Tabletop Roleplaying Games (D&D, Pathfinder, CoC, ETC.)

[Wormy]

How come later D&D editions don’t have domain play or mass combat? I look at BECMI, 0e, 1e, and (to a lesser extent) 2e, and I’m wondering why the local lord can’t just give us a plot of land for our heroics like in the old days?

Damn, that was honestly one of my favorite things with a successful character. Our group's GM's are even keen to do it as it opens up all sorts of side quest shinnegans.

What most people wanted to do at high level was take dimensional portals into new realms to kill the gods, not manage tax revenue.

Those people didn't know how to delegate. Tax policy? Infrastructure? That's why I hire NPC Sages!

 

[Adamska]

I really like that stuff too, but I haven't found a group of players that shares that interest so far. I'm not sure if WotC dropped that stuff due to lack of interest, or if newer players are just unaware that you could do that kind of stuff in their games because WotC dropped it. Part of the issue might also be that most games don't get past low-level play, and domain stuff just doesn't become relevant until your group gets to mid or high-level play.

If you want some 3rd party books that add some really good rules for domains and mass combat rules for 5th edition, MCDM has produced two books, Strongholds and Followers and Kingdoms and Warfare, which have rules for these respectively.

Spoiler: links if you care

https://shop.mcdmproductions.com/collections/digital/products/strongholds-followers-pdf

https://shop.mcdmproductions.com/collections/digital/products/kingdoms-and-warfare-pdf

It's the former.

Despite the people in this thread constantly saying that they like the mass combat elements from early editions and 4, it was blatantly clear back then and now still that most TTRPG players don't play it for mass combat and actually have little interest in doing that. 4 had a shortened life span precisely because it tried to go back to that. 3.5 actually TRIED to do this too with the Miniatures Handbook early in its dev cycle... it clearly didn't sell well since they stopped early on. 1e quickly began spinning off from chainmail since it was more popular among the tiny gaming community at the time.

If there was interest in mass combat games, they played other minis games that had more streamlined rules or focused solely on that detail.

This question is similar to people who wonder why most MMOs don't focus on PVP. Sure, there's a vocal element that loves it, but it's always a tiny minority compared to the norm and games that focus on it tend to eat shit and fold up.

 

[AGreatDipAtAFairPrice]

Mass combat is something that comes up rarely in most campaigns, is difficult to do even when the rules are good and for a d20 game just isn't what people signed up for. Most settings tack it on as an afterthought if at all in the core rules and its something that is put out by the game company or players after the game has existed for years. It is very clearly not the focus of these d20 games so the mechanics can suffer. If people want a mass combat game they'd play that from the beginning. Its why many companies have the PC side of the game and the mass combat side of the game separated.

It can be a decent change of pace for a Dungeons and Dragons style game, like you did a few dozen sessions that didn't have mass combat and hey, there's a little company sized fight you can get in. It is something to do once or twice as a switch up. There's a plot point in the campaign I'm in now which will likely involve some mass combat...and I'm 50/50 excited for it and kind of dreading it, even though the other 3 times went well from a gameplay and outcome for the PC side. It is a mindfuck for myself and most of the other players to try to remember and effectively utilize rules that are so rarely used and kind of confusing when they are, just off the basis of so rarely interacting with them alone. That is a best case scenario! If the rules are a clearly tacked off afterthought by designers and DMs with little mass combat experience in writing them and using them, then you're definitely screwed.

For me it feels like dozens of combatants are all simultaneously interacting with a Dungeons and Dragons style system's subsystems for grappling and swallowing whole and item saving throws for potentially hours...

 

[eternal dog mongler]

It is a mindfuck for myself and most of the other players to try to remember and effectively utilize rules that are so rarely used and kind of confusing when they are, just off the basis of so rarely interacting with them alone.

This is a big reason why even the old heads don't do much mass combat anymore unless the campaign is designed around it. Stuff like Chainmail works well but...it's not the D&D ruleset and doesn't even really feel like it.

Then you have different rulesets that came out in that era that are a bit at cross purposes. Do you want your PCs to dominate the battlefield? Are they more like elite units? Or are they just commanders? Because different rulesets had different design goals.

