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

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Yaoi Huntress Earth said:
Oh man, this I gotta hear.
Click to expand...
My main experience with them were that they were the worst group out of the lot in play-by-posts for forum games. Embarrassing mix of entitled legbeards, beta orbiter cucklords who thirsted at said legbeards, cringelord furries, and a moderate case of "fuck you dad"itis that oozed throughout.

Also had a very hilarious story told to me by an old ST about a different group where one of them kept leaving tl;dr whinefest letters over getting trolled by their totem and yeeted by Vampires since they abandoned their totem for shitty min-maxing bullshit.

These CHUDs are why I still have no interest even in New Werewolf; my experience with the brand was that heavily poisoned by them.

So yes. I can easily see the current crop oozing into the World of Darkness. It's not a hard system and the basic lot were already there to a degree.
 
Last edited:
New werewolf sucks anyways. It's basically, "You're the janitors of the spirit world, get to it."
 
robobobo said:
New werewolf sucks anyways. It's basically, "You're the janitors of the spirit world, get to it."
Click to expand...
Not to sound stupid, but just to make sure, when you mean "new werewolf", do you mean Werewolf: The Foresaken or V20 W:TA?
 
The Forsaken. Pretty sure that the V20 remake didn't change the core premise. Though I haven't read any of the 20th anniversary stuff, so could be wrong there. When I heard how utterly retarded all the changes for 20th Mage were, I didn't bother looking into any of the others.
 
robobobo said:
The Forsaken. Pretty sure that the V20 remake didn't change the core premise. Though I haven't read any of the 20th anniversary stuff, so could be wrong there. When I heard how utterly exceptional all the changes for 20th Mage were, I didn't bother looking into any of the others.
Click to expand...
Ok. I only read a little about Forsaken and I didn't like how they got rid of Lupus Garou and took out all cultural roots. In your opinion, what do you think were some of the most exceptional changes in V20 Mage were?
 
A bunch of the traditions simultaneously deciding that their names weren't woke enough and changing them despite the bulk of the traditions being hidebound and old, the sidebar that a lot of mages are trans or weird-gendered sex perverts, that sort of thing.
 
robobobo said:
A bunch of the traditions simultaneously deciding that their names weren't woke enough and changing them despite the bulk of the traditions being hidebound and old, the sidebar that a lot of mages are trans or weird-gendered sex perverts, that sort of thing.
Click to expand...
Now I almost want to read that, just to check how shit it is.
 
Adamska said:
My main experience with them were that they were the worst group out of the lot in play-by-posts for forum games. Embarrassing mix of entitled legbeards, beta orbiter cucklords who thirsted at said legbeards, cringelord furries, and a moderate case of "fuck you dad"itis that oozed throughout.

Also had a very hilarious story told to me by an old ST about a different group where one of them kept leaving tl;dr whinefest letters over getting trolled by their totem and yeeted by Vampires since they abandoned their totem for shitty min-maxing bullshit.

These CHUDs are why I still have no interest even in New Werewolf; my experience with the brand was that heavily poisoned by them.

So yes. I can easily see the current crop oozing into the World of Darkness. It's not a hard system and the basic lot were already there to a degree.
Click to expand...
what's a chud
 
robobobo said:
A bunch of the traditions simultaneously deciding that their names weren't woke enough and changing them despite the bulk of the traditions being hidebound and old, the sidebar that a lot of mages are trans or weird-gento irdered sex perverts, that sort of thing.
Click to expand...


Mages have always been really weird and pervy, sadly that's historically accurate to irl wizards, most of the sidbar shit can be ignored out of hand. I actually prefer 3rd edition but I found it an okay read, especially as a the disparate alliance provides and interesting contrast as a group rooted in traditional cultural and mystic origins vs the more cosmepolitan adaptive 9 traditions.
Interestingly the recent book of the fallen states that SJW's can be catspaws of Nephandi just as easily as their opposite numbers. The most important thing from the Fallens perspective is that people genuinly hate each other and act shamefully.
 
I'm still trying to figure out how 3E/3.5E monks were overpowered without a lot of chicanery or 3rd party bullshit. Sorry, @Spunt but I can't get my head around that.

PF1's Unchained monk is at least decent thanks to full HD and BAB, plus changing flurry of blows away from a pseudo-2WF attack (seriously, whose idea was that? Monte Cook?) to a straight up 'one extra attack at highest bonus', and basically building in the qinggong monk archetype into it so you can mix and match powers.
 
As for the 3.5 Monk thing, it was just a passing comment from my vague recollections of a monk completely breaking a campaign I played in, but there may have been some third party fuckery or some phenomenal stats involved. I do remember the DM for that campaign enjoyed snapping rulesets over his knee (he was an appalling min-maxer as a player) so he may have houseruled the monk into superpower because he was a weeb. Like I said, it's been over a decade.

For my campaign, I've narrowed it down to Pathfinder or 5e. The core rulebooks for 3.5 are too hard to find and most of my player pool (students from local universities) aren't likely to have rulebooks or know the ruleset well enough not to need them.

I've run low-magic, survival-type campaigns in 3.5 with success before. I didn't find the system too easy for the players and so long as you don't hand out too many baubles as a DM you can keep things competitive without the players feeling under-rewarded. It's all about managing expectations. When you're in a Mad Max wasteland, what would be a boring item or encounter in a normal campaign is an amazing find. I had two players actually brawl for the right to have a masterwork longsword, and an encounter with an Ankheg was a cause for wild excitement at the thought of stripping its corpse for its blood and exoskeleton - it wasn't just a monster, it was a resource. Limiting arcane casters to sorcerors only worked well. The sorc is a much more focused caster with a narrower but more potent spell pool, and is slightly better in a fight where they can't cast. I didn't get any caster supremacy issues in that campaign either.

