Whatever happened to the days of hardcore roleplaying where you could expect to reroll your level 1 character literally every session because they died until finally you got lucky enough to survive to level 2 and beyond?
Why is everyone so scared about killing off the PCs when they fuck up, are too stupid to figure things out, or they roll badly?
Why does everyone want their tabletop to be like a videogame where death is just an inconvenience because you know you'll "respawn" in a few seconds? What ever happened to true consequences of character death where you had to spend lots of time rolling up a new character, or you would be a level 1 among a party of level 15 PCs?
Roleplaying has gone to shit in my time. It's too influenced by video games. Table top should be it's own thing. The quality of gamers have gone down too. I noticed this mentality of handling PCs with kid gloves has gone hand in hand with streamlining the rules, too - so stupid people can play the game as well. I remember the golden times when everybody else I shared the table with took advanced math.
Is there any game or group out there that can cater to my tastes?
>>46684280
A good amount of people decided that interactive storytelling is more fun when you have time to explore your character and the world without having to hard restart every week.
There are also people who are too attached to a particular self insert or waifu character, but I'm not going to get into that.
>Is there any game or group out there that can cater to my tastes?
Sure. You could take a look at Funnel World or just be straight with prospective players or DMs about what you expect or want from them.
>>46684280
>Roleplaying has gone to shit in my time. It's too influenced by video games. Table top should be it's own thing.
You're not going to get roleplaying being it's own thing when you want it to copy how roguelike and roguelite games keep killing off PCs until a player gets lucky.
If you want roleplaying to be different to video games, that means focusing on things that video games can't do. That means encouraging roleplay. Constantly killing off PCs discourages roleplay because players don't expect the PCs to live long, so they stop caring about anything beyond the statblock. A character that is only seen as a statblock is the stuff of video games.
>Is there any game or group out there that can cater to my tastes?
Probably. I hope you find a group that you enjoy.
>>46684280
>smart people are playing the game
>they notixe that the game is too clunky, and the same things can be done with much simpler crunch without losing the essentials
>they decide to modify it, so that it becomes less clunky
>the game gets streamlined, removing superfluous elements and adhering to KISS principle
>becomes more friendly to newcomers, because there are less crunch traps, meaning more stupid people can enjoy it
Wow, you are dropping all these truth bombs harder than your mom falls on her ass. It's like fucking earthquake here.
Just because stupid people can enjoy the game doesn't mean that the game is bad. In fact, it means the game is good.
After all, dumb and smart people alike can enjoy chess, go and poker precisely because they are easy to learn, hard to master.
The problem is that those games are competitive, not cooperative, meaning the stupidest member of your party is the lowest common denominator.
The answer to this is simple - don't play with dumb people, if you don't enjoy it, you fucking idiot.
I swear, if it's not fantasy racism or lewd shit, it'a dumb complaining over nothing.
What has /tg/ become?
At least be creative in your shitposting, goddammit.
>>46684280
>Whatever happened to the days of hardcore roleplaying where you could expect to reroll your level 1 character literally every session because they died until finally you got lucky enough to survive to level 2 and beyond?
People stopped doing this because it wasn't fun.
>>46684280
>roleplaying has gone to shit
>too influenced by video games
>plenty of video games sell themselves on being lethal with permadeath
6/10 bait
>>46684280
Turns out that's a really shitty way to play and by 1990 everyone was tired of it, with nothing that had to do with video games.
Story based games, rather then dungeon crawls, became the ideal and consistent churn of disposable, faceless characters fell out of fashion.
>>46685395
>>they notixe that the game is too clunky, and the same things can be done with much simpler crunch without losing the essentials
>>they decide to modify it, so that it becomes less clunky
>>the game gets streamlined, removing superfluous elements and adhering to KISS principle
In some cases they simplified the crunch.
In others they decided that it would be better for a computer to handle the crunch. Meaning that a video game is a better medium than a tabletop RPG for what those people wanted to create.
