Tabletop RPGs

[Octopus]

I'm a huge fan of tabletop RPGs, stuff like Dungeons and Dragons and Shadowrun and what have you, and I'm curious if anyone else has some things to share about them. Your favourite systems, books, art, whatever can fit in here.

I've been playing them for honestly probably since I was about 8 maybe- I found my dads old D&D books when I was a few years younger than that, but I would just read the books over and over again as I was still a little young I think to really grasp what it was. I've been gaming ever since, I'm even working on two game systems (ones a space exploration mech game, the other a kung fu themed fantasy) of my own with a friend we're hoping to put out there somehow.

As for what I've played:
-every edition of D&D, with 2nd and 5th being the most common.
-I've played 4th ed Shadowrun more times than I can count, along with a bit of 5th ed (don't talk to me about 6th).
-Anima: Beyond Fantasy (that game is an absurdly wild ride).
-FantasyCraft, wasn't a terribly big fan but it was a good Pathfinder substitute.
-Played an Adventurer, Conqueror, King campaign (ACKs for short) for a little over a year.
-Traveler, one of my actual favourite old school style ones- you can die at character creation, happened to me far too many times.
-I just finished GMing an Ascendant campaign, which is a super hero RPG system made by the guy who made ACKs.
-Burning Wheel, which was a fascinatingly deep and realistic fantasy medieval sim essentially.

I think that's all, maybe there's a few others in there I played once or twice that I can't recall. Right now, my group and I are taking a break from our Ascendant game and switching to the classic 1986 TSR Marvel Super Heroes system for something a little more light mechanics wise, I'm running that too so it's been a lot of random super villain generation for me lately.

Oh, and I can't believe I forgot to mention the Call of Cthulhu RPG- it's a great system that perfectly captures the source material, complete with every other character ending up insane eventually. Played it numerous times, highly recommend it. I played the 20th Anniversary edition, think it came out in maybe 2003 or so, but I hear the latest 7th edition is a really great edition.

 

[Ravl]

In the past 10 years I've mostly played Savage Worlds, D&D 5e, Pathfinder 2e and Lancer. 5e was an absolute mess from the start and it's gotten even worse since Wotc released the Tasha book. I CANNOT believe how they made shit like the Twilight Cleric. Honestly, if I had to dm 5e again, I'd ban every book and errata after Xanathar and avoid playing past level 10.
Pathfinder 2e is way better honestly but it still has a lot of problems.

 

[Octopus]

In the past 10 years I've mostly played Savage Worlds, D&D 5e, Pathfinder 2e and Lancer. 5e was an absolute mess from the start and it's gotten even worse since Wotc released the Tasha book. I CANNOT believe how they made shit like the Twilight Cleric. Honestly, if I had to dm 5e again, I'd ban every book and errata after Xanathar and avoid playing past level 10.
Pathfinder 2e is way better honestly but it still has a lot of problems.

Oh yeah, we would only play 5e from the initial corebook with some choice additions from the OG unearthed arcana posts before they put everything into Xanathar's. If you just ignore WoTC as much as you can, it's much better unironically. The whole 'One D&D' or whatever it's called is such a silly release idea, just make 6e and get it over with already.

I played a good amount of the first Pathfinder, it was good but it was definitely crunchy mechanic wise. I like the idea but I'm not a terribly big fan of mostly everything being hard coded to feats and of the focus on multiclassing and prestige classing. I checked 2nd Ed out when it released but never ended up playing it. How does it compare to 1st Ed?

 

[Ravl]

Oh yeah, we would only play 5e from the initial corebook with some choice additions from the OG unearthed arcana posts before they put everything into Xanathar's. If you just ignore WoTC as much as you can, it's much better unironically. The whole 'One D&D' or whatever it's called is such a silly release idea, just make 6e and get it over with already.

I played a good amount of the first Pathfinder, it was good but it was definitely crunchy mechanic wise. I like the idea but I'm not a terribly big fan of mostly everything being hard coded to feats and of the focus on multiclassing and prestige classing. I checked 2nd Ed out when it released but never ended up playing it. How does it compare to 1st Ed?

2e has a focus on game balance, an obsession even. The game's is absolutely terrified of giving players game breaking options, though this only applies to casters, which are really underpowered when compared to something like the Fighter, the god of 2e:
A spellcaster like a Wizard has limited spellslots (using the Vancian System) and most strong spells have the "Incapacitation" trait, meaning that a creature of level higher than the spell's x2 gets a degree of success better when rolling against it (it can only fail its saving throw if it critically fails, and Critically succeeds if it gets a success->the spell does nothing. Normally you only critically fail if you roll equal or lower than the DC -10, the contrary applies for critical success).
Meanwhile a Fighter has no resources to manage, easely outdamaging a Wizard by just hitting with his sword, which he can do for free each round. They have absolutely crazy abilities like: if you hit the enemy with an opportunty attack triggered by it trying cast a spell, the casting is disrupted, wasting the enemy's turn and spell slot. At level 11 they can attack a creature and make it fall prone by just hitting it.
Both of these abilities have no cool down and require no saving throw, you just need to hit the creature, meanwhile the poor Wizard has to waste his spell slot and hope the enemy fails.
Btw did I tell you that Fighters have a bonus to attack rolls compared to other classes?

 

[Octopus]

2e has a focus on game balanced, an obsession even. The game's is absolutely terrified of giving players game breaking options, though this only applies to casters, which are really underpowered when compared to something like the Fighter, the god of 2e:
A spellcaster like a Wizard has limited spellslots (using the Vancian System) and most strong spells have the "Incapacitation" trait, meaning that creature of level higher than the spell's x2 gets a degree of success better when rolling against it (it can only fail its saving throw if it critically fails, and Critically succeeds if it gets a success->the spell does nothing. Normally you only critically fail if you roll equal or lower that the DC -10, the contrary applies for critical success).
Meanwhile a Fighter has no resources to manage, easely outdamaging a Wizard by just hitting with his sword, which he can do for free each round. They have absolutely crazy abilities like: if you hit the enemy with an opportunty attack triggered by an enemy trying to cast a spell, the casting is disrupted, wasting the enemy's turn and spell slot. At level 11 they can attack a creature and make it fall prone by just hitting it.
Both of these abilities have no cool down and require no saving throw, you just need to hit the creature, meanwhile the poor Wizard has to waste his spell slot and hope the enemy fails.
Btw did I tell you that Fighters have a bonus to attack rolls compared to other classes?
View attachment 1108

That's a bizarre reversal of power tier, the martial class overtaking the magic caster. Pathfinder 1 did already have the start of that due to their being some ridiculous feats they could take- I played a fighter at one point who dual wielded great swords with the monkey grip feat making about 3 or 4 attacks a round at a still positive attack bonus even while using power attack, but at least he wasn't knocking casters prone just because he interrupted a spell.

I think they clearly overtuned martial classes, considering in every other edition the magic casters greatly out power anything else eventually as the general trope.

I remember looking at the Monk (my personal favourite class idea in most things) specifically in 2nd Ed Pathfinder and seeing some good stuff in there with the different stance feats. It gave some cool flavour which is usually lacking with the Monk type class.