It still strikes me that 5e PCs are much harder to kill than 3.5e PCs unless you start introducing houserules. Once they hit 8th level or so they're almost indestructible, whereas even at that level 3e PCs were vulnerable to all sorts of things. I'll see if PF is any better, or if using an alternative encounter table/formula for 5e restores the balance a bit, as all accounts say that the default one is too much of a walkover for the PCs 90% of the time.
 
Spunt said:
As for the 3.5 Monk thing, it was just a passing comment from my vague recollections of a monk completely breaking a campaign I played in, but there may have been some third party fuckery or some phenomenal stats involved. I do remember the DM for that campaign enjoyed snapping rulesets over his knee (he was an appalling min-maxer as a player) so he may have houseruled the monk into superpower because he was a weeb. Like I said, it's been over a decade.
Click to expand...
Ah. If that's the case, I withdraw my comment. The monk class as written in 3.5e and core PF is pretty bad, and I don't think I can blame anyone for trying to fix it (heck, I was doing some brainstorming a while back before PF Unchained came out).

For my campaign, I've narrowed it down to Pathfinder or 5e. The core rulebooks for 3.5 are too hard to find and most of my player pool (students from local universities) aren't likely to have rulebooks or know the ruleset well enough not to need them.
Click to expand...
You can locate scans online here and there, but this might be the best solution.

I've run low-magic, survival-type campaigns in 3.5 with success before. I didn't find the system too easy for the players and so long as you don't hand out too many baubles as a DM you can keep things competitive without the players feeling under-rewarded. It's all about managing expectations. When you're in a Mad Max wasteland, what would be a boring item or encounter in a normal campaign is an amazing find. I had two players actually brawl for the right to have a masterwork longsword, and an encounter with an Ankheg was a cause for wild excitement at the thought of stripping its corpse for its blood and exoskeleton - it wasn't just a monster, it was a resource. Limiting arcane casters to sorcerors only worked well. The sorc is a much more focused caster with a narrower but more potent spell pool, and is slightly better in a fight where they can't cast. I didn't get any caster supremacy issues in that campaign either.
Click to expand...
Are you familiar with the Dark Sun setting? Athas?

Because if you're not, holy shit, you need to look it up. Seems like it'd be right up your alley.

Having played a sorcerer from 7th-18th level in a PF campaign, I will note that the human racial favored class option does break the 'narrow pool' issue.

It still strikes me that 5e PCs are much harder to kill than 3.5e PCs unless you start introducing houserules. Once they hit 8th level or so they're almost indestructible, whereas even at that level 3e PCs were vulnerable to all sorts of things. I'll see if PF is any better, or if using an alternative encounter table/formula for 5e restores the balance a bit, as all accounts say that the default one is too much of a walkover for the PCs 90% of the time.
Click to expand...
Couldn't tell you one way or the other, to be honest.
 
Emperor Julian said:
Interestingly the recent book of the fallen states that SJW's can be catspaws of Nephandi just as easily as their opposite numbers. The most important thing from the Fallens perspective is that people genuinly hate each other and act shamefully.
Click to expand...
Say, is The Book of the Fallen any good? I've heard mixed reviews of it.
 
Yaoi Huntress Earth said:
Say, is The Book of the Fallen any good? I've heard mixed reviews of it.
Click to expand...

In my opinions it has five major shortfallings

1) It's doesnt really explore non-western nephandi
2) In it's enthusiasm to emphasize the nihilistic aspect it down plays the creepy lovecraftian/Satanic aspects
3) The first chapter is just some evil prick rambling on and does nothing for the fluff or crunch.
4) It isnt the book of madness.
5) The metaphysical underpinnings the quiploth while neat do undermine alternative perspectives such as Technocratic nephandi

That said theres a lot of good fresh stuff here. I really think the goatkids faction and their's a lot of cool exploration of their mystcism. Definatly worth a read.
 
Spunt said:
As for the 3.5 Monk thing, it was just a passing comment from my vague recollections of a monk completely breaking a campaign I played in, but there may have been some third party fuckery or some phenomenal stats involved. I do remember the DM for that campaign enjoyed snapping rulesets over his knee (he was an appalling min-maxer as a player) so he may have houseruled the monk into superpower because he was a weeb. Like I said, it's been over a decade.

For my campaign, I've narrowed it down to Pathfinder or 5e. The core rulebooks for 3.5 are too hard to find and most of my player pool (students from local universities) aren't likely to have rulebooks or know the ruleset well enough not to need them.

I've run low-magic, survival-type campaigns in 3.5 with success before. I didn't find the system too easy for the players and so long as you don't hand out too many baubles as a DM you can keep things competitive without the players feeling under-rewarded. It's all about managing expectations. When you're in a Mad Max wasteland, what would be a boring item or encounter in a normal campaign is an amazing find. I had two players actually brawl for the right to have a masterwork longsword, and an encounter with an Ankheg was a cause for wild excitement at the thought of stripping its corpse for its blood and exoskeleton - it wasn't just a monster, it was a resource. Limiting arcane casters to sorcerors only worked well. The sorc is a much more focused caster with a narrower but more potent spell pool, and is slightly better in a fight where they can't cast. I didn't get any caster supremacy issues in that campaign either.

It still strikes me that 5e PCs are much harder to kill than 3.5e PCs unless you start introducing houserules. Once they hit 8th level or so they're almost indestructible, whereas even at that level 3e PCs were vulnerable to all sorts of things. I'll see if PF is any better, or if using an alternative encounter table/formula for 5e restores the balance a bit, as all accounts say that the default one is too much of a walkover for the PCs 90% of the time.
Click to expand...

I swear I say most of those rulebooks and side books available as epubs and pdfs on various torrent sites, and at least once in a /TG/ thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom