So which one is it?I had a great time with OSR stuff. Namely BFRPG and OSRIC. Also gave FMC a try, which was better than modern D&D but not great. I know they're just edits of previous editions of D&D, but for me formatting is a criteria, which is why I view them seperately.Also had some fun playing Scarlett Heroes with the missus, and was intrigued when going through Worlds without Number.Also played a few sessions of SotDL as a player, which was fun, but probably nothing I'd enjoy over a longer campaign, and lacking when it came to exploration (though that might have been on our DM but idk).I had an absolute shitty time when playing 3.5 and pf 1e, and just going through the 5e PHB was a slog, so I'm not too fond of WotC shit.What I want from D&D is a nearly generic fantasy setting with a decent focus on exploration and combat that's not a slog. I prefer overarching archetypes as classes over the weirdly specific stuff recent editions offer. A decent focus on gear, its modifiers and ideally crafting is also a huge bonus. I'm also very open to additional mechanics depending on their implementation.>inb4 hytnpdndYes, I mainly play in different systems, but I like variety.
>>94751280I've had a lot of fun with Hackmaster, though a good part of that might have been my DM being an expert on the system and providing a proper Points of Light style campaign to highlight the emphasis on contracts, supply management and profit margins.
>>94751280Just read them and pick the one you like. The rest of us aren't you and cannot parse your obsessive-compulsive, nit-picking preferences.They're all pretty much the same. I like the ones that don't use DCs, but Worlds Without Number has the coolest generation rules and as forever-DM, it's my favorite. Except I also love the 2e D&D settings and everyone plays 5e, so I play it w/ 2e settings because it's not that big a deal. The table you play with matters a thousand times more than which of the editions or ten thousand clones you choose.
>>94751280I'd say it's SotDL/WW but you might want to look into something like 13th Age. I'd say 2e is a marked improvement in 1e but 2e isn't out yet.
>>94751280stirrup eroticblondes erotic
>>94751280>I had an absolute shitty time when playing 3.5 and pf 1eCan I ask why? My experience with 3.5 was fun, but part of that was the fact the DM knew to throw out WotC's shitty encounter level distribution that turns everything into a slog.
>>94751280The best iteration of D&D is the one that you and your playgroup cobble together out of the things you like from all the editions and other games you’ve played together. Keep your own binder of annotated photocopies from various books, handwritten pages expounding on houserules, and so on.
>>94751280DnD 5e is the best iteration by far. It's SO bad that most people playing it don't even bother to learn the rules.
>>947512805e but with skill points and a custom spell and caster class list to fit your settingI think 5e made the best versions we've seen so far of Fighter, Barbarian and Cleric.
>>94751546>O think 5e made the best versions we've seen so far of Fighter, Barbarian and Cleric.Oof... holy fucking oof.
>>94751546>I think 5e made the best versions we've seen so far of Fighter, Barbarian and Cleric This is bait, right? Please tell me you are trolling.
>>94751460Is this brain rot or AI?
>>94751546Barbarian shouldn't be a class in the first place.
>>94751719Honestly anything that isn't Fighterman, Sneakyman, Magicman, or Holyman shouldn't be a class.And Holyman could probably just be made a subset of Magicman.
>>94751280Not 5th ED, that's for sure.
>>94751471To sum it up: The game is focussed on combat, while the combat is not really good and way too long and classes are less generic in addition to feelimg like they're fitted around the (not so great) combat system. Plus it was my first encounter with the "build-mindset" in ttrpgs
>>947517725th es is the best edition because it's the one where everyone is most likely to say "fuck it" and stop using the rules, which is an improvement in the experience 100% of the time.Half of 5e players don't even KNOW the rules.
>>94752058Honestly that's always been a thing. Maybe least of all in Basic and 3.xpf. Basic because there are so few rules that "roll an attribute check" was almost always the answer so the normal handwaving/houseruling a DM would do actually follows what the rules say to do. 3.xpf because people really enjoyed the number crunching of it. AD&D 1e, 2e, 4e and 5e? DM handwaving/houseruling has always been the go-to for anything that wasn't immediately an attribute check or skill in later editions.I'd honestly imagine it was that way in 3.xpf, but I always avoided that one so can't say for certain.
>>947512805e 2014, followed by BFRPG. Other iterations are shit.
>>94752058>>94751546>>94751482>>94752211We already know 5e is shit. Instead of false flag shitposting, is still worthless.
>>94752761Damn it, messed up text editing.>Instead of false flag shitposting, you can give alternatives.
>>94751546If a Fighter can't stop a couple goblins from running past him to shank his friends, then it's not the best version of a Fighter.
>>947512804E.>but that's not what I wantDon't care. Not what you asked.
>>94751280ACKS.
There is no D&D formula. Every version is a completely different wargame.
>>94753418You people are so fucking annoying. It's always the same exact stupid arguments. You know all those systems were in D&D first, right? So on what grounds do you differentiate the two?
>>94753540Stop being a whiny bitch, and tell us what version of D&D does implement ACKs features with good formatting.
>>94753418Imagine screenshotting your own posts from the archive even though every single argument in them is wrong.
>>94751280AD&D 1e>Vast amount of material to use with it.>Total compatibility is OSRIC and the other good clones, adding access>Huge population of people who have played it with most of the worthy Grogs especially the solid greybeards being 1e focused.>Damn near every concept in FRPGs originates with AD&D 1e so its still fresh there
>>94753418>Not knowing that D&D had parley, reaction, and other mechanics in 1979Imagine being this confident and this ignorant, all at once
>>94753418>literally none of this is accurate to 3.x or 5e or 4elol
>>94753745The ACK crowd is at least contributing to the thread, instead of shitposting.
>>94753917How are ackfags shitposting completely incoherent slop that anyone who has ever played a game of any version of D&D knows is completely wrong contributing to the thread and not shitposting, exactly?
>>94753540>>94753596>>94753705>>94753745>>94753926>O-other systems do it to-You're a lying cunt and your whore mouth needs to be closed for business for once.I spent my entire sordid youth playing 3.5, since then I've played 4e, PF & 5e and never once did I see a DM drop a moral check across half a dozen DMs.More importantly, OP asked for the best iteration of the D&D formula, their exact request was:>What I want from D&D is a nearly generic fantasy setting with a decent focus on exploration and combat that's not a slog. I prefer overarching archetypes as classes over the weirdly specific stuff recent editions offer. A decent focus on gear, its modifiers and ideally crafting is also a huge bonus. I'm also very open to additional mechanics depending on their implementation.Let's see which of those points ACKS hits:>Nearly genericHas a default setting which is fantasy Roman, which is generic with a twist>ExplorationDoes fantastic>Combat that's not a slogIndividual and Mass are both incredibly functional>Archetypes as classesYou have those and can build your own, the most weirdly specific you get in the main book is 'God-blooded Gandalf' and 'Elric of Melibone'>Focus on gearJust had a new book come out for it in fact>Crafting is a huge bonusIn ACKS you have crafting rules for:>Magic items, buildings, siege weapons, cross-breed monsters, constructs, ships, mercantile investment, kingdoms, basic gear, artwork, animal training, slave training, soldier training, fortifications, dwarven beer, god-bothering, human sacrifice and magic spellsSo.Prove me wrong assholes, suggest a better system instead of bitching and whining like I just kicked sand into your vagina.What's the better system you'd suggest to OP?
