This destroys the anti-5e crowd.
no it doesn't
Just play whatever you want and shut the fuck up.
>>98584055No it does not. 5th ed was made for the masses, 3.5e was where it peaked.
>mfw I see this memeI'm going to burn all my books and delete my pdfs now. I've seen the light.
>>98584081Nah, 3.x was the beginning of the fall. It was the first shit twinkie in a series of ever shittier twinkies.
>>98584055I prefer my chart, but I'm glad you enjoy what you like, OP
>>98584055This >>98584291Just look up people playing 5e and it's all theater kids larping.
>>98584055Your labels are wrong.Left side is "LARPING"Right side is "Taxes"Most games fall somewhere in the middle of this spectrum, with 5e being closer to the "Taxes" end of things (being D&D), FATE being almost all the way at "LARPING" and most good TTRPGs being near the middle, where mechanics and RP mix seamlessly.
>>98584765Yeah, because it's a streamed game and they're performing a show rather than genuinely playing the game, though you might also just be confusing roleplaying with larping because you think TTRPGs are a numbers game without any narrative of any kind, and you would be objectively incorrect.>>98584243This is true to an extent. 3.X has done irreparable damage to the TTRPG scene as a whole, making everyone think build autism and min-maxing is the only way to have a TTRPG and anything less than ultracrunch with 50000 useless options and like 10 good ones is "theater kid larp".
>>98584055what about the literally-doesn't-ca5e crowd?
>>98584055No lies spoken
>>98584996>Slop reaction imageWe accept your concession
>>98585000> You called it slop, you never called it wrong. I accept your concession
>>98584996What's so good about 5e?
>>98584996
>>98585103people will play itgood luck getting anybody to play anything else these days
>>98585115>good luckas if everyone has charisma so low that they need to really on luck instead of skill and natural born talent to get people excited to play something non d'andee
>>98584055OP please add another axis to this chart.I don't know what that axis should be, but it feels appropriate.
>>98585115People played Suicide Squad Kill the Justice League. Didn't make it good. Again, what's so good about 5e?
>>98584055That is kind of schizophrenia you get when shills don't play neither D&D 5e nor other TTRPGs.
>>985851395e, in a nutshell, takes the universal resolution mechanic from 3e (roll a d20+modifiers against a binary pass/fail Target Number), and then also included a universal influencer in the form of the Advantage/Disadvantage subsystem.These form a good, solid foundation, with the d20 being very easy to use and the math being incredibly easy to work with (flat distribution, increments of 5%), while ADV/DVD provides more reliable and consistent results when the situation is determined to warrant it (and constantly giving players one of the things they appreciate/dread the most: ample re-rolls). The rest of the system is hit-or-miss, but there's so much material (and new stuff being constantly made by 3rd parties) that even if only 5% of the system was worth looking at, that would still mean more material than the entirety of most systems, and there's even people in the community doing the work of sifting through all the garbage just to find the best parts for you.D&D has always been a game that was too big to be left to any one person or one company, and what makes 5e good is really just that it is the game with the largest and most active community that actively rewards participation in the form of stupid amounts of money and even fame for being even a mediocre designer. Not all of 5e is good, but with Sturgeon's Law dictating that 90% of everything is crud, it's not unreasonable to like 5e for whatever that 10% of it you might agree with isn't crud, because that's more than enough to play good games with.
>>98585186See, that's a much better explanation, thank you.
>>98584055>D&D 5e>BasedOh boi, I'm laffin'.
>>98584944>though you might also just be confusing roleplaying with larpingI'm using the term larping in the same context that OP is. If you have a problem with the phrasing, take it up with him.
>>98585115I can get people to run my own homebrew systems for me, sounds like a skill issue on your part.
>>98585633OP is, as usual, a faggot.
>>985849443.5 was fun because it had so much superfluous detail with all that detail having their own mechanics. It didn't really feel samey like 5e does. Too bad it's only remembered for minmax autism and questionable balance
>>98585115I am. What are you dying from that's stopping you?
>>98585852Minmax autism, questionable balance and the most obnoxious fanbase of fhe era.
