for rich roleplay and gameplay options. Fuck, you can even go for another edition of D&D that isn't third and still have better luck at it.
>>46855255
>prepare a fireball
>not getting yourself a young submissive elf Fighter to obediently take your buffs and pointlessly tank hits for you
>not bullying him into going sword & board
>not torturing his nipples every day until they permanently become large and puffy like a woman's
>not torturing his nipples until he's able to lactate
>not applying multiple heavy, awkward piercings to his nipples so they continually stay swollen and sore and slowly drip his milk all day and all night
>not piercing his meat with so much ironmongery that it hangs useless and impotent, pointing straight down, even when fully erect, and jingles when he walks
>not piercing his anus with the quarter pound of metal you still have left
>not having him gagged for days on end, locked in a cage too tiny to move in, while remorseless fucking machines turn his jingling asshole into a permanently gaping chasm with loose unfeeling lips, a worn-out, meaty mess that looks like a hag's vagina
>not switching him to a liquid diet consisting entirely of your semen
>not feeding him so much semen that he's able to preserve his gains
>not conditioning him until facefucking becomes his sole source of meaningful social contact and sexual release
>not ordering him to pose naked for statues and other artwork that is then prominently displayed, so everyone can recognize him as he follows you around town
>not regularly keeping his parents up to date with his progress
>preparing a FIREBALL
Jesus h christ
>>46855784
>Character sheets say nothing beyond that they know the system, which honestly doesn't mean much when it comes to the context of the game you're trying to run.
But knowing the system well is literally 100% of the game you're trying to run, in that the system is the game.
You also didn't answer my fucking question.
Q. What if you give a roleplaying bonus to people whose characters are well optimised?
>>46855769
It was only taken out because of a copyright claim by Chaosium.
>>46855825
>a game where gameplay and roleplay aren't mutually exclusive by design?
Is such a thing even possible?
I've seen roleplayers pop up in the strangest places, demanding that it be seen as BadWrongFun for people to try to beat the opposing team and win the game.
I think Space Station 13 takes the cake. It's a videogame, literally everything in it is deterministic. There is a very clear Team 1 vs. Team 2 gameplay. And yet, over half the servers out there manage to stick a "Pretend you're a spaceman on a space station and not a character in a video game" rule in there.
Madness.
>>46855826
There should be a game where being mechanically optimised involves sexual fetishes, minmaxing rollplaying involves appealing to those fetishes, and beating combat encounters somehow resembles an ERP.
I wanna see if people who are naturally numbercrunchers will remain so if numbercrunching involves faggotry.
>>46855829
>knowing the system well is literally 100% of the game you're trying to run, in that the system is the game.
Honestly, if you run XP awards based on optimization, you're merely encouraging the players to play the system and play the rule, without thinking outside the box. It doesn't facilitate actual roleplaying.
>Q. What if you give a roleplaying bonus to people whose characters are well optimized?
I literally answered that question. While knowing how to play your character is good, and knowing all the ins and outs of said class is good, this is merely knowing the game. Sure you can be the best at the game when it comes to skill checks, combats etc. but that won't necessarily make an interesting player, or a player who vested in your campaign.
Honestly for me, I'd rather take someone who is new to the game but can roleplay very well over someone who min maxes their character and has the correct answer for every scenario.
Outside the box thinking is very good for characters, and roleplaying trumps checks and combat. The best you can do is get a group and get them very involved in the campaign you're running. The most satisfying moments are when you can sit back as the DM and let your players deliberate amongst themselves without a blowhard involved in the group, on the best course of action to take in a given scenario. Obviously you may not agree with me, but this is my preferred style as a DM.
>>46855942
Clearly you have forgotten how to read, or are trolling me by misunderstanding me twice.
Should I rephrase my question?
>>46855942
Just to fully answer your question also, no I won't give someone an XP bonus just because their characters are optimized. Extra XP for roleplaying/clutch decisions only.
>>46855966
>What if you give a roleplaying bonus to people whose characters are well optimized?
Roleplaying has nothing to do with an optimized character. I don't see why you would give a roleplaying bonus to someone because they have an optimized character.
>>46856003
>>46855978
I'm not talking about an XP boost you fucking retard.
I'm talking about a roleplaying bonus.
A bonus to roleplaying.
Hence the name, roleplaying bonus.
It makes the player better at roleplaying.
Hence the name, roleplaying bonus.
Think of "roleplaying"?
Ok, make that better a little.
That's a bonus. To roleplaying.
Ok, got it now?
Good.
What
If
You
Gave
That
Bonus
To
People
Who
Have
Well
Optimised
Characters?
>>46856042
>you can manipulate numbers better
>so I'm going to focus on your optimized character over the other players' ones
Do you not see how this is completely retarded?
>>46856042
How do you give a PLAYER a bonus to something? Acting lessons?
>>46856042
>>46856090
Play FATE.
>>46856042
>bonus to roleplaying
What kind of utter nonsense is this? How would that even work? Are you going to give their character GM fiat powers or something? What a truly absurd thing to consider, please off yourself.
>>46856042
I see what you're saying now, thanks for spelling it out so clearly, though I believe you're playing on semantics.
Sure, you can give people a bonus who have well optimized characters to their roleplaying. However, if you have 3 people who are well optimized, and one character who's not, but roleplays exceptionally, shouldn't he receive a bonus as well?
>>46856081
It's no less retarded than giving XP for roleplaying.
>>46856090
>>46856126
>How do you give a PLAYER a bonus to something?
Simple. Give them more of the spotlight, and have them get their own way more often when it comes to saying if their RP worked or not, and make them more successful at changing your gameworld to suit whatever narrative it is they're trying to push.
>Are you going to give their character GM fiat powers or something?
Yes, you have correctly gathered how roleplaying works. It is based entirely on GM fiat.
>>46856042
>A bonus to roleplaying.
What the fuck? Not that guy, but that's not what a "roleplaying bonus" sounds like to me at all. When I hear "roleplaying bonus" I think of
>well, ordinarily this would be a very hard roll, but since you gave Baron von Nobleperson a good reason and you acted out the persuasion in character I'll give you a bonus to that CHA roll.
That guy was misinterpreting you, but considering how ridiculous your intended meaning was he's certainly not a retard for it. This one is on you for not making your intended meaning clear in the first place.
