D&D and D&D-esque games have always sucked donkeyshit. There's no tactical depth whatsoever beyond buff combos and unit placement. Every fight is either a numbers game or dumb luck. How is it that noone in these game dev companies thinks to at least give the AI the ability to use simple, BASIC ass tactics like charging or flanking? It's not exactly supercomputer stuff. Congrats, you spent 40 hours figuring out how blow your attack bonus into triple digits, now put it to use against an opponent that doesn't even understand basic positioning. Like nigger get a fucking life
>>3557698The game in your picture literally has enemies charging and flanking.Also you're greatly underestimating how complex it is to give enemy units the logic required to use actual strategy.
>>3557698That'll do pigley, that'll do.
>>3557701>Also you're greatly underestimating how complex it is to give enemy units the logic required to use actual strategy.For owlcuck interns it's incredibly complex.Jokes aside, you are right. It's easy to code an unbeatable ai, but balancing is something that needs some skill. Skill owlcucks don't have.
>>3557701>The game in your picture literally has enemies charging and flanking.You are literally being disingenuous and misrepresenting how the ai works in-game.>Also you're greatly underestimating how complex it is to give enemy units the logic required to use actual strategy.Lazy response, I guess it's much easier just to pump the stats of every enemy up right?
>>3557701>flankingWell yeah, Owlc*t applies the flanking condition to any creature that is threatened by two or more hostile creatures.
>>3557698Because spells and buffs play too big of an impact in combat in those types of games, which ironically makes combat itself really shallow.
>>3557698Try BG3, combat is a lot better there. I did some real strategic shit all over that game, like controlling 3 different floors of a building with separate party members, using stealth to assassinate the leader, chain reactions, etc.Say what you want about the 5E ruleset or the cringy ass characters, but BG3 was fun in terms of combat.
>>3557729Careful there fren about talking about fun or you'll summon le pro 4chan game designer to tell you why you didn't actually have any fun. You must understand that this isn't a place for chatting about enjoying a hobby about electronic toys. This is a serious place for serious design people which is why you had to be interviewed and present a resume to get in.
>>3557731Those are the same people who didn't play it because it's a 'bear sex' game. Same people who drop WoTR because they see a black paladin in the first 5 minutes.Those people don't play videogames.
>>3557731Isn't this board the best?It has the top number of "the idea guy" type game designersThey always have a lot to say why this or that game is actually bad, and their ideas on how to make a good game are so insightful
>>3557733>>3557731Oh, OK!
>>3557731People only get triggered when people start saying dumb shit like >x is the best thing everespecially when said shit is mediocre or bad and the one praising said thing never explain why it's the best.
>>3557698>D&D and D&D-esque games have always sucked donkeyshitStopped reading there
>>3557698D&D and D&D-eque games are literally the only good games that exist, all else is actionsloppa
>>3557698Play literally anything other than owlcat games. Those are the absolute worst games you can play.
>>3557818There's basically no functiobal difference between games like Pathfinder and Baldur's Gate, NWN, or TOEE.They are all essentially the most dim-witted reductions of d&d to exist that equate role-playing and tactics to "pick dialogue choice 1 or objectively better dialogue choice 2 gatekept behind a dice roll" and "buff your dudes, put them next to the enemy dudes, and occasionally press a button until they die or you die"
>>3557827Temple of Elemental Evil doesn't play like Kingmaker at all, those games are polar opposites.
>>3557829It was real in his mind
>>3557829>turn-basedCheck>d&d based rule systemCheck>isometricCheck
>>3557701>The game in your picture literally has enemies charging and flanking.Doesn't matter when I have like 110 AC, it's still a dice roll they're going to inevitably lose>you're greatly underestimating how complex it is to give enemy units the logic required to use actual strategy.Bro, even fucking indie devs know how to write simple scripts, you don't need more than this if your core systems are trash like D&D
>>3557698That’s because there’s never been a 4e game
>>3557861We have superior pf2e games instead
>>3557872?
>>3557698You seem to have mistaken RTwP for D&D. Don't get me wrong D&D is a complete pile of shit for various reasons but RTwP is the cause of the problems you have bought up.
>>3557827Print this out. Take it to the doctor. Voila, free invalid pension!
>>3557861There is, it's called WoW
>>3557698Yep and I wouldn't have it any other wayNow go back to spamming jump I frames in Elden Ring
>>3557829Fool.Toee is the best dnd game to date.Just unplayable without fan patches.
