Do you think it's kind of dumb how something that has a 5% of happening can make the most retarded suggestions instantly happen?
You rolled a 20 that doesn't mean you can do whatever you want.
Fuck it would be more impressive if it was a 100 on a 100 sided dice
Have you tried not playing DnD? Believe it or not, D100 games are a real thing that actually exists.
You are the cancer killing /tg/.
These anons have at least played a game before, but they're really not helping by bumping this shit thread.
>"Hi everyone, I'm OP!"
>"A thing in DnD is retarded!"
>(Other anonymous suggest OP try something else or tgat D20 isn't a perfect system)
>"Nooooooo! Only I'm allowed to talk shit about DnD!!! You're all just cancer a trolls!!!!!"
>(Sounds of vicious inhales of Copium in the background.)
One again OP proves OP is a homosexual.
In before "I'm not OP reeee-!"
>Thing in D&D
The only thing OP mentioned that's a thing in D&D is the d20 itself, which is shared with many other systems - a lot of which (i.e. SOTDL) /tg/ jerks off as the "superior" replacement for D&D (it isn't). Read the rules black man.
>You're all just cancer
Correct. People who whine about D&D are a cancer upon this board. You whine because you are a nogames. You have no game you play to discuss.
The moment you have to resort to calling someone "nogames", you admit that you have no actual argument and nothing worth saying.
DnD-clones are just as bad as DnD, thank you for pointing out the obvious, OP. Have you actually tried a D100 system like you was fantasizing over, or are you just going to keep screaming how people who are giving you advice and suggestions are "nogames" because they obviously have more experience than you.
>OP
Not OP, have a nice day /misc/nagger.
>Have you actually tried a D100 system like you was fantasizing over
Yes, I in fact made a fallout system that used d100s and it fluxuates between "it's impossible to fail" and "you rolled a 1 so you suck ass at this thing you should be a god at". D100s suck shit.
>they obviously have more experience than you.
Bitch please, you don't even have any games because you're such an unlikable piece of shit that nobody wants you at the table.
>I in fact made a fallout system that used d100s
So you made a shit product and are now saying your shit homebrew game is the standard when people are talking about d100 systems? God you really are retarded.
I'm guessing the mathlet used d&d bonuses in his fallout system then got mad when a +7 bonus is significantly worse in d100 than in d20
This is OP. That other guy wasn't OP. You're losing it.
Warhammer is for homosexuals
>even though you've been here since before /tg/ was its own board, and even though you're saying the same thing as the others, you're the cancer killing /tg/!!!!!!!
No, have a nice day and go back, tourist. Long after you've gone away, I will still be here.
>D&D fags once again make a spam thread, and then seethe when given reasonable recommendations
lol
>Do you think it's kind of dumb how something that has a 5% of happening can make the most retarded suggestions instantly happen?
I think it's stupid that you haven't actually read the rulebook, yes.
I think you're stupid for the same reason.
I don't think you're stupid at all, you're a Goddamn genius, although the saves thing is only in 3.PF. And maybe 4e but whatever. Point is, not in 5e.
Another moron who hasn't actually read the rules of the game he complains about.
You're one of the good ones.
As are you. And don't worry, I did not bump this thread, only responded to it.
>Another moron who hasn't actually read the rules of the game he complains about.
"You don't even need the books."
"D&D is good because at tables with good DMs good things are done."
"Just rewrite what you don't like."
There's a difference between knowing the rules and choosing to change them to suit your table's desires; and not knowing the rules and playing the game fundamentally wrong but then calling the game the problem.
You don't even need the rules to run the "game", though, so why would you need to know them?
Yes. This is why they're limited to attack rolls and saves, and merely always fail or succeed in D&D. There's no "something wacky happens" rider clause.
It is dumb.
That's why I don't use the D20 like that for my games; I'd rather create an array of results with different probabilities based on their effects.
>You rolled a 20 that doesn't mean you can do whatever you want.
No shit. D&D doesn't even work this way, at least not in 1st Edition (what I play)
This literally isn't how Nat20s work, though somehow I'm not surprised tgat the average DnD 5e player really IS retarded enough to believe it.
And you are the worst cancer on this board.
Ok, newfag.
He's not new, he's been doing this for the last 3 years. Pretty sure he's a WotC social media manager, being paid to shi(t/ll) post on Ganker all day.
WOTC is a shit company.
It always was.