>>46856157
>It's no less retarded than giving XP for roleplaying.
It's infinitely more retarded. It's a lot easier to juggle numbers than it is to roleplay well, because you can at least shovel the number-crunching off on Excel or something.
>>46856144
Well if the exceptional roleplayer gets a bonus to charsheet,
and the exceptional optimisers get a bonus to storytelling,
everyone is on equal ground!
>>46856126
>This one is on you for not making your intended meaning clear in the first place.
Hmm
>>46855545
>>what's a roleplaying bonus
>Giving the player more of the spotlight, and letting them have their way in the RP, giving them more successes at whatever it is they're trying to do to your game world.
Hmm
Nope, looks clear to me!
>>46856203
>looks clear to me!
The problem is that's the ONLY person it looks clear to is you, you brainless sack of tapioca.
>>46856188
You clearly have no idea how to juggle numbers.
>>46856225
>numbers are hard
Found the high-school dropout.
>>46855769
He was only taken out because of a lawsuit though. If that didn't happen he would have stayed.
>>46856157
>Simple. Give them more of the spotlight, and have them get their own way more often when it comes to saying if their RP worked or not, and make them more successful at changing your gameworld to suit whatever narrative it is they're trying to push.
Yeah, that's a stupid idea.
>>46855199
>I dislike the roleplaying aspect of a tabletop roleplaying game
Head over to /v/, you might find something you like
>>46856203
I will posit a counterpoint, on the stance from a seasoned GM/DM whatever.
You have characters who are well oiled fighting, stealing, looting machines, but they can't roleplay very well when it comes to the story you wish to portray, but you have a good player who's character isn't quite optimized, maybe he made an offshoot for fun, or maybe who's a noob. Who do you get more enjoyment from?
If you say the well optimized characters who are lean mean machines, but can't roleplay as well, then you wish to set a game that is combat oriented and less story oriented.
If you choose players based on their ability to roleplay, then you are choosing to run a campaign that is more based on story and lore that you create.
I'm not saying that either category is merely one or the other, but you are literally positing to me polarization in the players that you would consider 'letting run your campaing'. My personal opinion is that it would be funner for me with people who are good at actual roleplaying, regardless whether or not their characters are optimized.
>>46856214
Then maybe you need to get your head out of your ass, if you can't see things clearly.
Jesus christ, you roleplaying purists are insane. Rewarding a player for roleplaying? Sure, great! ... But rewarding a player for being well-optimised? No, that's insane, I literally cannot even understand what you mean until you spell it out!
I swear this is why I don't allow roleplayers at my table. Because they are extremist as fuck - they seem to think that roleplaying is some kind of holy gift from God and that not roleplaying is literally Satan.
>>46856307
>this is why I don't allow roleplayers at my table.
Damn right. What sort of fucker focuses on the Roleplaying part of RPG?
>>46855778
Just play Diablo then, you are literally describing Diablo
>>46856307
The rewards from being well optimized come in the form of the loot you obtain from dungeons/what you can steal/what you can talk people into giving you. Sure, give them more experience as well if you wish to, but honestly if that's all you care about then you should just play a console RPG or something. Part of the tabletop experience comes from the story you create, and your players interaction in your world.
>>46856265
>Yeah, that's a stupid idea.
Seems like a good idea to me - people get rewarded for being well-optimised, by making it so they can push their story through even if they aren't the best storytellers.
Gives the well-optimised people more power over your gameworld and the narrative. That's a good thing.
>>46856276
>>46856342
Alternatively, you could just play it as a "Tabletop game".
RPGs are still games when you take the roleplaying out.
>>46856358
A. Yes but
B. Why does this board (and it is this board, NOT the tabletop community) have such a hate-on for playing D&D like Diablo?
>>46856307
Being well optimized is a "reward" unto itself in that it inherently advantages you over the unoptimized.
Of course, people like you should be evicted when they are discovered, as they do not belong in this hobby and should be playing video games instead.
>>46856367
>Part of the tabletop experience comes from the story you create, and your players interaction in your world.
Eh, I'd rather it didn't. I find the combat encounters more fun, and the story as something you basically have to put up with because some faggots can't imagine rolling dice without a context.
>>46856203
Nice misquote, dumbass
>Well if the exceptional roleplayer gets a bonus to charsheet,
>and the exceptional optimisers get a bonus to storytelling,
>everyone is on equal ground!
This assumes that the "exceptional roleplayer" is already on the level with the munchkin who pulled a build off the piazo forums or whatever the fuck, which is obviously not the case. Bonuses to roleplaying are supposed to keep the ground ostensibly even between characters who mechanically optimize their characters but can't (or don't want to) roleplay and people who roleplay but don't build their characters like they're trying to break Skyrim.
>>46856379
>Seems like a good idea to me - people get rewarded for being well-optimised, by making it so they can push their story through even if they aren't the best storytellers.
But these players can ALREADY push their story through, by playing exceptional mechanical characters. You're giving them a bonus that they already have.
I don't think people have a hate-on for playing D&D like Diablo, but it's important to remember that at the end of the day D&D just isn't the same thing as Diablo. DIfferent players like different things, but that doesn't mean that the guy who built his character purely to roflstomp enemies should get all the spotlight from the guys who didn't, because, well, he already does while he's roflstomping enemies.
>>46856415
If you want to go roll dice without context you are free to do so. Do not waste the time of people who are trying to play a roleplaying game by injecting yourself in what they're doing.
Also, kill yourself.
>>46856389
Okay. We'll make a deal.
You assholes get out of DarkRP, Space Station 13, and shut down your world of warcraft servers.
We'll stay out of your fantasy land of make-believe where numbers hurt your feelings.
Or, alternatively, you can deal with the fact that some people play your games like they are GAMES.
>>46856379
Because D&D=Diablo is a viewpoint akin to only ever using a swiss army knife as a corkscrew.
>>46855879
It's a platform for RP, not for deathmatch.
>>46856415
Honestly if that's the way you feel, then I feel videogames, specifically MMORPGS are the way to go for you. Mainly because you are not going to find a GM who just wants to roll the dice. Subsequently, if you are the GM who just wants to roll the dice, you may not have good luck finding players who are interested in your style of world building/story telling. No offense intended, just my insight.