 

[Judge Dredd]

Maybe I’m just retarded, but now I’m thinking. How come later D&D editions don’t have domain play or mass combat? I look at BECMI, 0e, 1e, and (to a lesser extent) 2e, and I’m wondering why the local lord can’t just give us a plot of land for our heroics like in the old days?

I agree with most here. There are other games where you can do that. To use 40k as an example. If DnD is Kill Team, mass battles are Epic.

But I want to build on what @eternal dog mongler and @The Ugly One said. One of the big problems is tying that to the campaign and making the PCs matter. I don't mean to repeat myself, but I was in a campaign with a city building element once, and it had basically nothing to do with what the PCs were doing. It was like every few sessions we'd break to play a shitty version of Sim City.

Another problem is that mass battles don't really feature the kind of game 5e is. People ignore rules for ammo and carry weight because they're clunky, boring, and not need for a linear DM plotted game (I don't know if there's a term for that). In an old school game those things matter a lot.

Sure, there's a vocal element that loves it, but it's always a tiny minority compared to the norm and games that focus on it tend to eat shit and fold up.

A bit off topic, but I notice that with raids too. I don't play MMOs, but the fanbase always seems hungry for raids and hate the leveling grind to get to that content. Even pseudo mmos like Borderlands have this. Yet the filler grind content is the most popular, while few players touch raids.

I remember The Division 2 released a raid and only 5000 of the millions of players beat it, and only 8 on console.

 

[The Ugly One]

I agree with most here. There are other games where you can do that. To use 40k as an example. If DnD is Kill Team, mass battles are Epic.

But I want to build on what @eternal dog mongler and @The Ugly One said. One of the big problems is tying that to the campaign and making the PCs matter. I don't mean to repeat myself, but I was in a campaign with a city building element once, and it had basically nothing to do with what the PCs were doing. It was like every few sessions we'd break to play a shitty version of Sim City.

Another problem is that mass battles don't really feature the kind of game 5e is. People ignore rules for ammo and carry weight because they're clunky, boring, and not need for a linear DM plotted game (I don't know if there's a term for that). In an old school game those things matter a lot.

You spend all this time learning reality-bending spells or acquiring epic swords, and now we're going to order around mooks to go do mook things? I think a fundamental problem here is that very, very little of what you add to your character sheet as you level up applies to having a kingdom or a wizard's school or whatever.

A bit off topic, but I notice that with raids too. I don't play MMOs, but the fanbase always seems hungry for raids and hate the leveling grind to get to that content. Even pseudo mmos like Borderlands have this. Yet the filler grind content is the most popular, while few players touch raids.

I remember The Division 2 released a raid and only 5000 of the millions of players beat it, and only 8 on console.

This is because the Division 2 doesn't allow players to meet up via the in-game service; you're required to find people via reddit or Discord for some insane reason. Most games do this with their raids because game companies hate you.

 

[AGreatDipAtAFairPrice]

As for end game stuff, roleplaying stuff, running a business or a kingdom stuff, there's enough people that would enjoy at least some part of a Dungeons and Dragons game to be like this and its supported in prior editions and other games better than in 5E so I think rules like that will come out before mass combat rules.

People sometimes get to a point, "I'd still like to do things with these characters, but they are all really high level and wealthy, and what happens if they retire from adventuring, but do other things?" There is also that complaint or remark, "go into the dungeon, kill the dragon, again and again and again, 80+ percent of the rules are about going into dungeons and killing things" and this would give those people something more to do. Is a Dungeons and Dragons style game ideal for this, or set up with this in mind as a deliberate design? No, and not usually, a least not lately, but this is something that I think would not be much harder than mass combat, possibly easier, and likely more preferred. For 5E, given that it looks like its being wrapped up and is about 8 years old, I'd vastly prefer End Stage Content, Kingdom Running, Running a Business, Logistics and Dragons style stuff to get a 200 to 300 page book than another dose of Unearthed Arcana and stapled together web articles called Douchebag's Guide To Everything.