>>3557707>owlcuckwtf does that even mean >>>/pol/
>>3557698
>>3557698>charging or flankingNormalfags hate this shit. When the enemy starts acting intelligently, most people throw up their hands and give up.That said, I love Sil for taking off the silk gloves and abusing me in all its tactical glory.
>>3558407Varus, give me back my legions
>>3557698Tryhard
>>3557698Unit placement is the bread and butter of tactics games retard.
>>3557701>all the replies seething about true statementsnever change 4chan
>>3558617He's lying, flanking is just having a creature threatened by two or more other creatures, which is how it was implemented in games that are nearly two decades older.
>>3557698It's a crime that owlniggers are allowed to spam their garbage so much and it's starting to hurt the reputation of crpgs because the games are so extremely bad.
Solasta is actually very good for combat. This board goes into a schizo rage when it is mentioned though.
>>3558624Is the reason threads have been so shit lately is because you're back
>>3558629Like I said, schizo rage.
>>3557698Blame numbers autists. They're the ones who pushed "buffing" to the state it's in now.They abuse the mechanics then demand that game rules be changed because they ruined their own game by abusing the mechanics.It happens to so many games.
>>3557831>kingmaker>a game that added a turn based mode years after release>a turn based game
>>3558618>flanking is just having a creature threatened by two or more other creaturesso you're conceding there is flanking?
>>3558660No, because it's implemented in a dumbed down manner so that positioning explicitly does not matter.
>>3558663so again, you're saying there is flanking but it's implemented in a dumbed down way. in other words, conceding there is flanking
>>3558617You are underestimating how complex it is!!!!Reeee
>>3558624It's not though.
I'm right there with you, OP. I think it's retarded too. The thing about these games is hardly any of these encounters or areas are randomly generated. It would be pretty simple to add complex AI tactics after the fact. They just don't care about making good games these days. They just wanna pump out slop.
>>3557698A novus homo flogging plebs.
>>3557815Some of the most famous D&D games are borderline action slop LMFAO
>>3557698Sure, nice bait. Now please shill your GURPS games.
>>3560113I prefer HERO.
>>3557701Yes, but OP didn't actually play it, so you can forgive his ignorance.
>>3557698Even NWN has flanking. It doesn't explicitly state it but it factors in to attack adjustments. You haven't played a lot of these games, that's the only possible conclusion.
>>3560115Yet I'm still waiting for you to shill your games based on it.
>>3560122Not my fault CRPG devs are retarded.
>>3560119It's "flanking" is just two characters adjacent to the target. It's not true flanking. In practice, it's just put one more character next to the enemy to do more damage with no regard for position.
>>3560124i mean just look at how horrible and janky plenty of implementations of pnp are, bioware being probably the worst
>>3560124Alas, and you would think that with all these open licenses that some indie would make a good game with those systems. Instead all we have is stuff like KotC, Solasta, and so on.Keep telling people they better believe you and that you just haven't had the chance to prove the superiority of your beloved system yet.
>>3557698I have to agree. The ruleset is too loose even when tactical play should be enforced that it falls apart. D&D games often fail to implement1. line of sight2. dynamic fog of war (you shouldn't have vision beyond obstacles and characters shouldn't know about things they aren't supposed to see)3. cover modifiersIn the case of your image, Owlkek has also failed to implement1. proper armor class calculation2. correct bonus stacking3. correct flanking mechanics4. grapple5. balanced item distribution (way too many +5 and +4 items)6. take 20 on certain out-of-combat skills7. path exclusivity to a variety of mythic abilities as you would expect if you saw the mythic paths in tabletop8. accurate charge restrictions (you can often charge through friendly characters even though they should not be9. proper entity collision (a dozen giant spiders standing within the same 1m circle)10. Requiring an action to reload a crossbowMoreover, the D&D ruleset does not have1. Proper zone of control (meaning the ability to move freely is at best challenged by an enemy attack)2. Armor functioning separately from dodging and parrying (though understandable as it streamlined calculations are better for manual calculations); armor should mitigate damage from hits whereas dodge and parry are how one should avoid damage3. Reasonable restrictions on weapons (for example: swords do not hurt people through plate armor and are useless without specialized techniques, and, crossbows take 20-30 seconds to reload and fire with an experienced user as opposed to every 6 seconds implemented in game)4. weapon and armor durability5. rules for verticality 6. a stamina systemIn addition, the D&D rulesets are often too vertical where less vertical character development and more horizontal development would be better. After all, why should a fighter be able to take a lot more hits just because he's been fighting more? In the same armor, he's still anatomically the same.