We lost some types of RPG because video games became able to do those better than tabletop can.
>>46684280
Kids now a day grow up being told that everyone is a winner. Games like this conflict with their world view and become badwrongfun.
>>46685470
You can still fail to complete an objective or have something disastrously bad happen in a campaign without making PCs die left and right.
>>46685470
I spotted the edgy 22 year old.
>>46685518
Which is funny, because the people that *actually* grew up with the "everyone's a winner" strategy are reaching their early to mid thirties now.
Assuming he's actually 22, that means that people collectively realized it backfires more often than not when he was 9 or 10.
>i liked when everything was shit
>why isn't everything still shit
>why don't people like the taste of shit now that there are other, non-shit options
>i am confused
We started playing better games.
>>46685497
Absolutely. Just a week ago our campaign ended prematurely because one of the PCs kinda sorta incredibly misjudged a situation and ended up turning the entire party and their associates into utter pariahs in a mission-critical area. From there on out, there was basically no way for their mission to succeed at all.
Casuals ruin everything OP, they want all the fun of the hardcore but none of the hard work so you wind up with ridiculous compromises like it still being possible to die but dying have no real consequences. Not that casuals are all bad it's just that when you try to appeal to them at the same time as the hardcore you wind up with really shitty game design that only pleases casuals or in some cases nobody.
>>46685395
>Just because stupid people can enjoy the game doesn't mean that the game is bad. In fact, it means the game is good.
yeah brah, gotta get the diverse youth, cod kiddies and geek grrlz on board
>>46687004
Delta Green is newbie-friendly and fucking awesome. I hope you aren't working on any games, because they will invariably be shit
>>46684280
>Whatever happened to the days of hardcore roleplaying where you could expect to reroll your level 1 character literally every session because they died until finally you got lucky enough to survive to level 2 and beyond?
We started playing roleplay games instead of rollplay.
>>46687004
No, you dumb idiot, no one cares on getting people on board.
A streamlined game means the flow of the game isn't interrupted by looking up rules or tables, or not memorizing a fuckton of options
IT'S A GAME, NOT A JOB.
The best kind of crunch is the one you don't even notice.
That's why cRPGs are better in the ways of crunch than tRPGs are - because the player can focus on the game itself, not on the crunch.
He can apply his creativity to the situation itself instead of calculating numbers.
Black fucking box principle, the only thing that the user requires is the front-end.
>>46684280
>Is there any game or group out there that can cater to my tastes?
No, because you have SHIT TASTES!
>>46684280
Wildbow's Lausanne Weaver Dice campaign is absolutely brutal.
>>46685470
kids today google, not giggle. they play angry birds instead of getting angry AT birds. they all have an ipad but no iq. not one. they playstation but never play station. i.e. one pretending to be a train and the others pretending to be different trains or low paid maintenance workers. they're obsessed with one direction, rather than enjoying all eight directions equally. facebook... but unable to face... a book. or a hoop with a stick. a lost generation. the tv show.
>>46687213
That was poorly ripped from a shitty slam poem.
2/10
>>46687213
>"kids these days"
I swear to God, you're misconstruing the problem.
The Internet brought us instant communication en masse, and that showed us just how much the majority of the humanity is dumb.
Before Internet, you could've denied it and said something along the lines "there's no way people are this dumb", and therefore, sayed oblivious to it.
Now that the Internet is there, you can't hide from it.
THE MAJORITY OF THE HUMANITY IS DUMB
Think about how dumb is your average person, then realize that 50% of humanity are dumber than him.
And now that the corporational globalization is there, it's much easier to let humanity stay dumb and profit off it, as there is no conflict to survive, and thus, no motivation for people to become harder, better, faster, stronger and ignore the possible short-term profit in favor of long-term intellectual benefits.
So, no, the problem was always there. "Kids these days" is just another attempt at denial of the fact that humans are dumb, by appealing to the past and how the pasture was greener and the trees were higher in "our" time.