TSR was way better in Gygax's day.
Lorraine Williams fucked that company so hard even The Lady of Pain winced.
Certain skill related actions are literally impossible unless the DM says they're not. Did you even read The Dungeon Master's Guide?
The d20 systems (most notably, but not limited to, DnD) are not simulationist, but rather gamist - meaning they are not rooted in reality, but in some parallel universe where things work by a sort of cartoon physics.
>this shit again
The GM shouldn't call for a roll unless there's a plausible chance of success.
Yes but it's also a game. If dumb shit has a chance of happening it makes it less realistic sure but also gives more tension and humor.
Dumb shit and tension tension tend to be mutually exclusive.
Not always, chance of overwhelming failure or success is something that can't always be planned for and can require on the fly adjustment. To put it another way, if we wanted thing to be predictable we wouldn't be rolling dice.
>Do you think it's kind of dumb how something that has a 5% of happening can make the most retarded suggestions instantly happen?
If you actually played games, you'd know that's not how it works. But yes, it is stupid how every result has an equal chance of happening and how none of your character's investments matter for shit because a commoner has a very real chance of beating your +7 with sheer luck.
>You rolled a 20 that doesn't mean you can do whatever you want.
Correct, that is how it works in every d20 system with the exception of attacks in D&D, which auto-hit on a 20.
>Fuck it would be more impressive if it was a 100 on a 100 sided dice
D100s are even more cancerous than d20s, because they're d20s but with a 1% chance to hit anything instead of a 5% chance, making your investments matter even less. As for roll-under, fuck roll-under, all my homies hate roll-under.
>As for roll-under, fuck roll-under, all my homies hate roll-under.
>Hating systems where the DC/TN is put in the hands of the players.
>Hating WFRPG, Dark Heresy, Call of Cthulhu, GURPs and Cyberpunk
Tastelet detected.
Let me guess, you fudge results behind your screen all the time?
>Hating systems where the DC/TN is put in the hands of the players.
Because it leads to dumbfuck "I ROLLED LOW I CAN DO ANYTHING I WANT" bullshit. It's not their job to set that shit, it's mine.
>Hating WFRPG, Dark Heresy, Call of Cthulhu, GURPs and Cyberpunk
Yes, all of those systems are steaming hot shit
>Let me guess, you fudge results behind your screen all the time?
Let me guess, you let your players literally do anything they want with a low roll? Sounds like a dog shit game where it's all wacky lolrandumb bullshit.
>Let me guess, you let your players literally do anything they want with a low roll?
You do know you can add modifiers or just tell your players "no" right? Sounds like you're a lame ass pushover that can't stand up for yourself.
>Yes, all of those systems are steaming hot shit
What do you run/play, anon?
in what system is a 20 an automatic success on any roll?
if you're talking about dungeons & dragons a 20 is only an automatic success on an attack roll. If you're talking about skill checks then in any situation where even rolling a 20 would be insufficient to pass the check then the DM doesn't even call for a check.
Under normal circumstances I wouldnt really care because I see d&d like an episodic series and I'd rather have more frequent highs and lows because theyre more interesting to the story that way.
What drives me up the wall is the "le heckin nat fuckin twenty!" meme that a lot of players unwittingly fall into. Last week our party was talking with some redneck necromancer out in the swamp and he offered to sell us a little boat in exchange for some gold and my fey PC's hair. One of the new players rolled a d20 and got a nat 20 and looked at me with this gleeful expression said and he rolled diplomacy to convince me to shave my head so we can get this boat. I informed him that diplomacy is not something you are able to roll against other players. He reiterated that he got a nat 20 and asked if I was going to shave my head. I just barked No. I know its petty but if he wants to try and circumvent another player's agency then he is going to regret trying that on the enchanter because I am going to make him shave his own head when I get Dominate.
>What drives me up the wall is the "le heckin nat fuckin twenty!" meme that a lot of players unwittingly fall into
You can thank heckin epic /tg/ greentexts repeated endlessly on Reddit for this miserable state of affairs
Wow, this thread backfired spectacularly for our nogames shitspamming trolls.
Have you tried actually reading the D&D rules and realize 'muh Natty 20' isn't actually in the rulebook anywhere besides attack rolls?
In B/X 20s dont make retarded things happen. Not even makes crits happen. So I dont have this problem
Criticals are only worth the time in bell curve systems since they have almost no chance of happening.