>>46856379
>Gives the well-optimised people more power over your gameworld and the narrative. That's a good thing.
They ALREADY HAVE more power over the gameworld and the narrative precisely because they're well-optimized.
>>46856436
>random video game bullshit
>>>/v/
>>46856434
Maybe you shouldn't inject your roleplaying into the dice rolling?
I love how your argument is "kill yourself" tho. Like you literally can't stand dice rollers in your games.
THAT is why you'd be booted off my table in a heartbeat. Because you literally cannot tolerate people who game differently to yourself.
Good thing in the real world, you'd be kicked straight out of many groups for being THAT GUY, since A. You outright hate their character optimisation, and B. Your head's so far up your ass that you think your anti-rollplaying extremism is "Right" and that enforcing your view of how to play the game on others is "Good".
I don't think you should kill yourself.
But you should find some like-minded people to quarrantine yourself away with, so that you don't have to worry about having your feelings hurt by all the big scary numbers.
>>46856487
>Maybe you shouldn't inject your roleplaying into the dice rolling?
>>>/v/
>>46856441
"It's a platform for RP"
Nope, it's a platform for completing your objectives and beating the other team.
>>46856440
>Because D&D=Diablo is a viewpoint akin to only ever using a swiss army knife as a corkscrew.
True, but then there are faggots like this guy >>46856434 who think that even acknowledging the value of the corkscrew is akin to twenty lenins.
>>46856452
MMORPGs have merits but also downsides. Namely the player doesn't have as great a control over the mechanics as I would like.
>>46856472
Well good. Now let's give them something that'll work OUTSIDE of combat.
>>46856511
>>46856476
>>>/tg/
>>>/tg/
"waaahhh, my games have gameplay mechancis in them, it's not fair that people enjoy games for gameplay mechanics"
>>>/tg/
>>>/tg/
>>46856550
>Now let's give them something that'll work OUTSIDE of combat.
No. If they were too retarded to make their character functional out-of-combat they deserve everything they get.
>>46856550
SS13 controls very poorly, how anyone can think its main purpose is gameplay is mind boggling.
>>46856576
Stuff your strawman up your ass. We're talking about role-playing games. If you hate role-playing, you shouldn't play them. It's really that simple.
>>46856576
Well, it was fun talking though I think you are kind of an obvious troll. Maybe I'm wrong though and this is just what you believe. Good luck finding a group who wishes to play this way, and best of luck to you.
I will say honestly though if you want to play a game that is heavily dependent on dice etc. and less on roleplaying, then why don't you play Warhammer 40k/tabletop strategy games? That seems like it would be exactly what you want.
>>46856550
>Now let's give them something that'll work OUTSIDE of combat.
But they already do. You've ignored everything I've said so far, but optimized characters can be optimized for ANYTHING, and that includes ludicrous social buffs. There are loads of "charm person" style spells that a powergamer has access to.
Sure, the DM could fiat that the persuasion simply doesn't work anyway, but that's akin to responding to powergaming in combat by arbitrating that the monster has HP = (the damage the powergamer just dealt) + 15 or something. In other words, that's not an argument at all!
>>46856576
Frankly D&D is barely a roleplaying game. The people who play it nearly always end up with irreversible brain-damage that ruins them for life, as they become unable to conceive of things outside of the D&D framework.
Those who prioritize optimization, regardless of system, are already downgraded as players and as people in my perspective as GM. It's oftentimes better to pick even players who have no experience than to pick players who have experience with D&D. It's a sad state of affairs that this pathetic excuse for an RPG is the most popular and commonly discussed here, but even the average D&Dfag is at least somewhat conscious that the point of this hobby is to engage in roleplaying.
You and people like you are actually mentally deficient and need to be institutionalized. If the average D&D player is like Huxley's Delta, you're like Epsilons.
>>46856605
Alternatively I could play roleplaying games
Take out the roleplaying
And just play games
:)
But I do like the idea that you give people who are good at the "games" part of the games bonuses to roleplaying.
Just to hammer it home to those extremist roleplaying tyrants that no, they DON'T get to have their own way.
>>46856599
SS13 has controls. How anyone can think its main purpose is playing pretend is mind boggling.
>>46856618
You know, more people play M:tG for the mechanics than the immersive narrative building. Perhaps you should get upset about that?
And lol Wh40k is such a ripoff.
Anyway, 3.5e is a game with mechanics. It has game mechanics. You can build your character around the game mechanics, and then fight against CR-appropriate encounters using that character and those mechanics, in order to obtain Exp and Loot to beat higher CR encounters.
The game can be played as a game.
And it's fun!
>>46856735
>SS13 has controls. How anyone can think its main purpose is playing pretend is mind boggling.
You can't argue against what I said so you spew some idiocy.
>>46856735
>3.5e is a game with mechanics.
Not very good ones.
>>46856618
I fully intend to kick these "you MUST roleplay" extremists out of the games I play, and enjoy rolling some damn dice with people who enjoy rolling some damn dice.
And I'm thankful that most of the people who play this game are interested in playing to win.
>>46856721
Well what's your favourite system, then?
If it's not freeform, then it has mechanics, and they can be enjoyed.
I'd like to institutionalise YOU for playing games of pretend and make-believe, and demanding other people tolerate your pretend and make-believe shit, to the point of letting you say "This entire hobby should be about pretend and make believe"
That is unhealthy. As in legit mentally unhealthy.
The point of the hobby isn't to roleplay.
It's to have fun, you dumbass.
And the mechanics are more fun than the roleplay.
>>46856762
... That was my argument and it wasn't idiocy.
Your argument is idiocy.
"This game is not a game because the player interface is shit!"
Well gee I guess Dwarf Fortress and UFO: Enemy Unknown aren't games either then.
Doesn't matter if the player interface is shit. It's a game. It's got objectives, and you can use the controls to reach them.
How the hell did you manage to make the insane leap from "game has bad controls" to "game must not be about the gameplay at all". That is not logic, that is you jumping straight to your own head-up-your-ass roleplay extremist conclusion.
Protip: You're playing a computer game with two teams that have competing objectives. Sorry to rwn ur immershun.