And, yes, that includes us. We are too the problem.
We are just smart enough to realize that there is a problem, but not smart enough to do anything to fix it or exploit it.
>>46684280
> a level 1 among a party of level 15 PCs?
This was never not utterly retarded. You're a moron for desiring it.j
>>46687213
>.e. one pretending to be a train and the others pretending to be different trains or low paid maintenance workers
A warning sign for autism if there ever was one.
>>46687335
>THE MAJORITY OF THE HUMANITY IS DUMB
>Think about how dumb is your average person, then realize that 50% of humanity are dumber than him.
I can't tell if he's trying to prove his own point or is just unaware... Maybe he's foreign and English isn't his native tongue. Maybe.
>>46687244
so many selfies
yet so little knowledge of self
twitter and tweet used to mean spring was coming
they have xboxes, but we had to solve math problems with x boxes and y triangles
ms paint was the lady down the street that sold paints and primers and stuff
we played in mud, but these kids are the opposite of mud. they are dum.
it was cool to be dope, but now it's not to smoke it.
this generation. our generation. you decide.it's just a meme, bro, the guy was going all "this generation baka"
>>46687449
Nah, I remember the slam poem that shit was from. It was a bad poem and he fucked it up anyway.
>>46684280
I'd prefer to not have to rely on luck to get the opportunity to play out a story when people are putting a bunch of hours of organization to be able to play out that story. Bad rolls happen, people die, but actually relying on luck to start the game is adding bullshit meta-issues. The assumption is that you have a character worth being involved in the story, not just some random peasant.
Also the whole post is a contradiction focused on talking personal tastes up. What you want is video game mechanics because your view is based on old-school roguelikes. You're basically asking why roleplaying game, which are pretty much cooperative storytelling and character building adventures, aren't more like old spreadsheet/rng video games. Yes, the dice are important, but they don't have to decide every single detail to do what an rpg does.
Lolwat.
Old RPGs were extremely vidya like because they inspired vidya, and they weren't terribly complex until the 2nd gen of RPGs. Try visiting /osr/ on this board if you want 'hardcore' games.
>>46687938
>they weren't terribly complex until 1977
FTFY
>>46684280
Don't people still die in 1-3 good hits (depending on the character) in 5e at level 1? What's the difference from now and then?
>>46684280
If character creation was not as in-depth as it is now, then I would salute you. However, since character creation in many systems has increased over time, I'd prefer not to have players spending half the night re-rolling characters. During those 15 extra minutes, you're not giving blood to the blood god, nor skulls for the skull throne.
>>46684280
>What ever happened to true consequences of character death where you had to spend lots of time rolling up a new character, or you would be a level 1 among a party of level 15 PCs?
OP you're totally right, there's nothing more interesting than dragging along a dead weight that will never do anything more than bribe guards. Truly the height of roleplaying is not in fact acting in a way that is typical of your character but being completely useless because you rolled a 1 at the wrong time.
Sure is grognards in here.
>>46687335
>Think about how dumb is your average person, then realize that 50% of humanity are dumber than him.
>using "average" to refer to the median
Just so you know, most people use the most common value as their definition of "average" when they're talking about the masses.
>>46688001
DMs don't normally build henchmen with traits to crit the player to death in one hit, maybe by choice or because they aren't good at sheet building.
>>46684280
It doesn't play well with character creation in most modern systems, especially not in D&D 3E(although I'd hardly consider that modern). You might be able to get away with it in 5E.
>Make a level 1 rogue with 1d6 hp
>Dies from a single arrow first encounter
>Make a level 1 wizard with 1d4 hp
>Dies to a throwing knife
>Make a level 1 cleric with 1d8 hp
>Dies to a longsword
>Make a level 1 fighter with 1d10 hp
>Dies to a bardiche
>So much fun
>>46688001
Back then you died in one.