 

[Corn Flakes]

D&D has never really been for large-scale combat or kingdom-level management. That's not to say a GM who's interested in doing it couldn't do it, but they'd be homebrewing and houseruling everything. At some point if the characters are too powerful/wealthy/important to go dungeoncrawling, it's perfectly fine for them to retire from adventuring. But it's a game about adventures. Those retired characters can then become background characters, mentors, questgivers, expedition sponsors, lords and kings. There are scarcely better rewards for a well-played character than to be immortalized into the setting. If you really wanted to manage a kingdom... well, I'm sure there are videogames and boardgames for that, and it won't require any of the GM and the other players' time.

Anyhow, even back during the early, early days when getting throngs of followers was just a perk of reaching higher levels, most of those rules were still pretty abstracted. All those lands and subjects were there mostly for flavor and for something to do between adventures (or as a motivation, since you will want to go deal with something messing with your peasants), most of it was still happening at the GM's discretion. Did it make you feel badass, going from Brynselweyr the Fighter to Lord Brynselweyr Sunblade, Master of Castle Redmourne? Sure. But nothing is stopping that from happening in 5e. You might not have canonical rules for how to manage a kingdom, but who cares? It's a tiny part of one of many potential paths characters might take in any given story. If the GM wants rules they'll come up with rules themselves. If they want to keep it purely narrative, they'll do that too.

 

[Ghostse]

D&D has never really been for large-scale combat or kingdom-level management. That's not to say a GM who's interested in doing it couldn't do it, but they'd be homebrewing and houseruling everything. At some point if the characters are too powerful/wealthy/important to go dungeoncrawling, it's perfectly fine for them to retire from adventuring. But it's a game about adventures. Those retired characters can then become background characters, mentors, questgivers, expedition sponsors, lords and kings. There are scarcely better rewards for a well-played character than to be immortalized into the setting. If you really wanted to manage a kingdom... well, I'm sure there are videogames and boardgames for that, and it won't require any of the GM and the other players' time.

Anyhow, even back during the early, early days when getting throngs of followers was just a perk of reaching higher levels, most of those rules were still pretty abstracted. All those lands and subjects were there mostly for flavor and for something to do between adventures (or as a motivation, since you will want to go deal with something messing with your peasants), most of it was still happening at the GM's discretion. Did it make you feel badass, going from Brynselweyr the Fighter to Lord Brynselweyr Sunblade, Master of Castle Redmourne? Sure. But nothing is stopping that from happening in 5e. You might not have canonical rules for how to manage a kingdom, but who cares? It's a tiny part of one of many potential paths characters might take in any given story. If the GM wants rules they'll come up with rules themselves. If they want to keep it purely narrative, they'll do that too.

Agreed; Keep building is fun, but the rules for mass combat are super abstracted.
I'd argue that's sort of the point: Its less about autistically equipping & deploying your army and more about "Was I successful in resolving my dispute with my rival via violence?"

 

[Judge Dredd]

This is because the Division 2 doesn't allow players to meet up via the in-game service; you're required to find people via reddit or Discord for some insane reason. Most games do this with their raids because game companies hate you.

Most games do it because fanbases hate matchmaking for raids as it allows "scrubs" or "pubs" (ie. normal people) to play. I've seen people in a mouth frothing rage (or as close as text allows) because of WoW Raid Finder.

I forgot the name Raid Finder and had to google it. The second result is someone on reddit complaining about it.

It's not really raiding- its just a zerg with 24 randoms.

Raiding is about communication, teamwork, strategy, and patience. It's about playing with friends and growing as a team.

Raid finder has none of those.

 

[The Ugly One]

Most games do it because fanbases hate matchmaking for raids as it allows "scrubs" or "pubs" (ie. normal people) to play. I've seen people in a mouth frothing rage (or as close as text allows) because of WoW Raid Finder.

I forgot the name Raid Finder and had to google it. The second result is someone on reddit complaining about it.

So basically, we're not allowed to have matchmaking for raids because it makes the "hardcore" cope and seethe to just know, in their minds, that somebody out there did the same raid as them without belonging to a clan.

And yet, there are third party matchmaking services. I tried to use one for Destiny, but then after a couple days of not being able to schedule something, I realized Destiny is boring anyway.