>>3560182>HERO>GURPS>open licenseNo
>>3560186For me, it's FATAL and MYFAROG
>>3560191>MYFAROGToo pozzed for my tastes.
>>3560152In 3D games it's not much different. You can calculate pseudo-squares, but the angle is pretty wide that you might as well make that assumption. I think NWN might have some positional information in their calculation though, and if not then you can do this in NWNX, but it's not really game changing to exclude a few degrees on either side when you're not grid based. Arguably it would be more tedious and annoying. The problem with two front facing opponents is really more of a problem with combatants occupying the same square, which accounts for more than the model's hitbox. Basically your argument is really that these games aren't grid based. That said, there are more clear deviations from the rules in things like spell implementations that you could endlessly nitpick.My personal implementation of flanking would just be excluding 120 degrees centered on an opposite ally, where the inclusion zone overlaps so you can still have an opponent surrounded by multiple enemies.A more interesting tactical nit pick would be the lack of aiding.
>>3560186You could just file off the serial numbers and call it SPECIALERIEST.
>>3560185>Moreover, the D&D ruleset does not have>1. Proper zone of control (meaning the ability to move freely is at best challenged by an enemy attack)Threatened squares, occupying same square, size considerations, pinned. It has this in detail.>2. Armor functioning separately from dodging and parrying (though understandable as it streamlined calculations are better for manual calculations); armor should mitigate damage from hits whereas dodge and parry are how one should avoid damageThis is not necessarily true. Attacks to exposed areas aren't mitigated by wearing plate on unexposed areas. That said, there are rules for mitigation and conversion of damage to nonlethal damage based on armor.>3. Reasonable restrictions on weapons (for example: swords do not hurt people through plate armor and are useless without specialized techniques, and, crossbows take 20-30 seconds to reload and fire with an experienced user as opposed to every 6 seconds implemented in game)It has had this and more considerations like difference AC values for different types of attacks, and considering the material of armor and weapons, and so on.>4. weapon and armor durabilityIt has this. Armor and weapons can be sundered, they have hp, when you attack armor directly it can break, and so on, and so on.>5. rules for verticalityIt has this. Along with flying rules and everything.>6. a stamina systemIt has this. You also have other systems for thirst and hunger, fatigue, exhaustion, for environmental factors, forced marching, running limits, swimming limits, and so on. Older supplements even had a whole book dedicated to survival and wilderness and extreme conditions.>In addition, the D&D rulesets are often too vertical where less vertical character development and more horizontal development would be better.skills etc, massive damage rules, and so on and so on>but most of us ignore all that complicated nonsense!!!1111Oh, okay then.
>>3560199>In 3D games it's not much different. You can calculate pseudo-squares, but the angle is pretty wide that you might as well make that assumption>Arguably it would be more tedious and annoying. The problem with two front facing opponents is really more of a problem with combatants occupying the same square, which accounts for more than the model's hitbox. that these games aren't grid based. That said, there are more clear deviations from the rules in things like spell implementations that you could endlessly nitpick.There are mods for both Kingmaker and Wrath that implement flanking rules based on relative position of characters. If a modder can do it, certainly a competent developer could easily do it. > I think NWN might have some positional information in their calculationThe only factor it as is whether or not two characters are adjacent to the target just like NWN2, Kingmaker, and Wrath. >Basically your argument is really that these games aren't grid based.They don't have to be gridbased. The rule for flanking is actually independent of grids. It is solely that if you have two characters next to an enemy and you can draw a line from one character to the other that passes through the enemy, then it's being flanked. See pic related.>nitpickPointing out how Owlkek and Bioware released inferior products is not nitpicking. >My personal implementation of flanking would just be excluding 120 degreesYour take doesn't matter. The rule states something explicitly that does not depend on a grid.
>>3560201At that point you might as well do your own thing.