>>94753568ACKS is just BECMI + autism
>>94754729>What's the better system you'd suggest to OP?3.5His problem is just that his group (likely including he himself) is retarded, which no system will solve
>>94751280>a nearly generic fantasy setting with a decent focus on exploration and combat that's not a slog. I prefer overarching archetypes as classes over the weirdly specific stuff recent editions offer. A decent focus on gear, its modifiers and ideally crafting is also a huge bonusSounds like AD&D (1e or 2e) with Greyhawk. At that point, most of the content is cross-compatible with other old-school systems.
>>94754970>3.5>Asked for a system without weirdly specific options and general fucking about3.5 is nothing but fucking about. It's a system that consists exclusively of fucking about, from character design to combat, there is not a moment when you're free to engage with the game without the system itself getting in the way by fannying about.And I say that as someone who used to have a deep affection for 3.5.
>>94751280what is FMC?
>>94755013That's just you being a retard.Engaging with the system is engaging with the game. If you don't want to play D&D then you can just not play D&D, that's not D&D's fault.
>>94751280You got any more art of that character?
>>94755131Fantastic Medieval Campaigns is a hack of OD&D>>94755195Third edition and WotC slop has been ruled out in the OP.>>94755220Artist is ff69. That was the only pic of the character I'm aware of. Here's a cleric though.
>>94755614You not knowing how to play or read doesn't rule the system out, it makes the problem you not knowing how to play or read.Again, the issue isn't with the system. Changing system will never solve anything here.
>>94751706He's just posting facts.
Does the new D&D pinball machine count as an iteration of the D&D formula? If so, that.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qFAKoVWVSE
>>94751280I think from the list of things you like and don't like 13th Age might be worth looking into.>nearly generic fantasy settingYep. It's set up to be very moldable. It's got most of the classic F20 tropes with a few of its own ideas but it's a game that mostly expects you to be doing a lot of your own worldbuilding. The big thing it has are Icons, a collection of powerful archetypal characters PCs have some relationship to, but while it gives you a list of them it more or less tells you to make them characters yourself. Where D&D might have Elminster or Vecna, 13A has the Archmage and the Lich King as templates to use how you want.>decent focus on explorationAs with the Icons the settings is pretty deliberately incomplete. Similar to 4e's Points of Light style there is a lot of space on the map for DMs to do what is interesting which means exploration is largely about the table. Mechanics are pretty light but there is plenty to see and find, and a module like Shards of the Broken Sky is very sandboxy.>and combat that's not a slogOne of the best bits of 13A is how it manages this. The math is all pretty steamlined, movement is zone-based, most actions will do something even if you miss, and best of all is the Escalation Die. This is d6 that ticks up each turn. You add its value to your attack rolls, so as combat goes on it gets quicker, but it also is used for special abilities. A spell might be At-Will when the Die is even, and one-per-encounter when its not. As the Die increase the Barbarian can Rage more easily. You might have a particularly powerful effect that can only be used when the Die hits a certain value. Combat in general is pretty snappy but the Escalation Die does a lot to push things along. Monsters interact with it a little differently. Most of them won't use it for anything, so no attack bonus, but things like Dragons will and also have traits where they roll a d6 and if it equals or exceeds the Die they get an extra action.
>>94753280Well then in that case every version of the Fighter sucks.
>>94751280>>94756186>I prefer overarching archetypes as classesIts core Classes are all the stuff you'd expect. See picrel. There are certainly some weirder things in the supplements but mostly they're very archetypal. However, 13A gives you a good amount of space to decide that archetype yourself. Most of your Classes features are called "Talents" and each Class has a pool of these of which you'll pick a few of. If you like your Wizards with powerful spells with long names you might want Evocation, High Arcana, and Vance’s Polysyllabic Verbalizations. If you're more about flexibility and utility then Abjuration., Cantrip Mastery, and Wizard’s Familiar could be more your speed. The Paladin with Bastion, Cleric Training, and Lay on Hands is a different take on the idea than the one with Divine Domain (Justice), Fearless, and Paladin’s Challenge. Every Class has that sort of thing going for them and progression is very similar in that you're always choosing things you want rather than being given things the game says you get. >A decent focus on gear, its modifiers and ideally crafting is also a huge bonus. Mundane gear isn't really the focus, it's got everything you'd expect but it's not granular about it. It's full of magic items though and has two supplements just about giving you more of them. There is a lot of play with if loot is your thing here and something I appreciate is that most magic items come with "quirks". Magical items have somewhat of a personality and by using them they subtle push on your own, or not so subtly if you load up. Which I think is fun flavour. Crafting exists too but isn't codified mechanically, you make an item the same way you make an ally. Roleplay as appropriate.Everything mentioned is better in 2e too and it's backwards compatible. More options, better design, etc. I'll upload the latest playtest packet to newvola if you want to read it. It's shaping up to be one of the better revision-style second editions.
>>94756198>he doesn't knowrelease me
>>94751879A some of your issues are directly addressed by the material>combat is not really goodDepends on the material you use. what class did you play?>combat is way too longThis is a sympton of your DM using the wrong encounter rate. Most enemies should be smal numbers of equal-level opponents, they should be groups of low-hp mooks up to a big boss.The majority of combat should be fast and tactical rather than spongy if your DM does his job.>classes are less genericYou want classes to be more generic?
>>94754729>see a DM drop a moral check acrossoD&D, AD&D 1e, AD&D 2e. 3e dropped the checks entirely and if you think their morale should break you let it and roleplay the encounter accordingly. I'm not reading the rest of that garbage because you proved from the start you don't know what the hell you're talking about, you cultist loser.
>>94756456>You want classes to be more generic?Yes, retard. If you're going to marry a class system then it needs each one to be broad so that every character within that class is meaningfully distinct. Classless systems are strictly superior, but extremely specific classes is the worst possible solution to the charbuild problem.
>>94756456Kek. Threetards really are too autistic to deal with someone not liking their favourite toy. Just leave it, faggots. Nobody will change their mind.
>>94755881He's not even posting in English.
>>94758378https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/stirruphttps://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/blondehttps://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/erotichttps://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/dumbhttps://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/anonymoushttps://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/poster
>>94751460tits are ruining it though
>>94758292>Yes, retard.You sound autistic. Class systems have never functioned like you describe in any game I've every seen.
>>94758477i think that was his point, but what do i know
>>94758421you can make your own gay dnd thread if you want to anon, nothing is stopping you
>>94758412Randomly stringing words together does, in most cases, not result in speaking a language.