 

[anti SJW]

 

[ZMOT]

WotC had made the same mistake as TSR during 4e. Between 2008 and 2012 they put out a book almost every 5 weeks like clockwork. And then were surprised when only the "core" of PHB 1-3, DMG 1+2 and MM 1-3 were selling decently while all the setting, world building, power source and adventure books were selling like garbage.

it's actually worse now because you forget two things: dungeon masters guild and official WOTC stuff half the time being utter shit. now guess who gets a nice and juicy cut for all the necessary "fixes" and "plugins" sold on dmsguild? authors get a 50% cut, up to you to estimate how much WOTC takes of the other half.

(I also don't think they released any 4e content)

hardly anyone did due to the SDL and WOTC wanting a cut of every sale, while preventing another paizo situation. since that obviously didn't work out as planned (and was retarded to begin with), they gone back to the OGL and reap in money from third party sales and get their brand strengthened by everyone selling a "5e" product.

For example, Return of the Runelords, there is an option to keep Xanderghul alive, by accepting his surrender. Personally, I'd take that route, because one of the most powerful ancient runelords, one that manages to become a demigod, alive to meddle in the present day seems far more interesting than that fat jealous hag Belimarius. The very next chapter, however, assumes outright you kill Xanderghul and you somehow will never, ever kill Belimarius. So in the end, the two Runelords that survive are the two surviving women. One is a tyrannical seductress-sorceress with insanely high CHA score, and yet adventurers are assumed to instantly trust her instead of asking whether she is doing some charm-thing on them. The other one... ah who knows.

The Lost Omens 2e lore all follow this. Whatever decisions you made in a certain AP that don't agree with what these people want to be canon - who cares, negated by lore.

I still take that over "what, you mean that arc has an ending? all the plot hooks lead somewhere? nah just make it up ;^)" in current official 5e material. look up rime of the frost maiden to see what I mean. avernus is apparently even worse, but I never read it myself. and the less said about radiant citadel the better.

the argument is also a bit disingenuous. if you buy an AP, you want to be railroaded, more or less. and fuck me, most people playing PNP these days, 5e especially, WANT that shit, even if they claim they don't (as if they would ever know the difference between a railroad pulled of in a smart way and "true" sandbox). and even if not, nothing prevents you from treating it like any other sourcebook ripping out bits and pieces for your own shit. no one complains if you throw out forgotten realms lore or whatever, but suddenly that seems to never be allowed or even possible when it comes to pathfinder stuff (I'm aware that makes me sounds like a butthurt paizo apologist, it simply reeks like the same "you can't RP in dnd4" shit from 10 years ago).

it's also a fact meta-plot advancement is what the majority wants these days (there's a reason even fucking warhammer does it now), and in a micro scale with their own stuff. they don't want to make their OWN adventure, they want to be part of the BIG THING happening everybody else knows about. they can't talk about random stuff with their other "nerd" friends if they never heard of it or can't grasp it - same way you can tell almost anyone about the crazy shit happening in your skyrim playthrough, but try it with dwarf fortress and see their eyes glaze over. that's just how normies work, and again 5e especially (and to an extend pathfinder) is fucking full of them.

TLDR: "canon" exists because people demand it, and I rather have it and can decide to not use it, than pay money for shit that's borderline unusable (and certainly is in it's intended function) anyway.

Am sure someone will beat Paizo to the punch, there are already a few projects like Advanced 5e far into development, not to mention the amount of people doing compendiums of their house rules, homebrews and alternative classes.

they've been done for a while: https://www.levelup5e.com/

there's lots of other stuff around these days to fix the (perceived) issues of 5e in any shape or form. sure 6e will sell due to the official brand name alone, but anyone who already jumped over to an alternative has less reason to come back whatever WOTC is gonna call it.

"Black" was in there somewhere so that's probably it.
Some neat concepts but simply far, far too German for me to get into.

left: DSA player learns D&D
right: D&D player learns DSA

 

[Judge Dredd]

there's lots of other stuff around these days to fix the (perceived) issues of 5e in any shape or form.