>>3560222>If a modder can do it, certainly a competent developer could easily do it.You can do it but the added value is questionable. You don't have grid based combat. >They don't have to be gridbased. The rule for flanking is actually independent of grids.No, it is not independent. You can assume it's independent, but it's based on which squares people occupy, assuming two creatures can't occupy the same square/space. You take that out and it doesn't really mean much. What is a 10 degree difference of being inside or outside of a cone for the calculation? Not much, but it can be overly tedious. >Your take doesn't matter. The rule states something explicitly that does not depend on a grid.>When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by a character or creature friendly to you on the opponent’s opposite border or opposite corner.>When in doubt about whether two friendly characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two friendly characters’ centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent’s space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.>Exception: If a flanker takes up more than 1 square, it gets the flanking bonus if any square it occupies counts for flanking.>Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.>Creatures with a reach of 0 feet can’t flank an opponent. Guess you were wrong all along. Into the trash goes your uneducated opinion.
>>3560224Yeah, but it would probably be bad. Just look at the amount of bad takes anons have, some of them are even wrong because they never look anything up. Would you really trust them to make an interesting and coherent RPG system? I wouldn't.
>>3560232Next he will say it doesn't use the word "grid" and then waffle on an entire post about semantics and how borders, squares, and space can be construed to mean something else. Despite that it's directly referring to squares of grid-based combat.
>>3560213>Threatened squaresThere are no squares mentioned for qualification of AoO. The ruleset states leaving an area within the melee weapon's range triggers an AoO. Other than that, there is nothing else. There is no penalty for getting hit as the character can still move as normal after being hit. Proper Zone of Control requires restrictions on movement which are absent. This is why it's accurate to say D&D does not have proper zone of control. >size considerationsAre not part of zone of control.>occupying same squareSure, you can't stand in the same square as a big enough object. However, that is the default in all board games, i.e. two pawns cannot occupy the same square in chess, and does not qualify as part of zone of control.>pinnedPinned is a feature of grapple. Not of zone of control. >not necessarily true.You do not know the D&D ruleset then. Armor in D&D only applies an armor bonus to the armor class. >difference AC values for different types of attacksThere are only two types of "attacks." An attack with a weapon and a touch attack. A touch attack is generally unrelated to attacks to do damage with weapons. > considering the material of armor and weaponsA material can apply an additional bonus. But it does not change the mechanical function of armor.
>>3560232>but the added value is questionable. You don't have grid based combat. LMAO. Read the ruleset dumbass>No, it is not independent.It is>Guess you were wrong all along. Into the trash goes your uneducated opinion.Hello retard. Why don't you read the ruleset before posting next time>https://www.d20pfsrd.com/Gamemastering/Combat/#TOC-Flanking>When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.>When in doubt about whether two characters flank an opponent in the middle, TRACE AN IMAGINARY LINE BETWEEN THE TWO ATTACKER'S CENTERS. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent’s space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.In other words the rule for flanking is independent of grid. Try again next time retard>>3560236Next thing you're going to say is that you were just pretending to be retarded. Fucking retards.
>>3560232BTW here is the link for the 3.5 hypertext. Same exact rule because pathfinder is a retroclone>https://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm#flanking
>>3560213You can't sunder armor.
>>3560213> That said, there are rules for mitigation and conversion of damage to nonlethal damage based on armor.Only in homebrew. Not in the standard ruleset. There is no such rule in standard 3e or even up to 5e>https://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/injuryandDeath.htm#nonlethalDamage>It has had this and more considerations like difference AC values for different types of attacksIt has touch attacks which are designed for wizards casting a spell that doesn't require bypassing armor and only requires you to touch the target. Whereas a standard attack either applies dodge + dex, or doesn't. That is, there are only two types of attacks and one is irrelevant to the discussion of attacking with weapons. >It has this. You also have other systems for thirst and hunger, fatigue, exhaustion, for environmental factors, forced marching, running limits, swimming limits, and so onIt does not have a short term stamina system that applies short term fatigue. Though I should have clarified that as that is what is most relevant to combat. >skills etc, massive damage rules, and so on and so onSkills and massive damage are all vertical character development.
>>3560240>There are no squares mentioned for qualification of AoO.>Attacks Of Opportunity>Sometimes a combatant in a melee lets her guard down. In this case, combatants near her can take advantage of her lapse in defense to attack her for free. These free attacks are called attacks of opportunity.>Threatened Squares>You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your action. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you’re unarmed, you don’t normally threaten any squares and thus can’t make attacks of opportunity.>size considerations>Are not part of zone of control.>Reach Weapons>Most creatures of Medium or smaller size have a reach of only 5 feet. This means that they can make melee attacks only against creatures up to 5 feet (1 square) away. However, Small and Medium creatures wielding reach weapons threaten more squares than a typical creature. In addition, most creatures larger than Medium have a natural reach of 10 feet or more.>Note: Small and Medium creatures wielding reach weapons threaten all squares 10 feet (2 squares) away, even diagonally. (This is an exception to the rule that 2 squares of diagonal distance is measured as 15 feet.) >and does not qualify as part of zone of control.>A Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creature can move into or through an occupied square. The creature provokes attacks of opportunity when doing so.>Square Occupied by Creature Three Sizes Larger or Smaller>Any creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories larger than it is.>A big creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories smaller than it is. >pinned>Pinned is a feature of grapple. Not of zone of control. See various splat and officially licensed e.g. Ravenloft, and Ranged Pin in CW.