>>94758576Are you the threetard? Angry no one likes your system, and now trying to derail the thread, distracting from better games?
>>94753418sounds awful, makes sense it's ACKS."ACKS" sounds like something someone would say when they're getting punched, and the system seems to be primarily supported by culture warrior types, as otherwise they'd just be playing AD&D.
>>94751280If Fantasy Craft was popular enough to get a proper second edition that polished out a few more of the kinks and hiccups, it would have been the best D&D-adjacent game ever published.
>>94758894it's shilled by the same people (using the term loosely) that used to shill myfarog and mork borg
>>947512803.5, obviously.
>>94753418>System that can handle you getting a shitload of high end henchmen without keeling overSounds fun. Why are so many people having a rage-on over this post?
>>94760056Because these people are insecure. They can't admit that another system does something better than the one they like because that means that something they like isn't the best. They've defined their ego and self esteem using the things they like, so any attack on those things is an attack on their fundamental conception of themselves. Basically, they never grew up and live in this perpetual state of pre-teen, externalized identities.
Thoughts on Worlds without Number?
>>94758900that too.>>94759386I've seen normies playing mörk börg, game really is just all style no substance.
>>94760056>>94760121>>94760159This is some extreme cope.The reason people are dogpiling on ACKS is pretty simple. It's an incredibly mediocre product with no outstanding qualities, but it gets shilled here by a few losers who can't read a room and realize that this is not a board that's passive to obvious bullshit advertising. Its fans pretend it's the answer to everyone's prayers, instead of a non-answer to a question no one asked.
>>94762784WWN / SWN are the perfect choice if you're looking for something *like* D&D but without its many pitfalls. I recommend them to everyone. It's the perfect system to get a stubborn party offboarded from 5E.
>>94762900>Read the room>Urhm, well I don't like it so no one else could possibly like itOut of interest is it bullshit advertising when you give 3.5/5e loud, public sloppy toppy any chance you get?Or does that not count because it's you?>Non-answer to a question no one askedTwo things, OP was literally asking you subhumanoid, and I, personally, was figuratively asking when someone recommended it to me on here, because I have/had a Council of Wyrms 5e game going which was chugging slowly to a halt as they reached domain level play.Things players wanted to do but couldn't:>Use their minions in combat>Mass combat>Explore and build a domain in the Underdark based around a ruined Drow city they foundAll of which ACKS has no problem with.Face it, it's not that the question wasn't being asked, it's just that you don't like the answer and, massive autist that you are, can't comprehend that other people like things you don't.
>>94762784has some cool ideas worth taking for a different systemthe player side of the game is kinda barren
>>94765592'Read the room' is pure appeal to the silent majority. He might as well say "Everyone agrees with me, because I'm right and they all know it."It's arrogant as fuck.
>>94765875>silent majorityACKS was btfo by a significant majority of actual, vocalized posts as well>>94765592>only 5e and my shit game existlmaoIt once again circles around to the fact that you've never actually played 3e or understood how to play D&D, and are projecting that onto your every interaction instead of realizing you could just learn to actually playnta obviously
>>94765891NTAOP here. What's a good alternative to ACK? Several anons had already stated AD&D, but desu I would prefer something that's better formatted and where I didn't have to slog through several hundred pages of bonus material.
>>94759350Agreed.Also Sunchasers needs a dedicated book.
If you had great time with OSRIC, just add ACKS domain/mass combat rules, OP. Mass combat especially is really fluid and intuitive and will upgrade your game experience drastically. I'll accept any criticisms of ACKS but not a single person critiquing it will be able to point out a better mass combat system. Not a single one.
>>94765891>ACKS was btfo by a significant majority of actual, vocalized posts as wellApart from every time it's mentioned you mean? Because apart from the 3-4 seethatics who go looking for any mention of ACKS so they can scream like howler monkeys (And yes, you are easy to identify, because you never give a specific argument, you just hoot 'But Ser, is bad system, do the needful and do not play'), I've only seen a handful of people who sincerely didn't have fun with it after trying it.
The best argument against ACKS may be how much effort these losers put into pretending that all the arguments against ACKS don't exist and were never voiced. That's less fan behavior, and more cult behavior.The game itself is just a slow, bloated clone that is mediocre at its best. No one would care about it at all. Its cultists though are some of the saddest losers on this board, and it's really a shame that we're the ones who have to deal with them because they got themselves kicked off of Reddit.Even the whole "we got kicked off a website solely because of politics" is kind of silly, considering Reddit has full-blown MAGA subreddits and the game/creator isn't that political. The actual stated reason given for ACKS being banned is because of obvious, deceitful, and organized attempts at promoting the game, and considering what we're seeing from the cultists here right now, I think that's not an entirely unfair ruling.
>>94766419>We make shit non-arguments, arguing purely from emotion and people keep laughing at us and pointing it out>The fact they keep laughing at us and pointing it out is the proof our arguments are actually solid and right, and that we're being non-emotive about itWew lad, that's a hell of a position to take.Try making an actual argument backed by evidence instead next time. Give actual examples of how it's slow, provide the bits you think are mediocre.I shouldn't be teaching you how to be a more subversive little shitter. But luckily for me we both know you won't take my advice and will instead continue to get clowned on for the foreseeable.
>>94766448>cultist in full defense modeWe've seen what happens when people give you specific arguments though.Whole threads full of specific arguments, and what comes out? You in denial, trying to gaslight this entire board.Say hi to your discord.
>>94751280>What's the best iteration of the D&D formula?Absolutely fucking none of them. The only reason D&D got so popular was because it was the first TTRPG to really take off, and once it got its load of fanboys they absolutely refused to try any other game or set of rules. Almost every edition of D&D since then have been just variations of the original core set of rules to get the fanboys (who became grognards as they got older) to keep buying books but not pissing them off by forcing them to relearn too many of the rules. The one and only time D&D tried to be too different (4th edition) it caused such a shitstorm in the community that it's the only reason Pathfinder is even a thing at all (because it's just yet another edition of the original D&D rules set) - so the grognards could cling to the one and only set of rules they were ever comfortable with and will ever be.
>>94766464Who are you prancing for?For who? Do you think there's an audience here for your antics? I hate to be the one to tell you this, but no one really cares.You and I both know specific arguments exist and have been voiced. That even people who like the system that have complained about aspects like its slower combat compared to other retroclones and how laborious it is to find specific rules due to how much bloat there is, alongside dozens of other complaints. What are you hoping to do here? Just shotgun blast as much damage control as you can, and hope that no one cares about the game as much as you do and they'll just give up?You're right about one thing. No one cares about the game as much as you do. But, people on this board do care about your prancing about, which is why several have complained about you.Your game is mediocre and not worth the attention you're trying to get it, and that attention is largely now "wow, it's no surprise this game's cult got banned from Reddit; what a bunch of noisy, disingenous fags."