>>46856776
Haha yeah, 3.5e is broken as hell.
>>46856808
>If it's not freeform, then it has mechanics, and they can be enjoyed.
Most mechanics in most RPGs are passive and rely on GM input to resolve situations, D&D is one of a very small number of games that attempt to create an environment where applying mechanics serve as the primary way of playing the game.
D&D and its clones are the nearly the only system that actively encourages non-roleplay-centric progression. The notion of "dungeon crawls", "random encounters", and "loot" simply doesn't apply to almost any other system, period.
>>46856661
>Sure, the DM could fiat that the persuasion simply doesn't work anyway, but that's akin to responding to powergaming in combat by arbitrating that the monster has HP = (the damage the powergamer just dealt) + 15 or something. In other words, that's not an argument at all!
You are exactly right.
Social interactions are already more DM fiat than they are mechanics, and the DM can add more fiat on top of that and overrule the mechanics.
I think both of those are quite bullshit and it'd be nice to completely remove DM fiat.
But you can't really remove DM fiat so long as you're telling a story with characters that have humanlike emotions.
Solution?
Fuck the story.
Yeah I wouldn't really support giving mechanically optimised chars an RP bonus, for the same reason I wouldn't support EXP bonuses for roleplaying - it baits them into unfun stuff.
But it sure is nice to see everyone get their e-panties in such a goddamn twist when you propose to them that mechanically optimised players SHOULD be the stars of the game, because roleplaying is just a way of leading players from encounter to encounter. NOT the main part of the game at all.
>>46856932
Yup!
I don't play those other systems since I don't enjoy having a DM determine how something happens, and because they tend to focus far too much on the story and not enough on droppin' some big numbers on some kobolds.
Fine by me. Other people have different tastes. I won't barge into their games and demand they stop roleplaying because "Obviously their Roleplaying Game has a GAME in it, that means you're meant to focus on the GAME MECHANICS".
What really surprises me is that on /tg/, there are people who WILL barge into 3.5e and demand to shove roleplaying into it, like you're objectively wrong for playing the game like a game.
And it's /tg/. Not the hobby as a whole, just /tg/, who have this insane fixation on playing the game for the story, and how ignoring the story is just flat out wrong.
When, as you said, D&D is a system built around rolling dice and dropping big numbers on some goblins. That is what it is built on and what it is good at.
It's absurd, to me, that roleplaying extremists have their heads so far up their ass that they believe playing games of pretend and make-believe and writing co-operative fanfiction is MANDATORY to the system.
The system works fine with no story!
And my god does /tg/ get butthurt when you point this out, and imply the char sheet is more important than muh narrative.
>>46856953
If you're playing an optimized character that's capable of performing a particular action well in comparison to other PCs, why would you need/require an added bonus on top of being optimized to overcome a particular action?
To put it in another why, why should optimizers be rewarded when the reward is the fact that they're better at doing something than most people involved in the campaign?
>>46857085
To overcome DM fiat.
In fact, the way I phrased the roleplaying bonus, is "DM fiat works in your favor"
>>46857080
It's funny that you'd be completely unable to play proper (i.e., non-WotC) D&D, since it's built around NOT fighting the monsters, since you'll get your head fucked into your ankles, combined with being 50% DM fiat.
>>46845656
>I can only do what my sheet says I can
>>46857080
>average D&D GAMER
This is why this board is shit.
You stupid fucks feel like this idiot troll is unrepresentative of the playerbase for that shitty game, but the reality is that he's just what happens when you strip away the pretensions of the average D&Dfag.
Never invite a D&Dfag to your table, never play D&D.
>>46857129
I accept that I would not be able to play the game that is based around DM fiat.
DM fiat is annoyingly inconsistent and either it singles me out to be the game's buttmonkey or it works so damn well that there's little challenge. There is no in between where the DM fiat works about the same as for other players.
If there were a consistent and fair DM, then sure. I'd be all for it.
But a consistent and fair DM is called a "computer", and I believe that games using such a DM belong on >>>/v/ .
*Left 4 Dead's director AI is inconsistent and is a gay garbage piece of faggot shit ass that I argh words flarblfalfrgjarfl. So Computers aren't immune to this.
>>46857116
DM fiat is an integral part of every tabletop RPG, you cannot have a game that's completely devoid of GM fiat unless you're playing video game or a game like chess where the object of the game is entirely PvP.
That being said, how do you overcome GM fiat (something that's meant to take place outside of the rules) by optimizing your character (which means that you're playing by the rules)?
It's like trying to swim without getting your feet wet, is it not?
>>46857217
>Never invite a D&Dfag to your table, never play D&D.
Well yeah, if you demand roleplaying, you should probably play a system that's based around roleplaying.
Like freeform.
Or quest threads.
You guys like quest threads right?
>>46857224
>it singles me out to be the game's buttmonkey
Gee I wonder why.
>>46857243
Sadly you are right, GM fiat cannot be overcome.
All you can do is ask the GM to stop being such a rugmuncher with his fiat, if he's the "Yes, you Roleplayed that Roleplay perfectly, and you get to fuck the mechanics and just Roleplay all over the world." type.
>>46857252
There are games that have mechanics to them but are also decidedly focused on the narrative.
Hell, even old school D&D relied on this since combat was a last resort and most of your success came from being able to describe what your character is doing.
>>46857261
Because DMs (like all human beings) often have really strange ideas on the way social interaction works.
If you don't agree with their hidden assumptions, then you end up getting screwed over.
If you DO agree with their hidden assumptions then you're basically on the golden pathway to free shit.
>>46857274
Describing how you attack an opponent and gaining bonuses for describing said action counts as roleplaying too.
So really, if you just want to sit down and say "I roll to hit" for the entirety of the campaign, why are you even playing a tabletop RPG in the first place?
>>46857302
Surely it's not that you're just a complete failure at RP.
>>46857313
Because rolling to hit is fun.
>>46857339
I'm RPing right now, aren't I? ;)
Eh, I'd like to say I'm good at it but there isn't any way to measure that, is there?
>>46857343
But that's wrong, idiot.
>>46857343
Again, why play a tabletop RPG when you're basically describing a love for video-game RPGs like Final Fantasy or Dragon Quest?