>>98585852I can tell you with absolute certainty 3.X was a steaming hot mess of terrible game design. All it has is glut after glut of recycled, poorly-balanced content. And no, you don't need mechanics for everything, that's called bloat, and 3.X was the master of bloat.5e doesn't have that issue. For example, instead of Detect [thing] repeated like 20 times, Detect Evil and Good lumps them all into one spell so you aren't wasting your precious spells known/prepared on one-off trash. Let's not forget 3.X also has a metric fuckton of trap options.Any problems 5e does have? They're the result of trying to please 3aboos by copying what it did. For example, they're why Rogues didn't get Tricks, Fighters don't have Maneuvers as a core feature, and casters took a whole half edition to get nerfed. Fuck 3.X, fuck Pathfinder, fuck you.
>>98584055What the fuck is crunchy supposed to even mean you illiterate subhuman fuck? It would suffice just to say 5e is retarded, because it is. Learn to read beyond the scope of your common core permanent serf caste education then come back and try to make a thread. You fucking nuhuman consumermaxpilled modern audiance retardigrades are so annoying.
>>98585852eh, 3.5 also had lots of very boring slop that barely did anything, or was just yet another way of accessing and using the same spells (so in the end whatever flavor the class has just results in doing the same things as any other caster class)
>>98585908>What the fuck is crunchy supposed to even meanLurk moar.
>>98584055Your dichotomy is false, your game is bad, and you should feel bad.
This destroys the 5e crowd
>What makes 5e good is that there's a lot of people playing it!I pity people with no RPG friends.>>98585186>but there's so much materialThere's really not that much material outside adventures when you compare to other editions of D&D or other older games like gurps, runequest, OWoD, Shadowrun, SW d6 and so on. Those older games also come with the benefit of generally being compatible between editions instead of every edition reinventing the wheel.>Advantage/Disadvantage goodWrong. It fundamentally holds combat back. It would have been fine if it was only for skills, but having it being the major thing that changes your chances in combat was a purposeful attack against having combat be anything but a boring slugtfest.
Grognard dungeon crawls are mostly OSR. They tend to be at least as rules-light as the theater kid shit.
>>98587072You're objectively wrong, and it's probably because you haven't taken a real look at all the 5e-compatible material produced by 3rd parties. In the last decade, there's been a never-ending stream of publishers throwing books into what's essentially a giant gaping pit.To put things in perspective, GURPS has over 600+ titles on DrivethruRPG. That's pretty impressive.Shadowrun? 900+. 5e-compatible?17,159.5e has more shit being made for it than several of the games you listed COMBINED. There's ten new kickstarters for it every week, enough stuff already made for it that no singular human could read through it all in their lifetime, and millions of dollars are being thrown about.>Wrong. It fundamentally holds combat backYou mean it's one of the few features that speeds combat up, and almost everything other than it is what slows it down. It not stacking and being so ubiquitous helps simplify a lot of what used to be considerably more complex, which unfortunately resulted in design space opening up for all sorts of fumbly mechanics to be thrown on top.>combat be anything but a boring slugtfest.That sounds like a "you" issue. A skill issue. If you can't figure out how to make 5e combat fun and exciting, you're basically revealing that you're inept as either a GM or player.
>>98587176So you only eat at McDonald's right?
5e players are pretty much mostly neophytes, youtube onions grifters who are a bit more right-leaning than you'd expect for their phenotype and lazy people
>>98587176>In the last decade, there's been a never-ending stream of publishers throwing books into what's essentially a giant gaping pit.Quantity does not equate to quality, anon, I’m sorry,
>>98587345As any general with a surplus of infantry or artillery can tell you, quantity has a quality all of its own.Please, don't get into your whole crybaby mode. No one's saying 5e is the best game or even that it's better than [whatever game you don't play because you spend too much time malding about 5e]. 5e just has a few aspects that give it an advantage over a lot of other systems, and being the game that 1-in-2 people play and what 80%+ of people producing content for focus on is an advantage, unfair or otherwise.
>>98584055Still inferior to just plain old B/X
>>98587369We can read the thread retard, this isn't your discord where you can delete posts to gaslight mouthbreathers.
>>98587369Anon, you’re being way too defensive. I just dispute anyone that tries to appeal to popularity when it comes to RPGs. Especially for games where the primary audience is bottom feeders like D&D.
>>98587382I am inclined to concur.
>>98587394>>98587400You're being too contrarian, and there's really no point in pretending you're not a dimwitted troll who shakes with fury whenever someone says anything positive about 5e if you're getting this upset about something as objective as the fact that its popularity has dwarfed all other games and attracted the overwhelming majority of independent content creators for the last decade.It's faggots like you that make it difficult to talk about the more subjective qualities of what makes 5e good, because you just bad-faith complain even about good things because your goal isn't honest RPG discussion, just furiously shitposting here because you don't want to get downvotes where you usually post.
>>98587369NTA but speaking as someone who is cold on 5e but has a GM who likes it and also likes to bring in 3rd party content to patch issues and holes in the base system, my experience with all that produced content is that it is both trying to put lipstick on a pig and also pretty flawed in its own right despite the stuff my GM was using being very popular 5e content. It might technically be an advantage that there is an enormous pile of mediocre filler content for 5e once you exhaust official content, but that is only compelling if you are already happy with 5e and just want more of the same even if the quality might be a bit iffy at times. For those who aren't happy with the base system, there being more of the same isn't an advantage.
>>98587431You’re apparently mad enough to mistake multiple people as one single poster, dumbass. The only thing I’m disputing is the claim that 5e should be considered “good” based on the merit of popularity, which is a really shitty metric to go by. Plenty of people play bottom tier gacha games to the point of going into debt for them. Does that make them good? Or does it just mean their audience has a lower bar for quality?
>>98587449As someone who is pretty neutral about 5e, I will go a step further and say most of the produced content is total garbage and just reading through it makes me want to die. But, I can also say the same about most published games. It's very rare to find material made specifically for RPGs that better than material you can grab from any other source and port into your game of choice.Though, one benefit of the near-infinite slop trough that's feeding the 5e pig is that amidst the grifters, scammers, fifteen-year-olds, political activists, failed authors, and monkeys-with-typewriters is that 5e has become a nexus for indie creators with even a shred of talent, largely because it can easily turn a few months of work into hundreds of thousands of dollars. >but that is only compelling if you are already happy with 5e and just want more of the same even if the quality might be a bit iffy at times. For those who aren't happy with the base system, there being more of the same isn't an advantage.You could say the same about any game. In the subjective world of RPGs, if a game doesn't click with you, that's basically it.But, in the cut-throat world of RPGs where most of the products are incredibly similar and even just a slight advantage means people playing your game and ignoring the thousands of other competing titles, 5e has enough advantages that has left it at the top of the pile in terms of popularity.
>>98587459It could be considered good for plenty of subjective reasons, but considering that you're willing to argue about objective ones, you don't really inspire any confidence that you can handle a discussion involving anything with nuance.>5e should be considered “good” based on the merit of popularity,5e has unfair advantages, but they're still advantages. Popularity means means insane amounts of playtesting, documentation, advice, guides, and that's before you get into material to add on to the game or even drastically change it. Even just being able to join a random group and having a high chance of everyone having played 5e is an advantage. You can subjectively argue its better or worse than most other RPGs, but it's impossible to say it's not good enough to attract and sustain a community of players that exceeds all other games combined, because that's what it's objectively done. I know this upsets the contrarian in you who has a knee-jerk reaction to hate popular things, but that's largely just you failing to appreciate the irony of letting yourself be influenced by the exact forces you try to reject. Be better than that.
>>98587628You’re still trying to appeal to popularity in your argument and call it “objective” when that’s really just your opinion thigh and through. Your attempts more to act condescending and holier than thought just come off as pathetic and sad. Be better than that.
>>98587647I'm not saying 5e is objectively good because it's objectively popular. You can't say an RPG is objectively good, because how good an RPG is is incredibly subjective. That's kind of what lets you rely on your complete bad faith arguments where you view every aspect of 5e in the most negative light you can muster. The objective facts though are that 5e is popular. We can count players. We can count materials. These are objective numbers you can't do anything about other than say they're bad players or bad materials, as you would because you're just that kind of prick. If you want to be taken seriously, you need to give the slightest hint that you're able to have a discussion where you're not just spinning everything, including the objective facts you can't argue against other than to cry about they're not fair and how you don't actually understand how Appeals to Popularity work. If I said a million people think the moon is made of cheese, and because of that it must be cheese, that would be an Appeal to Popularity. Even if 7 billion people thought the moon was made of cheese, it still wouldn't be made of cheese.If I said the majority of people who play RPGs play 5e, that's just an objective fact. You can count the people yourself, if you don't want to look at all the evidence that supports that. If I said 5e benefits from popularity, that's also a fact, and while you can that popularity also brings drawbacks (like contrarians who try to poison any discussion about the game, for instance), the benefits generally outweigh the drawbacks.