>>94766506Oh and of course>Still won't say what cunting system they actually like or recommend one.
>>94766551Please, enough with your antics and prancing.No one's as dumb as you'd need them to be to take you seriously. Do you really imagine anyone would look at your post and think "oh yeah, this is definitely a guy who wants to encourage discussion, i bet he's really fun to talk to," when it's hard to even imagine a more biased, neurotic, insecure, and disingenous loser? You're not here to have an unbiased and open discussion, you're here to prance.You trampled right past some specific complaints, because you're in full defense mode. You're upset because some people called you out as an annoying cunt, and now you imagine the issue is with the game, when the game is just a boring C- you're hoping to sell as an A+.It's like herbal supplements and other "harmless" snake oils. No one cares about worthless placebos, until people try to sell them as miracle cures.
>>94766684>I don't careReally though, who is this statement for? I can't imagine anyone you'd be able to convince you don't care when you're foaming as you are.>I just want you to say something of fucking substance You're actually autistic.If someone told you "I don't like winter because it's cold", would you get as enraged as you are now? Would you demand they explain how they felt cold, what the specific temperature was, and scream in frustrated rage when they don't indulge your autism?I'm telling you, once again, the game isn't even really worth discussing. It's a bland, boring affair bloated with tables; just one of many forgettable retroclones.The issue that people brought up, and I'm going to have to make sure you understand that I'm just describing what happened to you because you're too autisitic to understand this, is you.
>>94766759>Winter is bad>What's bad about it>Shut upI have to ask, when Marcis killed your entire dwarf clan, did he do it with his bare hands, or did he use some sort of humiliating tool of violation?Because that's the only thing I can think of that earned his way into having his name written on the contents page of your own personal book of grudges.
>>94754763Well yeah, BECMI's crunch falls apart after Expert. The autism is for internal consistency is a welcome addition.
>>94766846>No, because cold is a specific complaint.So are slow and bloated, and let's not pretend that your favorite system is reknowned for being swift and svelte.You're playing a weird game of trying to be as tiresome as you can be, to drive away everyone, and then hoping you can make an unanswered claim of victory in the following silence. You were given specifics, and then demanded more specifics, and further specifics, all while making it quite clear you were going to reject/dismiss everything as hard as you could. And, you imagine that this website wouldn't just call you out on your prancing.It's a shame you were cast out from Reddit, because you really can't survive in this environment where people are only too happy to call you out on your bullshit. Now that I think of it, even the idiots at Reddit saw through your bullshit.
>>94766103I really like OSRIC, it's basically 1e cleaned up and simplified as groups in the 80s actually played it.
How does ACKS 2 compare to 1?
>>94766900No, slow and bloated aren't specific, they're vague and generalized.Right, I'm going to be entirely sincere here and not insult you because if that is the problem here then calling you names won't solve this. I want to say something before going any further.I am entirely sincere in liking ACKS. I honestly don't think what you've given in the past is specific, I truly think it's vague and I always thought it was because you were a massive piece of shit who wanted to just sling mud. Everything I'm saying is entirely honest, and I'm not playing games, I just don't understand where you come from, this post is my attempt at an olive branch.Here is what I mean when I say specific; I'll even give 2 separate examples of what specific sound like:>5e combat is badly designed because HP bloat rapidly gets out of control, it is unable to survive when large numbers of people are involved, the action economy has a very narrow Goldilocks zone when it comes to the 'right number of enemies' which is ranged about 1 enemy to Party members * 1.5 tops, anything beyond that fucks everything up. Even solo enemies have to have lair actions propping them up to make them viable. There's loads of trap options that fuck you over if you take them and the best thing to do in almost any situation is Grug your enemy to death by hitting them every turn until they stop moving, focusing on one enemy at a time because there's no penalties for enemies being wounded but not downed. Enemies are also mechanically incentivised to fight to the death, anything from a squirrel to Tiamat acts this way and all these things combined make fights a slog. It is slow and it is bloated.
>>94767160>3.5e combat is badly designed because numbers go up is the only way they make enemies more dangerous. This causes a very narrow range of enemies that are tactically viable for the DM to present as challenges, weak enemies fall like chaff while stronger ones quickly become impossible to handle due to Big Numbers (Note: 5e, for its flaws, solves this to some degree with bonded accuracy, which isn't a perfect solution but was at least an attempt to fix something), again, the action economy fucks whichever group is smaller and there's far, far too many trap options, to the point where things even I, IRL, could do are considered 'feats', of which you only get a small number, they're precious and you can't afford to spend them doing things every moron should be able to do. Again the best solution most the time is everyone ganging up on a single enemy and beating them with sticks because there's no wounded penalties, no reason not to and no chance they'll back down. Worse still, some classes have an obscene, absurd number of options (Read as 'Wizards') and slow things to a crawl. 3.5e combat can be very slow and very bloated for this reason.The statement comes after the specifics and the specifics act as evidence for the statement.Now, what I want from you is the specifics of where you see problems, this is the information I'm looking for that, as far as I know, you've never given me.I am not an unreasonable man, if you say something I agree with, I'll admit it, I promise, I'm not trying to get a gotcha here, I'm trying to meet you half way on this.
>>94767166I cannot make clear enough that I'm coming at you with this question in good faith, I promise, I'm completely open to actually talking this out.And, on the other side of that, just to be perfectly clear, I swear to fucking god, if you dodge answering this with some petty bullshit excuse? I'm going to hunt you down in any thread you post in going forward and shit down your throat every chance I get.This is my one and only attempt at a civilized discussion with you. if you spit in my face then I'm going to take that to mean exactly what it does, that you're a fucking bullshitter who hates it for the obvious reasons you'd never admit and is just trying to justify that with any cover you can to avoid the conversation going:>I hate ACKS>Why?>Because [Culture war]>Fuck off retardThe ball is in your court.
>>94755614>Jesus in fantasy
>>94766917It incorporates a lot of the heroic fantasy handbook by default and brings most of the things that are currently in Axioms into the fold.Personally I like it.
>>94767160>Everything I'm saying is entirely honest,lol.No one has any reason to believe you.Especially because you're happy to say "i won't insult you" before immediately going for some insults. You lie so easily and frequently you even lie about lying.You like ACKS? Who cares. That's basically you just admitting your bias, without realizing that's your cart before the horse. You are sincere only in that you are sincerely biased.Looking into why ACKS got banned from Reddit, it seems that the ACKS discord tried to do some smooth-brained thread manipulation there and got banned as a result. They thought they were being clever, without really appreciating that the rest of the world, even the idiots on Reddit, are not dumb enough for their "scheme" to work.Please, don't continue to insult the people here. Don't belittle our intelligence by saying we have any reason to treat you as anything but an incredibly biased idiot, who argues in the most tedious method imaginable. Want to discuss the game? Present yourself in a way where someone might imagine you can carry a conversation about it, and not just dismiss valid and common complaints because you feel personally attacked. You've failed hard here and now, and made that basically impossible, so next time try to curb your bias and not get people to immediately call you out. I'm actually kind of shocked by how many people told you to go fuck yourself.
>>94767325>Cunts out of the discussion by pretending to be incensed over what was said, complete with 'hurr you admitted to liking it, that means I win'Thanks for confirming what I already knew in my heart of hearts, you absolute wart of a human being. Now I truly know that I can call you exactly what you are without a shred of guilt over if maybe I've simply misjudged you.No, going forward I can live in the certainty that Anti-ACKSfucker truly is the exactly the piece of shit you appear to be. Thank god for that.And for anyone else reading this, for more on this 'person' and their prior shenannigans;https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/94492356/#94513931https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/94415189/#94426652Enjoy reading them getting raped around the room and have a list of all the subhumanoids favourite terms;https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/text/ACKShill/https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/text/ACKS%20boring/https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/text/ACKS%20tedious/https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/text/ACKS%20heartbreaker/https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/text/ACKS%20dishonest/Just so you can all see by their formatting that this is the exact.Same.Person.And they've been at it for over 2 years by this point.The Fish Logistics saga is particularly entertaining, especially right at the end where they have to finally resort to 'Players should be enslaved to the whim of the DM and you should punish players for doing things you don't approve of'Oh and for the record>Don't belittle our intelligence>Our intelligenceNo, just yours.You're alone in all of this.Always have been and always will be.
Whoops, I forgot one example of them being a complete scumfuck and gettign meme'd on, let me just put that here as well;https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/93954915/#93960406
>>94767394You're getting your own ass raped in those threads, and trying to reframe them and hoping no one actually reads them to see you getting your ass raped is just more of your "i think everyone here is an idiot" belief in action.Hell, you just linked plenty of those 'specific' arguments you were earlier pretending didn't exist, and they get quite detailed in their complaints about the system. Quite the fuck up on your part.Do you really not understand that no one has any reason to take anything you say at face value? That you're a caustic cunt of a liar, with an open and obvious bias that colors everything you post, and even just a single post from you in this thread had people telling you that you needed to shut up and fuck off?I'm shocked, because I thought only a few people cared enough about your antics to call you out on them, but it seems like you seem to really want this entire board to hate you and your game and won't rest until even 4chan goes "Holy shit, Reddit was right about these cunts."What a legacy. Getting 4chan and Reddit to agree that you're too gay for them.
>>94766419>The best argument against ACKS may be how much effort these losers put into pretending that all the arguments against ACKS don't exist and were never voicedso it's a good game but shitty people play it?
>>94767476Mediocre game with apparently incredibly shitty people.Not "bad" like Black Tokyo bad, just mediocre in the "netflix remake of a classic movie that has none of the talent or vision of the original" kind of mediocre way. Watchable, but forgettable, and incredibly odd to see anyone championing.
>>94767325>You want to discuss it but don't immediately concede that I'm right and you're wrong? Heh, looks like you're bias, unlike meNo anon, you're in the wrong and he was completely right about you. It's incredible that he knew exactly how you would act.
>>94767476Like the fans or not, ACKS is a good game that does exactly what it advertises.>Be an adventurer>Be a conqueror>Be a KingSimple as.
>>94767457>Hell, you just linked plenty of those 'specific' arguments you were earlier pretending didn't exist, and they get quite detailed in their complaints about the system.You mean the one time you posted a single chart, only for someone to go>Yes but you missed that's one step out of 4-5, the other ones balance out your compla->REEEEEEAnyone who doesn't believe me on this is welcome to go look by the way. Unlike him, I'm not afraid to just let the evidence speak for itself instead of gaslighting about how I totes won every argument.
>>94767160>>94767166>>94767195You did your best anon.Some people are just fucking insane.
>>94767207>jesus outside of fantasy
>>94767537>adventurer/conqueror/king>less exciting than being an entry-level accountant
>>94767554nta, I looked over the links before getting bored.You have to accept that having 5 steps with independent tables to calculate the price of beer and wine is a niche interest. When you like a niche thing you don't get to stand and demand people explain why they don't like the niche, you are the minority and you should convince others.It's like asking why people don't like anime, they tell you wrong stuff, you correct them, but they still won't be interested in watching it. Because you didn't bring people to the niche, you fought people who didn't care in the first place. If anything you made it harder for others to get them to try.
>>94751546>5E has the best>FighterOnly the one with combat manouvers, warmaster, was it? I really enjoyed that subclass but eldritch knight is a mess and champion is a joke.>BarbCan't say, but we had this one with transformation powers in our party, it was way too OP in combat as long as she had transformation charges.>Clericno, they're absolutely pathetic since they lost access to Harness Divine Power and other self-buff combat spells, they got flanderized into being WoW priests; Command is still one of the best spells in the game if you're GM isn't a pussy
>>94767665See, I can actually engage with this. I'm running ACKS and I don't use those tables myself (All my cities so far are custom made rather than random rolled)But there's a difference between 'This world gen tool might be useful to some people, but not me' and 'This entire system is shit, it's always been shit, always going to be shit and here's my proof, [insert single table taken entirely out of context here]'Go read the part about fishing and look at how angry he gets over it when the entire point was 'No, sometimes, those tables you keep calling useless are valuable', then follow through to the other link and see where that leads so you can realize just how committed this person is to being a shit. To extend your own metaphor; OP asked what anime I'd recommend, I suggested ACKSvangelion and this shithead immediately kicks in the door and starts raving about how that anime is badwrong, then starts calling anyone who recommends it the same person and/or a bad person.Because he's got brain worms over it.(Also just for the record and to be clear, those tables? Purely used in world gen, not, importantly, at the table as he kept claiming.)
>>94767394>Every post they make is an attempt to hammer the discussion termination button as hard as possible, filled with thought terminating cliches and attempts to shame anyone out of further conversation.>These people don't just live where healthy discussion goes to die, they've started a fucking commune there.>You'll never fit in, because your entire function is the opposite of the function of this board.>People are here to talk about things. You are here to do your damnedest make sure they don't.Very relevant to this thread and particularly these posts >>94767160 >>94767166 >>94767195
>>94767665Anime is a broad medium though. It's also basically mainstream now, especially among younger people.Turning an RPG into a the most boring version of fantasy imaginable, complete with spreadsheets to track the price of fish, is so niche that it borders on parody.
>>94767716You're thinking of druids instead of barbs, barbs can be even more OP. And the Cleric you want is war cleric, they have self and area buff spells.>>94767760I see, that makes sense. I'm not really in the market for OSR games atm so I have no stake in this grill.Still, fighting other people isn't a rational way to make your niche interest more popular. If it's fun for you I'm not the fun police, but it's not a way to get people interested in playing anything.