>>3560240>>3560262>You do not know the D&D ruleset then. Armor in D&D only applies an armor bonus to the armor class. >Armor Damage Reduction Values>In this system, armor offers two benefits against attacks: a minor bonus to AC, which functions just like the armor bonus in the standard d20 rules but is usually lower in value; and damage reduction. See Table: Armor and Damage Reduction for the armor bonus and DR values for common armor types. (All other armor statistics, such as maximum Dexterity bonus, armor check penalty, and arcane spell failure chance, are unchanged.) >Armor Damage Conversion>Armor, in addition to adding a bonus to AC, also converts lethal damage from physical attacks into nonlethal damage. (Shields provide a shield bonus to AC, as normal, but do not convert damage.)>Each time an armor-wearing character is struck by an attack that deals lethal damage, the amount of damage dealt to the character is reduced by an amount equal to the armor bonus (including enhancement) of the armor worn. The character takes and equal amount of nonlethal damage. Damage that is not affected by damage reduction (energy damage and the like) is not converted. >There are only two types of "attacks." An attack with a weapon and a touch attack. A touch attack is generally unrelated to attacks to do damage with weapons. >A material can apply an additional bonus. But it does not change the mechanical function of armor.>Adamantine has 40 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 20. >Darkwood has 10 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 5. >Mithral has 30 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 15. >has had>Armor Type Slash Pierce Bludgeon>Banded mail +2 0 +1>Brigandine +1 +1 0>Chain mail* +2 0 -2>Field Plate +3 +1 0>Full Plate +4 +3 0>Leather armor** 0 -2 0>Plate mail +3 0 0>Ring mail +1 +1 0>Scale mail 0 +1 0>Splint mail 0 +1 +2>Studded leather +2 +1 0>* Includes bronze plate mail>** Includes padded armor and hides
>>3557698What type of Combat do you like? JRPGs or Action?They are both shallow and worse than DnD
>>3560257>>3560262>>3560263>But when I said D&D never I meant only this edition, and these books, and I personally consider advanced rules and options as homebrew, and I would never use themOkay then.
>>3560263The armor as DR rules suck massive shit.
>>3560267>okay it exists, but it sucks like shit so I'm still right nyeh nyeh nyehOkay.
>>3560270Bad rules might as well not exist.
>>3560272Uhuh.
>>3560266>>3560267>>3560270Proving that even if you have receipts to prove you're right, you'll still never win in a 4chan shitpost thread.
>>3557698So let me get this straight.This is good combat to you?
>>3560266Fine. But you can never prove that D&D has ever had rules for a channeling or mana magic system! Fuck you!
>>3560266The fact that you have to pull out some obscure homebrew rules you found on the internet or invented for your table when video games are based on the official core rules which lack these features doesn't help your case. But sure, you can conjure rules from your ass and pretend they're part of the game outside of your table.
>>3560280None of it is homebrew or obscure. Your knowledge of official D&D publications is just lacking.
>>3560273>Lose AC>DR gained is neutralized by 1-for-1 power attack>Take more damage from anyone power attacking with a 2H weaponGreat rule.
>>3560284But if it's an edition previous to 5th edition then it's homebrew. None of the older editions are supported anymore which means they're not official. They're homebrew now.
>>3560287How can it be if it doesn't exist?
>>3560284>None of it is homebrewIt is homebrew. BTW, everything in a third party supplement was always homebrew.
>>3560292When did I say it didn't exist? I said it sucks shit because it's a garbage rule. It disadvantages already bad combat styles and incentivizes the already best combat style.
>>3560293State your definition of homebrew for laughs.>everything in a third party supplement was always homebrew.Good job it's still in official supplements then, huh?
>>3560293>>3560289Homebrew means that is was developed at home for a home game. Please stop embarrassing yourselves. Most of this is official rules and some are official optional rules. Gracelessly refusing to admit you were wrong by changing what homebrew means is not a good use of time.
>>3560297I'm honestly unsure whether he's being a disingenuous fuck on purpose or he's just stupid, but technically he's half right in that a lot of D&D stuff that later became part of the "official" rulesets was indeed born as a homebrew and later adopted through official supplements because some of the bigwigs thought it was cool shit, though to my memory that was something that was only really frequent for 1E and AD&D, from 3E onwards it started to become less and less frequent
>>3560263You pulled that off the D&D wiki. It's in the homebrew page:>https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Armor_As_Damage_Reduction_(3.5e_Variant_Rule)By definition homebrew is not part of the standard ruleset. In essence it's your own ruleset. Something that would be great for more developers to use as a computer can streamline calculations and make it even more subtle and interesting than what could be done in tabletop. However, the fact that you can homebrew rules into the game as alternatives does not mean the ruleset has such rules.
>>3560313No, D&Dwiki also replicates the 3.0 and 3.5 SRD on top of being a homebrew wiki full of bullshit. Unearthed Arcana was released as part of the SRD. It's right here https://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/armorAsDamageReduction.htmand it completely and utterly sucks as a rule.
>>3560310Well, I think anyone versed in the development of D&D design would understand that a lot of it is just rehashed from past stuff. It's just always guys like this want to die on the hill that "D&D would never" actually never read more than the three core rulebooks, and probably didn't even properly look through them. They don't like to be challenged, but I had a few minutes and a vague idea where the specific rules were so I could just copy/paste easily.>>3560313No, it's not. It's the SRD. There are many optional rules and variants in most official supplements, including the core rulebooks. Some aren't even variants, just specific ruleslawyery fine print in official supplements. Others are rules from Unearthed Arcana if I recall. The point is I recall, you don't recall, because you don't even know and that doesn't stop you yapping.>but but but somehow it's still homebrew because I didn't use the optionSure, okay.
>>3560262If a character takes one AoO, they lose any semblance of "control" without taking a feat in 3e to get more AoO. Then for every other character opposing him, they can move into and out of his space, go past him, and so one without consequences. Can you really say there is a zone of control if it disappears the moment any other character farts? D&D 3e and onward does not really have zone of control. Just a condition for a single free attack occasionally. Likewise Reach weapons are irrelevant to zone of control since characters don't have zone of control. They only get 1 to 1+dex bonus free attacks.An example of true Zone of Control would be in Battle Brothers:1. A melee character moving into a ranged characters square completely prevents the ranged character from using a bow or reloading a crossbow2. A character attempting to move out the square triggers and AoO. If hit, they cannot move3. Even after the character performs an AoO, other characters still cannot move out of the spaces around the character or through spaces around him without incurring an AoO.
>>3560328The rules you're referring to are literally coming from the homebrew section and listed as a homebrew page.
>>3560330>>3560328But somehow he's still a little bit right, right? Please, please, this is all he has, please say he's still a little bit right.
>>3560335This is what is so sad about all of this. You're confused because you're using the lesser/worst website that hosts the SRD and have no concept of the fact that the rules were published in a book. Your confusion and lack of knowledge is your own problem, that's not anyone else's issue.
>>3560335No, I'm not. They're from Unearthed Arcana, an official 3.5 book.
>>3560334>admits that the system has a lot of considerations>admits that character options can influence the outcome>denies that it matters and therefore doesn't exist because I say so
>>3560335Dumbass. You're supposed to use this one https://www.d20srd.org/index.htmWhy are you dead set on being such a shit when people are literally helping you learn more and understand it better?Admit your mistakes and stop acting like a sniveling child.
>>3560340>>3560339But somehow he's still right, isn't he? Can you prove that it was really WotC and not a false flag crisis actor that released the book?
>>3560334The argument was never about whether or not you would like the rules. It was about whether or not they existed in the first place.
>>3557698Most D&D game developers are either no longer around or were mostly too incompetent to implement mechanics like Bioware, Obsidian, and Owlcat. Blowing up numbers is just how D&D was designed to be since the early days. Stacking numbers has always been part of rpgs.