>>98587701Considering yiur ooeitin was that 5e must be considered good because a lot of people play it, yes. I’m gong to treat it as an appeal to popularity. Because the qualities that make an rpg “good” are very much a matter of debate, and that includes 5e. Appeal in and of itself is not a measurement of quality, ai slop proves that much. And certain qualities that people say they enjoy about 5e like abundance of extra material and simplification are not “objectively” good since those csn easily be resounding into drawbacks due to the abundance of crap modules and how it’s in a weird limbo of not being crunchy enough for people who like bite to their game but still somehow complicated for the crowd it was being simplified for due to how often normies admit they can’t keep track of their own abilities and options from their character sheet.You can call D&D popular, easily. You could call it appealing to a particular type of gamer. You can even call it comfort ping to that crowd. But unless you’re going to break it down mechanically to tell us why 5e is superior to so many other choices for games, I’m not going to call it “good” just because a lot of people like it. Again, people find ai slop appealing, but that doesn’t make it “good” as a game. It makes it good as a product. And I’m not a Has to investor, so I don’t give a shit about it being good as a product.
>>98587733>I’m gong to treat it as an appeal to popularityLearn what an Appeal to Popularity is, you dumb fuck.It's trying to say that because a lot of people believe something, then it must be true.Here's a very simple example someone like you should be able to understand. >If I said a million people think the moon is made of cheese, and because of that it must be cheese, that would be an Appeal to Popularity. Even if 7 billion people thought the moon was made of cheese, it still wouldn't be made of cheese.If someone says "Popularity is an inherent benefit to a communal activity like RPGs", that's not an Appeal to Popularity unless they said "A lot of people believe 'Popularity is an inherent benefit to a communal activity like RPGs', so it must be true."For fuck's sake, just because "Popularity" is involved doesn't make it an Appeal to Popularity. You might as well say that anything mentioning an Authority is an Appeal to Authority, even if the statement was "Authorities are an important part of dictatorships.">But unless you’re going to break it down mechanically to tell us why 5e is superior to so many other choices for games, I’m not going to call it “good"Considering your general lack of intelligence and how you only seem to know how to argue in bad faith, I don't think anyone cares what you call good or bad. If you want to actually get to the point where we can discuss more nuanced and subjective aspects of the game like its mechanics, you need to not stumble over the first step of looking at objective and measurable facts.
>>98587794>It's trying to say that because a lot of people believe something, then it must be true.Considering your claim has been that since a lot of people play 5e it must therefore be good…Unless you’re willing to admit that’s not the case?
>>98587808My claim is that 5e's popularity is one of its strengths. Likely its main strength, considering how many 5e-likes or 5e-clones there are that make any question of some sort of inherent or objective superiority of its mechanics absolutely moot, even if we wanted to entertain the idea of inherently/objectively superior mechanics existing.And, please, for absolute fuck's sake: I'm not saying 5e is objectively good because a lot of people say it's good. I'm saying 5e's popularity has given it the benefits of that popularity, ie. shit like 3/5 people at a table wanting to play it and 2/5 being willing to put up with it. Do you follow? Are you actually struggling with this? You've had a number of chances to stop being stupid, and I'm pretty sure if you double down one more time, all doubt will evaporate that you're not just a troll, but a genuinely stupid one at that.
>>98587176>3rd partiesso, as I said, it has less material than other editions.>You mean it's one of the few features that speeds combat up,Doesn't change the fact that it completely fucks up how combat works for the exact reasons you listed. The gain in speed isn't worth the loss in everything else.The rest of your post is just adhom nonsense.