>>94767958I don't know. I once had a conversation with a friend where he kept saying he wanted things that wh40k had, like comically specific some times, but he had no clue what wh40k is. So I showed him a picure, it has meassuring tape, he tells me to fuck off with that shit.Making realistic market developments isn't all that niche once you're inside the simulationist niche, the distances become smaller than outside in normal people land.Anon said it was just a world generation tool too, those get pretty crazy. It doesn't reflect the game.
>>94751280>which best?The one you and your group finds the most enjoyable. And it applies to all games out there, not just DnD.Since the trivial answer to a non-question was given, I've got to ask a real one: what was the point of making this thread? Was it that image? Was it filling up the catalog? Thread sliding?
>>94768015clearly the intentended reading is "what's your favorite" or "what's best for you".But out of respect for you I'm saging too.
>>94767966>I see, that makes sense. I'm not really in the market for OSR games atm so I have no stake in this grill.>Still, fighting other people isn't a rational way to make your niche interest more popular. If it's fun for you I'm not the fun police, but it's not a way to get people interested in playing anything.Perfectly reasonable. Honestly, my only stake in this is, and you can quote me on this, 'I think ACKS is kinda neat'.I've got no great stake in it or anything, it's just this fucker is such an asshole about it that I guess I dig my heels in. You want to see how he acts when someone tries to talk to him like an actual human being, scroll up and take a look.He's the kind of person that deserves to be punched in the gob once a day, every day at lunch time, because if he's not done something to deserve it up until that point, he's going to do something by dinner time.
>>94768015>I've got to ask a real one: what was the point of making this thread?Presumably he wants to know which system is most mechanically sound and has the most interesting play.'The one you find enjoyable' is weak. That's like someone asking you what musical instrument they should take up and your reply is 'The one that works for you'.Yeah, but I'm trying to find out which one works for me by asking people who I think know about musical instruments. Don't pull that wax on, wax off shit on me, I'm trying to get your opinion as someone I think has something to teach me.
>>94768074How do you imagine you can pretend to be taken seriously as a sane individual with a level-headed stance and no deep bias, when half your post is dedicated to expressing violent insanity? You're more parody than human at this point, just like your favorite system is more parody than game.I'd like you to remember this; I'm not the first, second, third, fourth, or even fifth person to tell you're that you're a fuckhead, even in this thread alone.
>>94767394>https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/94492356/#94513931>https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/94415189/#94426652How the hell can anyone look at this and say that you're the one who was 'getting ass raped'.I've never seen any thread where so many people played soggy biscuit with one persons shit opinion as that OSR thread.
>>94751280Spellcasters should not be a playable class. Their role is strictly supportive NPCs or bad guys
>>94768129It's always amusing how you need to shift into lies and hyperbole at every step, because that's the only way you imagine you can "win" an "argument". You're trying to misrepresent a post directly above yours, like you imagine everyone is inclined to only believe in your posts, even when lying about something only a couple pixels above your lie.This isn't really even an argument. This is you wondering how you can salvage a situation where your activities have rendered people lining up to throw shit at you, and being so fucking dumb you only know how to make things worse. And, the irony is that I'm giving you the advice you need, and your response is to make yourself out into even more of joke.The reason I reminded you about the people lining up to throw shit at you is because you are so heavily invested in the idea that you can treat this board (and likely the internet as a whole) as some kind of numbers game, where if you pretend your side is big and the other side is small, you win. The reality? The [not completely retarded] people here don't care about how many people are arguing one side or another, they care about the arguments, and you're genuinely terrible at every aspect. Logic, rhetoric, even just basic banter. And, as you struggle with basic arguments and instead turn towards trying to treat this board like a numbers game, the more the actual numbers will go against you.People are lining up to throw shit at you because you're dumb and say dumb things. If you want me to stay quiet and let you self-destruct just like the ACKS discord did on Reddit, just remember that I'm not your worst enemy. That'd be you.
ACKS is pretty fun. I've ran one campaign in it, in the middle of running another one, and then it's either me playtesting my dark elf book - which is almost ready for publication - or my friend is going to run something mysterious in it.
>>94768279>All this effort made to desperately pretend he's got a point>Has to record to talking about how popular he and his positions are, discord, reddit, anything except the topic at hand>All while pretending he has the arguments>When he can't even answer a question as basic as 'What alternative system do you recommend then?'You really have nothing, do you? All you have is 'You're wrong, you're bad, you're smelly, I'm right, take my advice and stop talking, no one agrees with you, everyone agrees with me, I am the bestests that ever was and you're nothing'You truly are the most poorly socialized toddler this board has ever seen.
>>94768299At some point I'm going to commit to running a dwarven campaign with it.I've wanted to do a dwarf kingdom ever since Throne of Night fell through years ago.
>>94768314One of the players that unfortunately had to drop was a Dwarven Sporecaster. Holy shit are they fun but it's also a little bit hard to deal with as Judge because they eventually learn to animate an infinite number of undead with a touch. It hasn't come up yet because I asked the player not to, but also he gets to talk and scout the dungeon just by talking to the various slimes that live in it. Another player played a Mechanist variant, and those are pretty silly, because at max level with a massive gold investment, he's doing 4d6 damage twice a round and has an AC of 27. It's pretty ridiculous.
>>94768299Holy shit, dark elf anon, your work is honestly not to my personal taste, but I respect the fuck out of you for the work that's gone into it.
>>94768056>clearly the intentended reading is "what's your favorite" or "what's best for you".... which doesn't change my answer.>>94768087>'The one you find enjoyable' is weakExcept that's literally the only solution. What does it matter if system is "sound", if you aren't enjoying it? And it's not a rhetorical question, I want you to genuinely ponder on this issue before answering.Also>That's like someone asking you what musical instrument they should take up and your reply is 'The one that works for you'.Except that's literally how it works>but I'm trying to find out which one works for me With instruments, you would have to try few examples from each group, along the lines of what music you actually want to play, then pick one that suits you best in the end.But since this is DnD, you are ALREADY in your "favourite group" and "favourite subgroup", so the choice literally boils down to "the one you enjoy the most".This is not rocket science nor a slide answer. It's just how it works. I find it confusing you struggle with such basic concept
>>947512803.5efinder, no matter your personal experiences, are the best versions of the formula. D20 classic systems are robust in general, but 3.5e and Pathfinder 1e are the best, both for their robust mechanics (for games following the formula, of course, it can't compare to stuff like GURPS) and glut of options, even if going by core. If you don't like them, then you won't like the D&D formula.