If anyone can suggest any of these (other than advance 5e) worth looking into, I'd appreciate it.

The group I'm a player in (the one with HEMA guy) is currently on hiatus for the summer, and some of the players are asking if we can switch to PathFinder 1e because 5e is too simple. One guy is even suggesting his own homebrew system.

I still take that over "what, you mean that arc has an ending? all the plot hooks lead somewhere? nah just make it up ;^)" in current official 5e material. look up rime of the frost maiden to see what I mean. avernus is apparently even worse, but I never read it myself. and the less said about radiant citadel the better.

I don't see what's wrong with the Eberron approach of "Here's the setting as it is when the campaign starts." or the Ravenloft approach of "Here's the setting, the adventure, the outcomes. Anything beyond that is up to the DM."

but suddenly that seems to never be allowed or even possible when it comes to pathfinder stuff

That's because it's how the world starts when you jump in.

Spoony had a great rant on this back when he used to put out content that I recommend.

The short version, it puts the players and the DM in a bit of pickle. I used PathFinder's not-Egypt setting as an example before, so I won't repeat it. But it leaves the DM with some less than ideal options, all of which could've been avoided.

 

[Ghostse]

@ZMOT

hardly anyone did due to the SDL and WOTC wanting a cut of every sale, while preventing another paizo situation. since that obviously didn't work out as planned (and was retarded to begin with), they gone back to the OGL and reap in money from third party sales and get their brand strengthened by everyone selling a "5e" product.

Preaching to the choir on that one.
No OGL and player-usable SRD for 4e really fucked any hope 4e had for getting players. The best WotC has done for 4e is not go after the various wikis that compile 4e shit.

 

[EnemyStand]

If anyone can suggest any of these (other than advance 5e) worth looking into, I'd appreciate it.

The group I'm a player in (the one with HEMA guy) is currently on hiatus for the summer, and some of the players are asking if we can switch to PathFinder 1e because 5e is too simple. One guy is even suggesting his own homebrew system.

Well, if you don't have issues running Pathfinder 1e wouldn't hurt to do it. But if a dude has a homebrew system make him run it. I have issues with people who homebrew a system and hand it over to other people, because they tend to sperg out if the GM messes something up in their ruleset.

 

[The Ugly One]

it's also a fact meta-plot advancement is what the majority wants these days

5e adventure books outsell entire lines of other TTRPG products. I don't personally care for them, but they're doing something right.

sure 6e will sell due to the official brand name alone,

They are completely capable of collapsing their market back to where it was in late 3.5 or 4e days. I strongly suspect that 6e will be more about removing the "problematic" bits of everything and thoroughly wokifying the game than it will be about fixing various design issues. The obnoxious power creep in Tasha's Cauldron suggests WotC is getting worse at writing rules, not better. In fact, each expansion from Xanathar's onward has been about making D&D more of a power fantasy.

 

[Ghostse]

The group I'm a player in (the one with HEMA guy) is currently on hiatus for the summer, and some of the players are asking if we can switch to PathFinder 1e because 5e is too simple. One guy is even suggesting his own homebrew system.

I since 2015 have never known PathFinder 1e to be suggested by anyone who wasn't a powergaming munchkin (before 2015 that would merely be 'rarely'). And never in the history of ever have I heard PathFinder 1e suggested by someone who actually liked roleplaying.

Depends on what you are wanting from your Roleplay sessions.

I'd say, since you're on break, give the homebrew system a try. If it sucks, you have a ready-made excuse to stop playing it in a few weeks. As @EnemyStand said, make sure they're GMing it.

 

[BlazikenLover]

Can't reply to the post, but I am surprised radiant citadel is out, feels like it wasn't announcef that long ago. Is it the one thats supposed to be like sygil/planescape?
WotC really speed up their releases

 

[Buckaroo]

Can't reply to the post, but I am surprised radiant citadel is out, feels like it wasn't announcef that long ago. Is it the one thats supposed to be like sygil/planescape?
WotC really speed up their releases

Sigil but no room to have adventures in it because violence and theft is rare and everyone is happy and on welfare. I really have no idea why they wasted time with that setting instead of focusing on the other worlds connected to it.