>>98587864>I'm not saying 5e is objectively good because a lot of people say it's good.Okay, good, we can at least baseline agree with that.>I'm saying 5e's popularity has given it the benefits of that popularity, ie. shit like 3/5 people at a table wanting to play it and 2/5 being willing to put up with it.That's at least fair, though I would argue that it's equally a weakness since that 2/5 could just as easily walk away from the table once they've stopped being willing to tolerate it after playing for so long.>My claim is that 5e's popularity is one of its strengths.I'll say I disagree on that being a "strength" if only because popularity is a very fleeting quality and what's a strength today is a weakness tomorrow. Years from now, once it's forgotten about, it's not going to remain a strength, but your assessment will still stand claiming it is. If you'd made a claim that its brand familiarity is a strength, for example, that is at least something that time has far less ability to take away due to the ubiquity of Dungeons and Dragon as a household name.
>>98587906>so, as I said, it has less material than other editions.3rd party material is still material.>it completely fucks up how combat worksIf you don't understand it or approach it like 3e used all its fiddly little modifiers, I can understand how you could get tripped up, but most groups find it pretty easy to use and a valuable addition to combat.
>>98585906>For example, they're why Rogues didn't get Tricks, Fighters don't have Maneuvers as a core feature, and casters took a whole half edition to get nerfedlol 4rry detected
>>98587915The effects of that popularity won't just vanish without a trace, and we're already feeling that. Most D&D editions had a rough shelf-life of about a decade, and 5e is already in year 12 and we're unlikely to see a 6e (or whatever they end up calling it) anytime soon. The entire industry is being shaped by 5e being an unprecedented behemoth that has no true rivals and unusual longevity, with efforts to try to coax people tired with 5e to other games only to find them rebounding right back to 5e.All the material being made for 5e doesn't just disappear, and that strength is pretty much eternal, particularly because the vast majority is easily saved and shareable PDFs. >I would argue that it's equally a weakness since that 2/5 could just as easily walk away from the table once they've stopped being willing to tolerate it after playing for so long.The choice those two usually have to make is whether to play with their friends or play with randos where the only thing they might have in common is they like the same system. 5e is a game most people like and most of the remainder can tolerate, and that makes it an easy de-facto choice. People know they can invest time into learning 5e and it's unlikely to be wasted, and that just feeds into itself.
>>98584055Is there anything in blue other than Pathfinder?
>>98587176>5e has more shit being made for it than several of the games you listed COMBINED.Oh how I loathe it.
>>98588165>People know they can invest time into learning 5e and it's unlikely to be wasted, and that just feeds into itselfYou mean they’re too lazy to learn better systems
>>98588281Retard
>>98587176>5e-compatible?>17,159.Now list the ones worth playing
>>98588345Do the same for GURPS first.
>>98588306You’re not denying it
>>985871765E's combat is shit and you're never going to convince me otherwise.
>>98585186Advantage/disadvantage for everything is an objectively bad thing because you can no longer work fiction first and get a legible result afterward.
>>98585103it has the most marketing and makes the most money for company
>>98588281Yup. What's sadder is that several editions of DnD clunk overlaid atop one another make it a disproportionately aggravating system to learn for what it is (allowing for the fact that popularity pre-teaches a lot of the concepts by osmosis). Players introduced to the hobby by it have an unrealistic idea of the effort involved in learning new rules.On the other hand lazy retards who can't be bothered to wade out of the kiddy pool are welcome to wallow there. It can be harder to get more niche games going but is generally more rewarding imo.
>>98584055When did Notepadanon and Horus start posting on /tg/ again from their ivory tower known as the white room.
>>98587176Same insane shit over and over again like a broken record. Popular = good. Can't undersatnd how threads work. Actualy all the flaws everyone knows about are great! It would be great if shill knew anything about the game they post blantant bullshit about. I despite you kind so much it is unreal. The only reason you can post this is due the mod protection and everybody learnt it easy or hard way. I geniuenly wish you death. Kill yourself.