>>94768420>I find it confusing you struggle with such a basic conceptAnon, I'm going to try and help you understand this from the point of view of someone who isn't so dense they've got their own event horizon. I hope you aren't just playing stupid.Most people prefer systems that 'aren't bullshit'. 'Bullshit' comes in a variety of possible flavours, being arbitrary, being poorly designed, being obtuse, or fiddly, or having fundamental flaws in how it works.While, yes, everyone has a slightly different tolerance for the various flavours of 'bullshit', there are some systems out there that everyone can agree are 'bullshit'.FATAL for example. You can argue about it all day, but no one enjoys FATAL, and if you want to argue with me on that, go roll up a character then come back to me when you are forced to reluctantly admit that I was right.OP is asking us, as a board that has played a lot of games, to give suggestions on games he could try that he might enjoy.He will then take those suggestions and play them himself to see which one works best for him & his group.He's not asking us to read his mind or cast the runes so we can figure out which game is the one he'd enjoy the most.He is asking for our help, our suggestions and recommendations on systems that we, personally, have enjoyed.You could even tell him why you enjoyed them so that he can go 'Well I like the sound of that/That sounds about as enjoyable as being personally abandoned by God.'It even gives us the chance to all discuss the virtues and flaws of systems we like/dislike.You're not obtuse Anon, I know you're pretending to be, but since I answered your question, I'm going to ask one in return (or rather, two that are strongly connected).Why are you pretending to be instead of just giving OP your honest answer and moving on? Why do you feel the need to make things difficult for someone who is asking for your help?
>>94766076He got banned from there for running a vote farming brigade for marketing. He also got banned from rpg.net because he got mad and threatened to sue the site owners. Macris is just a giant baby that is insufferable to deal with.That's all not mentioning him bankrolling a pedophile.
Honestly, reading this thread really reinforces the idea that I would have likely read and tried out ACKS years ago with a test game or oneshot, were it not for the annoying people who argue for and against it. >its fans all seem to have a personal grudge against the concept of D&D, and brigade against it at every opportunity, as well as never articulating the reasons people should play ACKS, and when they provide examples, they only ever show me things that are possible within D&D with a little work on the part of the GM>its detractors are either redditors who ad hominem the author, or complete autists who brigade against ACKS like the ACKS fans brigade against D&DIf someone could give any reasons to actually play/not play the game, I would have likely looked into it by now.
>>94768409Well, thank you! And honestly, I mostly wrote the book for myself. I like dark elves as a concept and I wanted to nail down the rules so that I could run it. The book is financially a net negative - I've spent 1500 on editing, and there's gonna be about a grand spent on art. But I don't care about any of that. I'll have something to my name and it'll feel pretty good, y'know. It might not be much, but it'll be my own, and hey there's a non-zero chance that someone might use something from it.
>>94768576There was no farming brigade, it was literally his fans from the Discord. When he saw it was getting out of hand, he told them to stop, but at that point the damage was done. There was no lawsuit, Macris just correctly pointed out that he theoretically could claim defamation and then rpg.net's legal team said "Actually yes he can," and then rpg.net mods and admins just decided to ban all mentions of it.
>>94768651>as well as never articulating the reasons people should play ACKSAs someone that dislikes D&D and likes ACKS?I don't have a grudge against D&D, I just think ACKS does D&D better than D&D does. Call it a personal preference but I think 5e is very poorly designed.As for why people should play ACKS? It's a game without a 'sweet spot'.Every version of D&D has a Goldilocks zone where everything works, where fighters and wizards are on a kind of even keel, the options aren't too bullshit, ect. It's that bit between rusty dagger shank town and everyone going 'Alright, the fun is fading, let's start a new campaign'.ACKS doesn't have that. Because the sweet spot for ACKS is level 1 through 14, there's never a level where you don't have something going on.That's the way I pitch it to people. I don't have to mention mass combat, ruling a kingdom, ect.Just plain old simple 'It starts strong and goes strong throughout'.
>>94768651Thing is, it's a bit disingenuous to say that older editions of D&D are capable of doing what ACKS does. Like for example, domains:Yes, technically the book does say that at 9th level, the fighter gets a castle, a personal guard, and a bunch of men-at-arms. That's it. There's no rules for anything else - how big is this parcel of land? How much value does it produce? How much upkeep does it consume? What can you actually do with this land? How often do monster attacks happen? What if the fighter doesn't want a castle, can he build something else? Can he train more cavalry? Why not? What is the growth rate of the domain? Are there trade routes?I'm not saying that you NEED all this. In my ACKS campaign only two of the PCs wanted to actually do anything with their domains. One is building a clockwork elf mine (like dwarves but they look like elves) and the other has a standard domain. One of the PCs just built a giant ziggurat (technically is still building as it's gonna take 10 years) made the domain be net cash positive, and is just dicking around. Another build a hideout, did some hijinks, and now just serves as the intelligence agency for the domain player. The fifth has a couple of followers, but isn't entire sure what to do with them. Other than that, I mean you're not wrong. Any fantasy d20 game is going to be pretty similar to one another. You have your scrubs turning into powerful heroes doing stuff. There's rules for dungeons and adventuring. I like the throw mechanics and ascending AC quite a bit, because you can do larger scale combat. It also has rules for REALLY large-scale combat (like thousands-to-tens of thousands of people) but we've done that only once. Pic is the next session we're going to do, with the PCs (at the bottom right) are going to fight a bunch of inverse snakes (chichimechs from 3.5, modified for ACKS).
>>94768751It gets a bit rocket tag-y at high levels, but that's true of every single edition of a d20 RPG that isn't 5E (which has the opposite effect since everyone is a HP sponge)
>>94768787I'd take rocket tag any day over 'Oh god, it's 3d6 goblins, call your significant others lads, we're going to be here until morning.'Besides, most rocket tag can be avoided by not getting yourself in stupid situations where they can tag you in the first place.
>>94768796You really have no way of not sounding like a pathetic shill, do you?"That criticism? THANK GOD for it, because otherwise [extreme opposite]!
>>94768796Mmmm. I was toying around with DPR caps for both PCs and baddies, but ehhhh seems like too much work for not enough payout.
>>94768812>He's at the point where he has to pretend that 5e doesn't have HP bloat and defend it.Orc, 3.5: https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/orc.htmOrc, 5e: https://5e.tools/bestiary.html#orc_mm(You): https://5e.tools/bestiary.html#reduced-threat%20otyugh_tftyp
>>94768847How much damage are you talking about anyway, on both sides, give or take?
>>94768781>anime portraitsDidn't read.
>>94768880stfu nogames>>94768868Well, the fighter can consistently put out 15 damage per swinggreatsword 5 dmg+3 from bonus+3 from ogre's strength+1 oil+1 inspire courage+1 bless+1 prayerWhich means that on average she can drop a 3-4 HD creature and go on a cleaving spree. The mechanist has power armor that does 4d6+3 2x a round and has an AC of 27. As well as a portable ballista that does 9d6+7 (not sure about the +7 but at that point it doesn't matter).Again don't get me wrong it's not a HUGE issue because at the same time, the opposition has spells and damage out the ass as well.
>>94768651>complete autists who brigade against ACKS like the ACKS fans brigade against D&DTake away the ACKS discord and their activities that have gotten them banned just about everywhere they can get banned, and ACKS has really nothing people would talk about. OSRs are a dime a dozen, and ACKS is a fairly lazy one at that. No creativity in its design, with most of any effort being used to expand the page count. ACKS's design is like a student having to write a 1,000 word essay on a book they didn't read, after copying someone else's answer for 100 words and then being forced to freestyle just to hit the word count.