Hell, I love playing tabletop precisely because I have the freedom to describe how I'm attacking enemies and seeing if the rolls give me a favorable outcome.
>>46857394
>Again, why play a tabletop RPG when you're basically describing a love for video-game RPGs like Final Fantasy or Dragon Quest?
Because it plays very much like Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest, and I enjoy that.
>>46857371
Is your RP entertaining, give depth to your character, or advance the plot in a meaningful way?
If the answer to at least one of these is yes, then congratulations. If you're just saying "I roll to hit...I rolled X...I dealt Y damage" then your RP is shit.
It's not even that hard to roleplay if you're not being a complete twat about it or the GM isn't being THAT GUY.
>>46857394
>>46857418
And if you're asking why I don't just (re)play Ultima or Diablo, it's because you have a far greater control of the mechanics and the tuning in the tabletop.
Turns DO take longer to resolve. I will give you that.
But there's more depth - more of the actions that you can take might be the "best" option, depending on circumstance.
FF1 had choice in how you built your party but once that was done, it was pretty obvious how to play it. DQ often set you straight on flowchart mode.
>>46857418
How?
>>46857450
>Is your RP entertaining
Not for me to decide
> give depth to your character
Don't care, character depth is boring bullshit that detracts from the game
> advance the plot in a meaningful way
Don't care, the plot is boring bullshit that detracts from the game
Honestly I just don't like it and I don't want my games to have it.
You know roleplaying in games to everyone outside of tabletop games is picking the bad choices for thematic reasons, they never call it roleplaying when you pick the best or even decent shit. Like playing through some war game where you refuse to use enemy guns, various hack and slash games with different weapons but you stick with the first weapon because "it's that characters weapon", and other bullshit that just generally makes the game difficult for no reason that pertains to the game. Hell even the developers really don't support it, any RPG you play in the video game sphere that allows you to wield any weapon doesn't stop you from mixing it up it only gives specialization AKA min maxing. There aren't a lot of "roleplayers" outside of table top.
>>46857487
How what? How it resembles FF1 and DQ?
Creatures (including players) take turns to make an action, and those include dealing random damage to an enemy, or casting a spell with a preset effect (but random magnitude)
Random encounters with enemy creatures in a maze-like dungeon
You encounter stronger creatures over time
It also, annoyingly, tends to have BLAH BLAH BLAH WORDS *hits you with a novel* ZZZzzzzzz *snores* like those games. Especially Ultima. My god does Ultima like you bash you in the face with a novel, easily the worst part of the game.
I don't need context for what each of these "virtues" mean! they are numbers, I make number go up, the meaning is arbitrary.
>>46856735
Yes, and I play MtG myself more for the mechanics than the story, so I don't really see your point.
>also not upset
>>46857561
>How it resembles FF1 and DQ?
FF1 and DQ were ripoffs of some flavour of D&D. AD&D 1e, I think.
Involved "Story" in tabletops only gives assholes reasons to betray the party and morons reasons to stop participating or actively hinder the party causing a party wipe.
There I said it.
>>46857474
>And if you're asking why I don't just (re)play Ultima or Diablo, it's because you have a far greater control of the mechanics and the tuning in the tabletop.
Not really, but that's honestly a good thing.
In a video game, every possible option that you can choose has already been mapped to your character's progression. Rydia will learn "Fire" after a set point in the story (unless you level grind), Cecil will always become a Paladin after a certain point in the story, and every spell, item, action, etc. that your party could access has already been produced into the game's code.
You to alter the story beyond what has already been decided for you.
But in a tabletop RPG, every decision you make as a player affects something within the story. Using a spell to uncover a spy before he can kill off the king when the king's death would've set off the plot changes the entire dynamic of the story.
Maybe the king hails you a hero for saving him, maybe he gives you a keep, maybe he decides to make you and the party members of his own personal protection squad, but whatever direction the campaign goes in, it's much different than what the GM had planned before you managed to foil the assassination.
It's because of this potentially chaotic derailment and teamwork between the players and the GM that I personally keep coming back to sessions week after week. You can't necessarily alter a video game once it's out unless you know programming but all you need to alter the story in a tabletop RPG is an open-minded GM and one lucky roll during a point where it could change everything.
That and working together with other players to overcome a challenge through teamwork as well, that's always interesting.
>>46855918
Black Tokyo.
>>46857658
>Cecil will always become a Paladin after a certain point in the story
I thought that was avoidable?
>>46857509
I find your dismissive attitude towards character depth and plot distasteful, I don't think you'll be welcome at my group.
And I say this as someone who used to play dragonwrought venerable kobold sorcerer. It is quite possible to enjoy both the tactical combat aspect and role playing aspect of RPGs. Calling the role playing BAD WRONG FUN is just as bad as vice visa.
>>46857509
Even something as basic as Super Mario Bros. has a plot to explain why Mario is going after Bowser man.
Darkest Dungeon has a plot to explain why you and a crusader are traveling to cursed land of eldritch abominations.
Even FF1 had a basic story to explain why four heroes of light needed to kill off the fiends you encounter.
How do you play a tabletop role-playing game without having a story or roleplay?
>>46857674
Only if you never progress beyond Mysidia.
>>46857705
Ok!
But you wouldn't be welcome at my group either 'cause you'd constantly try to roleplay, and demand that the group roleplays, and I would not be cool with that.
>>46857606
Yes, they adapted the basic idea and did their own thing with it.
Origionaly FF was more on track with D&D down to multiple attacks by fighters until it hit the "everyone can do everything" model around 5. DQ encounter/boss wise actually is probably more on track with D&D after the first game cause encounters can completely wreck you unless you have immunity equipment or can alpha strike them, later on bosses can just flat out kill the party if they focus fire and you can't recover fast enough.
>>46857561
I think rogue-lites are more your speed champ.
All the numbers but none of the pesky story.
>>46857734
You fight against combat encounters of appropriate challenge using the characters you have built and the equipment you have acquired up to this point.
>>46857734
Oh I just ignore the story in those games. Makes it much easier to play them.
>>46857653
Why are you playing with THAT GUYS though?
There I said it.
Someday, somewhere, the great Rollplaying vs Roleplaying debate will be settled. But it won't be today, in this thread.