>>98588165That graphic just shows release dates, not player base numbers. Few completely abandoned 1e when 2e came out, and finding groups who exclusively played the various basic versions at the time was rare. The only time basic was a big deal during the short time when elementary school kids discovered the Moldvay Magenta box at toy stores or in the Christmas catalogs. Most who stuck with it beyond the fad quickly moved over to AD&D. It's why most tie-in t-shirts at the time had Advanced Dungeons and Dragons printed on them, despite the Saturday morning cartoon. Playing AD&D in general subsided a bit in the '90s as those kids were now in their twenties and didn't have as much time, as well as losing players to that mindless card game.
>>98590622>Few completely abandoned 1e when 2e came out,Actually, most 1e players moved to playing 2e, something like 90%+, which is something even Gygax commented on because he tried to promote his Dangerous Journeys as the proper place for 1e players to move on to, but most of them just ended up going from 1e to 2e (and later to 3e). 4e was the first of the mainline D&D editions where the trend broke down, and not even initially, because most 3e players did move onto 4e but then a good number either switched back or changed over to Pathfinder. The people who would stay with older editions were always a very small minority prior to the 3e and 4e split, where about half would continue playing 4e and about half played some version of 3.PF. Then 5e came along and swallowed up most of the 3.PF/4e players and a good number of other players as well.
>>98590657>5E>swallowed up most of the... 4E playersDidn't happen.
>>98590661Where did all the 4e players go then.
>>98590664Out of the hobby because of Essentials or to similar games.
>>98590715No, most ended up playing 5e. The thing about this hobby is that the majority of people who play RPGs are pretty casual about it, and just end up playing the current edition of D&D as a default.And, then there's the guys who try to treat RPGs like a sport or social status thing, and they also just end up playing the most popular game where the highest amount of competition can be found along with the most rewards for "being good" at it are, which is almost always just the current edition of D&D. The majority of the people who played 4e were basically these two groups of people, and when 5e came out, they abandoned 4e without much of a thought and the 4e population collapsed practically overnight.
>>98590744No they didn't. 4E's tools were kept up as long as they were because the team knew 4E players wouldn't gel with 5E.
>>98590779...DDI was kept up because it didn't really cost anything to keep it up, and they stopped updating it immediately as soon as 5e dropped in 2014. It only went down in 2020 because the Microsoft platform it was built on stop receiving support so they just finally shut the whole thing down.Most 4e players jumped ship to 5e as soon as 5e came out. You could even see that on /tg/, where 4e discussion evaporated as 5e took over.
>>98590809Wrong, and no, 4E players didn't jump ship.
>>985908094E discussion on /tg/ was on life support before 5E had its first playtest. 4E had no new content for a year and Essentials damaged the game beyond repair because it killed the original line.
>>98590812Okay buddy, good talk, great evidence.
>>98590813I think most 4e players on /tg/ had switched back to Pathfinder before 5e came out. 4e had a rough life on /tg/, and 5e finished it off.
>>98590826That would be 3.5 players who went to 4E then to Pathfinder. 4E players are really their own segment of the market to this day.
>>98584944>anything less than ultracrunch with 50000 useless options and like 10 good ones is "theater kid larp"So 3.X led people to an objectively correct assessment of RPGs, to which the GAME is central that's why it's in the fucking name. The Platonic Ideal of the RPG concept is a system in which absolutely everything is handled mechanically and players simply make in-character choices(ie, role playing, no matter what your boy-buggering theatre kid failed acting troupe so-called RPG group believes) which the engine of the game then resolves.If a game is not at least trying to aim for that ideal, it's not an RPG, it's an excuse for faggots and women to meet up and gossip while putting on funny voices - Book Club for nerdy poofs, essentially.
>>98590835You need to stop trying to push your false dichotomy already.You've been doing it awhile, and it's obvious you're just some retard who doesn't actually play games and only theory crafts about what your incredibly autistic-self would enjoy. You, with zero social skills and no charisma to speak of, of course you'd hate the social aspects of a social game. And of course you'd hate women, since that's sort of guaranteed for incel losers who don't belong in a hobby where its encouraged to speak to other people in way outside of shrill and frustrated demands to abide by the rules as written.Fuck the fuck back to whatever hole your crawled out of, and die alone instead of trying to poison the pond where other people might drink from, you hate-filled, spite-fueled, sad and pathetic loser.
>>98590846Not a false dichotomy.
>>98590867100% that's what it is, you complete retard.
>>98590873Nope.