Absolutely, 5% is too high.
HYPNOTOAD?
A 20 should just be a best case scenario or something lucky happening. If you roll a 20 on something that would be impossible, it should still fail. But maybe the character learns something or something lucky will happen.
For example, if you try to convince a character of something that they wouldn't under any circumstance do, on a 20 they might still refuse but give up a hint or something
This anon gets it. Rolling for a result is not the character's specific ability to do so, it is rolling for the outcome itself while being affected by the attempting character's stats. These may sound similar but it's a necessary understanding. A character's aptitude affects their chances of success but there are a hundred other factors in place for things to affect difficulty (which some systems accommodate for and others don't) that can skew an outcome.
A DM should be generally aware of what their PCs can do so they know within reason what their ranges are and if some approaches would even be capable of reaching a result. You don't roll the dice if the outcome is obvious or if the attempt cannot create meaningful failure.
>there's already a thread whining about this imaginary problem up
>xe had to make another
At least it's not more yiff spam I guess
You’re not trying unless you’re rolling. Rolling is how you interact with the world.
I remember...
I remember the old ways
the red mage.
you meant this one
the good old days before smartphones ruined the internet
This is why bell curve systems like 3d6 exist.
The chance of a 3 or an 18 is 1/216 each. I think that's the ideal amount of probability. Common enough that it's likely to happen eventually over the course of a long campaign, but rare enough that it's special when it actually happens and worthy of being outstanding.
Name us five 1d20 games that aren't DnD and its clones.
Come on, prove this is an actual problem, rather than something solved by not playing DnD
1. Using that house rule is dumb.
2. Hinging "rules" on DM and/or player whim is dumb.
3. D&D is dumb.
4. Not making your own thing from the get-go, because "rewrite what you don't like" means D&D gets a pass for all its flaws, is dumb.
5. Paying money for something you're expected to do yourself is dumb.
6. Trying to justify the TTRPG marketing scam with "it's always been this way" and "every RPG has D&D's problems" is dumb.
7. Ignoring the fact that exceptions can be created just because the fact that none have been, in order to cash in on D&D's strategy, is dumb.
8. Having threads about D&D, whether criticizing it or its houserules, or defending it or its houserules, is dumb.
9. (You) are dumb.
10. Everyone in this thread, including me, is dumb.
Have a rotten day, fagcake.
>I WILL CRITICIZE ALL SIDES SO THAT WILL MAKE ME SMART DOHOHO
Fuck off, centrist scum
Yet there weren't any errors in the post.
How funny.
>"STOP MAKING D&D THREADS ON THIS RPG BOARD!!!"
He's not a centrist, he's a clown and an extremist trying to get as much attention as he can.
What point is there for threads about something that "isn't needed" to "run the game"? If you don't need the books, you don't need to discuss them.
What point is there for threads about something whose flaws are defended with "just rewrite what you don't like"? Any mechanical talk just boils down to comparing preferential configurations with no actual discussion beyond "not true D&D!" or "I will use this".
What point is there for threads about something that gets qualitative credit for good arbiters doing good things for their good group, but is somehow immune to getting qualitative demerit for bad arbiters doing bad things for their bad groups?
What point is there in posting new threads about something that is so common, when there are so many other places already established for its discussion? This board is for ALL tabletop games, and could use more discussion about actual games.
What is the point in rehashing tired bullshit that gets regurgitated over and over and over again, when nobody ever changes their mind, and most people can't even address an actual point without making a deflection to attack tone or some assumption?
What the fuck is the point?
>when I roll a nat 20 to hug my pet and crush it, killing it instantly
Hugging is an amorous/platonic, consensual action. The hugging would result in your dog turning into a dog girl in heat.
Nigga there's still a DC
You're retarded and fell for meme culture. Nat 20 has never been an auto win or setting breaking decision. It's simply the best possible outcome. If it was never going to happen, like a level 1 fighter defeating an Ancient Red Dragon with a rusty sword, it doesn't matter.
If you challenged the BBG to a break dancing contest to settle the fate of the world, even with a Nat 20, he's going to tell you to fuck off, or if the DM humors it, dance with you and then continue his plan anyway.
They don't though. Even in Dungeons and Dragons, critical hits are a poorly understood rule that only applies to attack rolls. It's a widespread misunderstanding that you can actually always have a 5% chance to succeed, because people don't read the rules properly and know memes spread by people playing the game wrong.