>>46857766
Nigga you don't understand how hard I go in on Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup.
and how hard I -used- to go in on Nethack until the devteam went full SJW.
Maybe I should learn to play Tales of Maj'Eyal or ADOM or some other rogue game.
>>46857777
Somebody needs to cap this shit and show it to /v/, for this man is their king.
>>46857509
>Do you find X entertaining?
>Not for me to decide
Then... who DOES get to decide that? If you don't get to decide what you enjoy, who does? Do you have a guy behind you with a leash attached to your neck telling you what you can and can't have fun with? I don't understand.
>>46857734
GM : "Alright here's the dungeon entrance"
Theif : "OK going to check for some traps"
Mage : "Wait let me check for magic, maybe it has some magical monsters guarding it"
Fighter : "So is this a wall here, does it look roofed I think I could climb up there and see in."
It's acutely quite fucking easy. You just play the game instead of sigh and complain there's no realistic reason why your party is there and no reason for them to explore a dungeon and other whiny shit you fucks constantly have to dress shit up to PLAY A FUCKING GAME.
>>46857828
I'm sorry, I'm just not feeling it.
So why are you at that dungeon anyway?
I have a Barb with 8 Wis/Int/Cha and I'm having turns of fun role-playing outside of battle. His only proficient social skills is Intimidation.
If a DM believes your character wouldn't do something because of the their low stats, that's bullshit. Your stats don't define your character.
I've had my character suggest ideas and try and investigate a missing persons case, he just speaks in third person and is too blunt about it. He lacks subtlely in important situations and tends to rely on using his size and power to get his way.
>>46857854
I imagine that, if your GM was to ever confront your party with a caved-in passage, that would be the end of the session for you.
>>46853984
>The point of roleplaying is not to "win", it's to roleplay.
This this this fucking this
I run con games, and thanks to the internet I live in constant terror that some shit stain is going try and spoil my efforts by trying to number crunch and what have you. Because of this I made a couple precautionary measures that make sure that doesn't happen.
I will never ever understand the mindset of winning an RPG. If you're goal is to survive despite what the DM wants, you have an extremely flawed sense of how a roleplaying game works, and you're more than a bit retarded for thinking the DM is perfectly capable of killing you of at any time for any reason, because he controls absolutely everything about the world your in.
On the flip side, beta DM's who get played by the system they use are just as terrible. Novice DM's get a pass, but if you've been doing this shit for years, and you tell the players that you couldn't save them, you're a shit DM
I must have been triggered cuz god damn I mad now
>>46857822
No sorry I'm heterosexual
I like vaginas
I don't like penises
So I would never fit in with /v/ and their crossdressing attention-seeking transsexual fetish.
>>46857823
Oh you mean do -I- enjoy my roleplaying
Fuck yes.
But usually what people ask is "do other people enjoy your roleplaying" and to that I say I have no fucking idea.
>but you said you don't enjoy RP
Well, not in the traditional sense.
I do like the "Let's see if I can make this ridiculously unoptimised build work for shits and giggles" side of roleplaying tho. Or the "Let's see if we can beat this encounter by killing the boss monster FIRST and then the little minions" or "let's collect every pot in the dungeon".
Stuff like that. That's what I mean when I say I enjoy roleplaying. It's doing stupid irrelevant stuff to see if I can.
>>46857313
>Describing how you attack an opponent and gaining bonuses for describing said action counts as roleplaying too.
Bonuses towards what?
>>46857881
Well it depends, why do we need to get pass that caved-in passage? If we need to recover macguffin then maybe we'll dig our way through the rock. If we need to kill some baddies behind it then maybe we dig through the rock then divert a river into it. If it's not actually that important then maybe we go back the way we came and do something else.
But see the key words here:
>it depends
Hence, context is needed
>>46857913
So I pretend I'm "Uses thrown crates to disable all enemies man" and see if I can use thrown crates to disable all enemies.
That's roleplaying.
And it's fun.
Make sure your group is OK with it first tho. In many games, they're RELYING on you to be mechanically competent and not jackass around. And for most jackass stunts, you're relying on them to help you or at least not interfere.
You really need to agree with your party beforehand that you'll be trying to jackass something. 'cause if one guy wants to jackass and another wants to go hard with big numbers you'll just upset each-other and that's no good.
>>46855826
Go home FATAL, nobody likes you
>>46857913
>I do like the "Let's see if I can make this ridiculously unoptimised build work for shits and giggles" side of roleplaying tho.
Oh, that's kind of fun, I do the same thing. Not as far as to look up actual builds and things, but similar. You all right.
>>46857854
It contains combat encounters, skillchecks, loot, and experience. I want to beat the encounters, bypass the skillchecks, sort the loot and add to my inventory the stuff that would be useful to my character for future dungeons, and use the experience to further build my character.
>>46857828
This is making me wanna play the game.
Can I be Theif?
I hardly ever play Theif.
>>46857877
>int 8
>slightly smarter than a child
>low by peasant standards
>thinks that a high dice roll changes that
Naw nigga. If you make one stat crippling bad just so you can do 2 more points of damage in combat, I'm going to fuck with your character in game and make a point to put you in situations where you will be faced with the realization that having a really low Int or Wis has very real consequences.
Just like I rule that a trained swordsmen rolling a 1 doesn't stab his friend, rolling a 20 doesn't make you rise above your limitations.
>>46858003
End your fucking life.
>>46857777
You are exactly the kind of a worthless waste of skin that poured into the hobby when video games made it popular. You're the MOBA generation of pen and paper RPGs, the shallow fucktard who only wants to play beer&pretzels wargames but is too cheap to buy beer or pretzels and too chikenshit to play a wargame.
>>46858021
Maybe you should use the report function to ask the moderators to ban me.
That's what you always do when someone likes something that you don't like, right?
Wouldn't it be such a pain if you just had to put up with people who openly enjoyed things that you didn't enjoy?
Stay mad kid.
>>46858040
You should go post on >>>/v/ where you belong, degenerate.
>>46857913
>No sorry I'm heterosexual
>I like vaginas
>I don't like penises
agaymancalledrichard.png
>It contains combat encounters, skillchecks, loot, and experience. I want to beat the encounters, bypass the skillchecks, sort the loot and add to my inventory the stuff that would be useful to my character for future dungeons, and use the experience to further build my character.