>>94768751That's a better pitch than most, I will agree. But I also feel the same about 3rd edition and its derivatives, and that system has demonstrable flaws that have been documented for years. Basing it entirely on "I like it and I think that it's fun at all levels" ultimately relies upon someone's personal opinion of the person recommending it's taste. And I don't know you, anon. Apologies.>>94768781I don't disagree that ACKS is capable of doing domain and mass level play straight out of the gate. But I also added a qualifier that i feel is the most important part of the discourse around recommending a whole new fantasy RPG system to someone:>things that are possible within D&D with a little work on the part of the GMI am the GM for 99% of the games I'm in. I like making these systems and making them matter. Perhaps i should have clarified that as a GM I actively enjoy making minigames and subsystems to flesh out aspects of the world that players want to engage with. Especially if I already know a "good enough" system in and out. I'm not going to make the argument that having mechanics for every aspect of domain level play is pointless autism, and make glib remarks about ASOIAFags and their tax policy. (Especially when it's just that I prefer to make my own autistic systems.) But why should I spend time learning a new system, or starting new games with a new system?
>>94768943>I don't disagree that ACKS is capable of doing domain and mass level play straight out of the gateHaving rules for something doesn't necessarily make them good rules. Even 5e has rules for mass combat.
>>94768943Nah man, obviously you do you. I like ACKS but I also have an 11-page house rules document because some of the design decisions were questionable, or I needed to make a ruling and then wrote it down. And obviously if you enjoy making the subsystems, then yeah you should pick your favorite system and do that. But like, speaking personally, I don't know enough about small-scale economics to make an economic subsystem that isn't going to wreck the gameworld via its implications. The nice thing about ACKS is that in the supplemental stuff (AXIOMS) the guy actually went into the mechanical detail of how he designed his world and the systems in it, so it becomes rather trivial to iterate a system on top of that. It's also funny that he claims that he doesn't have autism. Lol. Lmao. But yeah, I mean, if you have something that you find enjoyable... then yeah I would say there's no reason to switch. I only learned about ACKS recently-ish when I was doing a Dragonlance campaign in 5e and the players were like "Well, we're traveling from Palanthas to Kalaman, is there anything we can purchase so that we can make a profit?" and it all snowballed from there.
>>94768991>5e has rules for mass combatNo it doesn't. They're UA, not part of any official book. And they borrow some stuff from ACKS (the Battle Rating and unit "size"). And they're woefully simplistic compared to ACKS.
>>94768943>I like making these systems and making them matter.In that case, ACKS isn't for you, since one of the things its pitched on is 'everything fits together and smoothly runs one into the next', if you like building your own homebrew for sub-systems then yeah, it's not your jam.
>>94768996Just stop replying. There's no point. Reply to people who reply to him.
>>94768943>But I also feel the same about 3rd edition and its derivatives, and that system has demonstrable flaws that have been documented for years.Isn't 3.5 the exact system that started the whole 'You reach a certain level and all 4 wheels violently explode away from the cart' meme? E6 exists for a reason.
>>94769011UA is official material.And it's based on AD&D's mass combat rules, you complete mong.
>>94769036bruh
>>94769018Yes, it was! And yes, it does! No, it does not change my opinion, I am still fond of it.
>>94769050>Yes, it was! And yes, it does! No, it does not change my opinion, I am still fond of it.I respect you for loving it, warts and all anon. Good on you.
>>94769041It's still first party material, just in a draft form. Might as well say the Silmarillion isn't official.
>>94769050>>94769018Yeah, 3.5 has a certain charm to it. It's jank as fuck though. Limiting people to tier 3-4 seems to work.
>>94769061Bro, come the fuck on. It EXPLICITLY says this. Like, who the fuck are you kidding?
>>94769067Back in the day I had so much 3.5 3rd party content saved up, it was obscene.
>>94751760holyman and magicman should both be the same classits literally just reading approved theology or anything you want including apocryphal texts
>>94769073Read the full paragraph. Usable in your campaign, but not permitted in Adventures League events. Basically, we're talking about two different definitions of "official", with the "official" they're using there being whether its approved for use in a league.
>>94769077Yeah same. I was expecting the trove to always be there. ALAS. This is only what I have left.
>>94769111I'd hook you up, but sadly I'm away from home at the moment.
>>94769114Thanks for the offer! At the same time I don't see myself running anything 3.5 in the near future.
>>94769111I'm still not over the Trove being obliterated. It was so convenient that I never thought I'd need to have my own backup archive.I'll never forgive RPGdrivethrough.
>>94769105"you are allowed to use this"what a pack of twatsgood thing : they dont mind me doing thatthat i didnt pay for that book and that i dont play adventurers league
>ACKSfags still pretend they don't know why they've been banned everywhere and pretend its politicsPolitics is probably like 10%, at most, since the game isn't that political. The way you act is 80%+.
>>94769155>that i didnt pay for that book UA was free though.
>>94769041At the end of the day, more importantly, what do the 5e rules offer?Mechanically I mean. A system incentivises what it rewards.ACKS offers actual rewards for engaging with its various mechanics, there's always XP to be had.I imagine 5e mass combat rules lean more towards 'Oh yeah this is for a set piece, I'll give Quest XP afterwards'
>>94769238I mean, I honestly don't care. There's 0 chance I'm going to run anything in 5E and while I'm currently in a 5E game, I'm mostly checked out of it.
>>94769235Official has more than a single definition and application, just like a man can be black (color) and black (race), or black but not black.Official in regards to being 1st party material sanctioned and available for home use is a valid definition, even if its not official for league use.
>>94769109Why are acks fans so stereotypical anyway
Bringing the entire thread back to the OP.I still recommend ACKS, specifically because he said he wanted crafting and exploration.And ACKS has more crafting than you can shake a wizards dick at.
>>94768532>No answer to thisYou're a coward anon, I want you to know that.
>>94769656Well yeah. Gonna give it a try soon. Seems promising from skimming the PDF. But to be honest, I knew this thread will generate some shit flinging, due to the focus on D&D, but jesus don't gobble up this much bait at once (I'm looking at the ACKS community here). This discussion is just going to continue in circles until we hit the bump limit.
>>94769890Everyone can see what that faggot is writing and contributing, which is fuck all. At this point you both are just shitting up the thread until bump limit.He's obviously baiting you.
>>94770407NTAYou see, no one actually cares about discord beef.
>>94756198The 4e Fighter is capable of that from level 1.>multiple opportunity attacks per round>opportunity attacks reduce speed to 0No feats or specific character building necessary. But people don't like a Fighter actually being good at his job for some reason.
>>947547294ewhich also has rules for cowing morale-broken enemies into submission and hiring hireling, not that anybody is aware of that because people took one look at the powers and went “this bullshit is like video games!” and immediately closed the book