>>3560367>>3560352>>3560350>>3560348>>3560345>>3560340>>3560340>>3560339>>3560337>>3560335>>3560334>>3560330>>3560328>>3560313>>3560310>>3560298>>3560297>>3560295>>3560293>>3560292>>3560289>>3560287>>3560284>>3560280>>3560278>>3560274>>3560267>>3560266>>3560263>>3560262>>3560257>>3560247>>3560246>>3560240>>3560236>>3560233>>3560232>>3560222>>3560213>>3560199>>3560185All retards. Everything released by WotC is homebrew. In fact everything released after Gygax parted with TSR is homebrew. If it's not 1st edition D&D or the original D&D, it's homebrew.
>>3560384OD&D actually had some interesting rules, funnily enough. I think most of them were in the Blackmoor book, with some complex rules for facing and attacking body parts. You could literally cut combat short by attacking someone's head from behind.
>>3560387My favorite rules were the ones that the Paladin had to pay a tithe to the church, could have only 10 magic items, and could only keep enough wealth to maintain a modest retinue and castle.
>>3560391Honestly, a lot of old rules had so much flavor that people sleep on and act like it never happened.
>>3560384Okay, you clearly are a disingenuous retard trying to troll people>In fact everything released after Gygax parted with TSR is homebrew. If it's not 1st edition D&D or the original D&D, it's homebrew.Except a lot of 1E is also, literally homebrews, even fucking 1E thieves were originally taken from a mail submission by a fan who used them in his homebrew
>>3560335Real rat behavior that you didn't respond to anyone and apologize. Just means you're going to do it all over again next time.
>>3560384anon did you sell your medicine to make rent again
>>3560384>guys I'm trying to be funny haha when being funny stupid didn't work to my advantage
>>3560185>After all, why should a fighter be able to take a lot more hits just because he's been fighting more? In the same armor, he's still anatomically the same.Because they're more likely to have higher constitution (that means more health) due to their profession and they are trained to take hits (that means they literally have more hit-points), you retard.
>>3557731>>3557732>>3557733Are you guys making up shit in your minds again to be upset about?I get that you want to memoryhole all the threads about how subpar the writing of the "bearsex game" was but that wont go away.
>>3557698But they do? Pathfinder games literally have feats like outflank that require flanking an enemy while games like DoS2 account for verticality in strategic formations. Environmental factors also play a part like how rain can affect ranged attack roles or being wet can affect the dmg of electricity. Not to mention plenty of games also account for local props (like you can legit throw a column over some enemies or heat a metal enemy and then immediately cast an ice spell to turn it brittle. Most also account for enemies sizes and using corridors or doors to create bottlenecks and deal with hordes easier. One could argue enemy strategies rely more on numbers and buffs but they do flank and attack spellcasters and healers first. There are also several cases of ambushes and traps too. All and all they are strategic enough.
>>3557698I know that OP is probably baiting but i agree wholeheartedlyGive me Fallout, Baldurs Gate etc with Jagged Alliance 2 Mechanics
>>3560405>even fucking 1E thieves were originally taken from a mail submission by a fan who used them in his homebrewIf Gygax approved of it and implemented it into the official ruleset, it's not homebrew. If he had nothing to do with it and never implemented it, it's homebrew. For example Unearthed Arcana was original written by Gygax hence it is official. The 3.5 "unearthed arcana" is homebrew just like the "3e core rules."https://archive.org/details/tsr02017addunearthedarcana/page/n15/mode/2upOf course, WotC being unoriginal hacks as they always had been just stole the name as well while destroying the ruleset by replacing the well-balanced tables and stat limits with their retarded statbloat homebrew nonsense just like they started doing with MTG. There are many aspects of 2e that are not homebrew as in all the stuff that was ripped directly from 1e. However, everything else in 2e is homebrew. And given how everything was changed for 3e and onward without any input from Gygax, it is all homebrew. The replacement of the superior Greyhawk setting with the inferior Greenwood fetish novel setting was also one of the points of decline and more proof that everything after 1e is homebrew. WotC's abandonment of the TSR code of conduct was the final straw. Now there are a plethora of tranny fetish games all being advertised as "D&D" games. Finally, if it doesn't use THAC0, it's not D&D. >Okay, you clearly are a disingenuous retard trying to troll peopleMaybe vrpg should have user ID's so it's easy to tell when you're talking to a different person. >>3560426I've actually never been on any subscription meds.>>3560437>I'm so schizophrenic that I believe everyone is the same personThis board really need poster IDs.
>>3561019Stop being so genuinely insane and get professional help. Your behavior is bad for yourself and everyone that has to deal with you.