Well I can certainly see the fun in beating encounters and getting loot, but without an overarching objective what's the point? You're just putting down bigger numbers on paper. It's just a means, to what end is your built up character for?
Realise that this need for context is pretty universal with rpg playing people. If you really find them boring then you're in the minority.
>>46857985
Looks more like D&D 3e to me.
>>46858028
>>46858021
This is why I don't allow roleplayers at my table.
They're so hostile towards anyone who doesn't share their backwards retarded beliefs.
And I do play the beer & pretzels wargames! They're great. And I buy the pretzels! So go fuck yourself you niggerfaggot.
>>46858056
Yes, because /tg/ is the antisocial hivemind where only head-up-your-ass tier roleplaying is allowed. NO DISSENT ALLOWED ON MY /tg/, NORMIES PLS GO REEE.
*stays*
:)
>>46858040
Notice the part where you pretended to be an adult? That's called "roleplaying" and you seem to enjoy it quite a bit.
>>46857828
So...we're just a bunch of people gathering at some random abandoned tomb just because?
How do we even know there's treasure inside? Or monsters to beat?
We could just go home and become bandits since we'll eventually encounter both if we do it for long enough.
>>46853984
>>46857907
>The point of roleplaying is not to "win", it's to roleplay.
Bullshit. Achieving the victory conditions of the scenario is a completely legitimate way of playing the game.
If the GM tells you the game is about a band of rebels trying to overthrow a corrupt king, the point of the game is quite literally to achieve that, and by definition "win" the campaign.
I know this anti-gamist meme is really popular these days, but these asinine statements bother me greatly. They essentially claim that players trying to act in their own best interest and/or complete actual objectives in the game world is badwrongungood, and true "fun" can only be achieved by "roleplaying," whatever that is supposed to mean, as if taking the role of a rebel who really wants to overthrow the kingdom's corrupt king is wrong or misguided.
These people seem to completely forget that RPGs quite literally formed out of wargames, and no matter what pretense you put the game under, chances are there's going to be a goal someone wants to achieve, and by definition achieving such a goal through whatever means is a "win."
>>46858003
>It contains combat encounters, skillchecks, loot, and experience.
How do we know that?
>>46857907
>Literally has a phobia of non-roleplayers
Kill yourself.
>>46858094
>They're so hostile
Gee I wonder why.
>>46858130
>RPGs quite literally formed out of wargames
Wrong, D&D has that origin. And that is one of the main reasons that it is pure fucking cancer.
>>46858066
You do realise that your "overarching objective" is completely made up and exists only in your imagination, right?
It isn't an end either.
What bloody context, your context IS making the numbers bigger. Your objective IS making the numbers bigger, to fight the next encounter, to make the numbers bigger. That is your journey, that is your goal, and there isn't any need for anything else.
>>46858109
I lol'd. :D
Man, it's a good thing I'm not a roleplayer, or else I'd probably have taken your humorous joke personally and gotten all buttmad!
>>46855009
where the fuck do you think you are faggot?
>>46855656
Nigger, it pisses me off to have uneven XP, and I'm in games mainly for the RP.
>>46858172
>D&D has that origin.
50% Chainmail Fantasy Supplement, 50% Dave Arneson's homebrew.
>>46858155
Because you've got your heads jammed up your collective asses and you live entirely in a circlejerk of other hateful like-minded people who are absolutely intolerant of anyone who doesn't play the game THEIR way,
so to fit in with them and play any games at all, you succumb to their extremism and the way they honestly think roleplaying should be ENFORCED, mechanics be damned?
Yes, I know. Thankfully there are plenty of groups who AREN'T complete abusive assholes that will kick you out for playing the game 'wrong'.
When I said that /tg/ was more closeminded than /pol/, that wasn't a joke or an exaggeration. That was a literal statement.
>>46858130
I don't see why you couldn't both achieve the victory condition and have role playing. No role playing is not about choosing suboptimal choices, role playing is about acting out a character that's hopefully more than "me, but a wizard" with all their positive and negative traits so that they feel like a real person, so that this story is about them.
Like for example if you want to overthrow the king, one way would be to talk up to the crown prince and convince him that his dad is not up to the job, then help him to get all the pieces ready for a power grab.
The fact that I have to explain roleplaying to you, a player playing a roleplaying game should send alarm bells ringing.
>all this shit about forcing bad roleplaying because low stats
>meanwhile my last game involved the wizard and the cleric having a sovereign glue drinking contest
>>46858130
D&D formed from a wargame. Other RPGs developed from roleplaying fans fleeing from D&D because it had become a rancid turd a decade before most of the people in this thread were born. D&D sucking ass is why we have all the other roleplaying games. D&D sucking ass is the genesis, the fiat lux of the hobby.
>>46857915
>I attack him in the knee with my warhammer
>Okay...roll THAC0
>...I got X.
>Okay, that's enough, roll damage
>...Y!
>Your warhammer smacks him in the knee and completely shatters it.
Shit like that.
>>46858237
I honestly doubt there are many groups that would be tolerant of the playstyle you're suggesting.
Belligerent anti-roleplaying is pretty much the most unacceptable attitude towards gaming to have in an RPG session.
>>46858237
Figure out how to bottle irony and you're a rich man.
itt:
>THAT fucking guy
>>46858259
Protip: "Me, but a wizard" is roleplaying.
You are roleplaying yourself.
Your wizard has a personality, and goals, and WORDSWORDSWORDS. They are your own.
That is still gameplay-clogging RPshit.
Take yourself out of the wizard.
Play "A wizard, but a wizard"
He doesn't have a personality, or goals, or WORDSWORDSWORDS. He isn't a copy of you.
He is the numbers on your character sheet. Nothing more.
THAT is who you should be playing, if you don't want to roleplay.
>positive and negative traits
Yawn
>a real person
YAAAAAAAAAWN
>this story
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWN *falls asleep*
>>46858259
Your smug self assurance in the sole arbiter of what roleplaying is set aside, it was you or someone you appear to agree with who argued that you don't play RPGs to "win," when it is very, very evident that you are wrong. Winning the scenario is, in fact, a very large part of what roleplaying games are about, because victory implies a goal, a reason to achieve that goal, and a consequence of failure.
In the scenario I have outlined, the game can be said to be won or lost depending on how the rebellion goes. Call it a "good end" or "bad end" if you want, the fact that the game wholly revolves around achieving the victory condition is clear and evident.
You are wrong, and like most "role"players, your head is jammed too far up your own ass to see it.
>>46858130
I'm >907, but I think my message was a bit muddled.
Here's how things go for me. Remember that this is a one off situation at a con. I don't do regular sessions because I'm a grown ass man with a busy life, and I don't want to DM or even play an rpg every saturday night for months and months, I've got other things to do and friends with different interests to hang out with.
I'm really going to shorthand this a bit
>Alright guys, there's this fog covered mountain that recently cleared, and there's a castle up there filled with spooks. Shit has started rolling downhill, local ruler walled off his city while the outer villages suffer
>Bring your own character sheet, here's some rules blah blah blah
>Player A brings Yorek, disgraced knight of whatever. Good warrior, capable leader, a bit angsty/tempermental/has whatever problem. Has come to reclaim glory
>Player B brings Isaac, shadow of the deepwoods. Part of road warden group. Has come to investigate before spooks encroach into his hood
>Player C bring Gandalfo. Has put no thought into his characters motivation or personality, but knows how to kill things really well. If you suggest his character be more a part of the world then just a puppet he uses to kill everything in it, he gets upset.
>As a player, he thinks having the most fine tuned killing machine is the way to play the game. Doing the most damage, being able to survive anything, knowing the rules cover to cover
>That is the end all be all way of enjoying sitting around a table with friends and/or strangers, and using your imagination as you trounce around a poor mans middle earth slaying all manner of creatures so you can live out your fantasies of being in a place more interesting than the real world.
No. Fuck that guy. You role play for the story and for the community. If it's only about number crunching and winning, go play pvp dark souls or something that's more aligned with your goals, stop trying to drag other people down to your level
>>46858204
>You do realise that your "overarching objective" is completely made up and exists only in your imagination, right?
The game is built off of imagination though.
>That is your journey, that is your goal, and there isn't any need for anything else.
Without context to explain why, it becomes a question of why a dude would willingly go out to fight demons and warlocks and liches and dragons when they can take their treasure, go home, and live comfortably for the rest of their lives off of the several thousand gold they could amass from a successful dungeon raid.
The reason why most characters fight armies and monsters and the like is because not doing so would mean the destruction of the world.
Numbers getting bigger is a means to an end, a means to an end that only serves to benefit you, the player, and has no context to your character.
It's not even like it's that hard to come up with a reason for why a party is fighting monsters on a daily basis, you're just too lazy to come up with even a basic sentence or two to explain it.
>>46858344
You used to be convincingly retarded, but that was just a little bit trying too hard. I'll give you 8/10 for endurance.
>>46844805
Because DMs too often make games one fat string of combats so Barbarians aren't left out.
Go be salty elsewhere.
>>46858298
I'm not a belligerent anti-roleplayer, I'm just an anti-roleplayer.
Plenty of belligerent roleplaying extremists on /tg/ tho, I can tell you that much.
>>46858303
This entire thread is fucking irony. We've got people playing a game with game mechanics and game objectives and those are damn fun, and they're insisting that the point of the game isn't in the objectives at all, it's in having a freeform game of pretend and make-believe.
And they honestly believe that people who disagree with them are the insane ones.
But you're right tho. I am a bit harsh on the roleplaying moderates (people who like roleplaying, but don't DEMAND THAT THERE BE ROLEPLAYING because ROLEPLAYING IS GOODRIGHTFUN and THIS SYSTEM IS A ROLEPLAYING SYSTEM). But damn it, you get enough roleplaying moderates, and you'll get fucking extremists like the ones in this thread wandering in, mistakenly beleiving they're in good company.
And the sickest thing is that sometimes they ARE, because the moderates will put up with them, so unless you have someone to reign in their narrative bullshit then yes, they will take over the system and the group.
>>46858204
>You do realise that your "overarching objective" is completely made up and exists only in your imagination, right?
Yeah, so is your mary sue fanfic. What is your point here?
>>46858351
U wot m8? Did not you see:
>I don't see why you couldn't both achieve the victory condition and have role playing
Which translates to yes! You should try to achieve the victory condition. And yes achieving it is a very large part of what roleplaying games are about. But another very big part of roleplaying game is about you know, the roleplaying. And you can have both roleplaying and trying to achieve the victory condition in the same game.
Take LotR for example, the victory condition is to destroy the ring, but the meat of the story is about how the characters change on the way to the victory condition.
>>46858297
Well I suppose that's not too bad.
I'd be ok with that kind of roleplaying.
It doesn't take very long.
>>46858451
Then you're not the person I was arguing with, and I fail to see why you insist on inserting yourself into a discussion that nobody but you was talking about.
>>46858430
>I'm not a belligerent anti-roleplayer, I'm just an anti-roleplayer.
No, you're pretty belligerent.
Being an anti-roleplayer though is enough of a red flag in and of itself though.
>>46858430
>I'm not a belligerent anti-roleplayer, I'm just an anti-roleplayer.
My point stands, that attitude is in direct contradiction to this hobby. I can't imagine a group actually capable of tolerating a person like you for any length of time.
>>46858423
:( damn you saw through my ruse
>Barbarian
>Walk into room
>Monster
>Charge at it
>Smash it until it dies
>Repeat until you die.
>>46858430
>I'm not a belligerent anti-roleplayer, I'm just an anti-roleplayer.
This entire thread stands as testament to your belligerence. And yeah, being actively opposed to roleplaying in roleplaying games is just stupid.
>>46853500
Because someone who would make attempts at shoehorning your behavior based on your stats in that fashion is not likely the kind of average-performance GM who will also do roleplaying well enough to be worth not just walking away from.
>>46858400
He's trying to RAISE you to his level.
Your story sucks, man.
Being a fine tuned killing machine is the way to enjoy sitting at a table with friend and strangers.
Imagination is a buzzword.
Roll some dice.
>>46858470
The problem is why can't you tolerate both in your game. Hell the game is even designed so that party can have a face character to handle all the heavy lifting around NPC interaction so you can off load that job to someone who really enjoys roleplaying.
