Dungeons & Dragons Talk

Somewhere to talk about rules, monsters, items, ideas, mechanics, etc.
Probably from 3.5 and up, but really any edition (even you strange beasts who fondly remember THAC0)

As for me, i've been playing 3.5 d&d probably for the last 10 years now. the first few years were spent solely as a player with one DM.
I read the books a bit, absorbed and learned from the one, then started to DM occasionally as well.
Being exposed to different DM and game styles over the years (especially the last several) have definitely helped me grow both as a player and as a DM i believe, which is fantastic!
As for d&d, it's still one of my favorite games, even as i look at it and see some flaws in logic or mechanics or where things could work differently. i embrace the game a living entity which can be molded to fit your players and DM style :)

Share your thoughts, experiences, questions, ideas dealing with d&d if you'd like :)

I started back in high school thanks to a friend who had been playing for years. That was over a decade ago. While I can't say I played much during college, and I played almost none after, Pen and Paper gaming started for me thanks to D&D 3.0.

I've moved away from D&D slightly, leaning more to Pathfinder for fantasy and a liking for spy settings like Spycraft or preferably, Shadowrun. But nothing will take D&D away from my heart, and I'm gonna be picking up the 5e books soon.

I got my first taste of 3e back when I was in elementary (Young'n), and was instantly hooked. However I did not get to play again until middle school where, by de facto of being the only one who owned the 3 books, I was designated DM. I went along with it, but I was very terrible at it, and the group didn't last very long.

Fast forward to when 4e came out (high school); as I did not know anyone else who played (or the proper channels to go through), I only touched this once in an LGS weekly event with the pre-made modules. I made several characters and asked the DM if they were OK, which he said yes (First red flag, being approved to play Chaotic Evil in a pre-made module, with random people). After the first 10 minutes I got a warning that Evil wasn't actually allowed (should've mentioned that), and given the oversight (and the generally boring story, damned drow), I left and wrote off 4e completely.

Now, having gotten to read through some things on Pathfinder and 5e, I'm pretty much trying to find a game for either that I can work with. When it comes to 3.5/PF, I have a tendency for making sub-optimal snowflakes (such as my wizard-experiment-dinosaur artificer, or a hedonistic summoner). As far as 5e, pre-ordered the books, because I have a gut feeling the only way I'll get to play is as a DM PC (or a very cooperative and interactive DM).

I started with a 3.5 one shot melee last one standing wins. I had a blast slicing up my new found friends and ended up winning by some fluke. This was in my second year of college about 5 years ago. I've been in several games with different DMs, Systems, and Player style. I still lean towards 3.5 and Pathfinder as my games of choice since I know them the best. I am looking forward to 5e coming out, what I've heard seems promising.

5e so far looks like it's what 4 should have been, at least from what all the hype on the interweb might have us believe.

5e is easily the best of 3.5 and the best of 4th, with some concepts from Pathfinder matched in. It goes back to the fluidity of 3.5/Pathfinder, giving some of the less option based classes like fighter more to do. I don't have any of the books yet, but I really should...

I haven't looked into 5e (I've moved away from D&D and d20 systems for the most part - I prefer slimmer games). That said, if you are all big D&D fans and would be interested in something with a bit more "storytelling" twist to it, check out 13th Age. It was designed by former D&D designers who were unhappy with 4e. Some of the "new" stuff in 5e is done (better) in 13th Age, and there are some things 13th Age does that no other game does. It's a really neat system (the only game I am a player in is a 13th Age game).

What do you consider "slimmer" games? like less rules intense, more freeform, etc etc.
D&D, or any RPG for that can be more combat or roleplay and storytelling based depending on the GM you have, and the players you have.
A lot of games have things no other system has or does the same way, but usually also some mechanics or ticks that make you raise your eyebrow at them. D20 has AC which bugs me, L5R has target numbers for hitting and a complex leveling system, Warhammer RPGs can be hard to track your character progression across job/classes and is incredibly lethal for examples.

I mean mechanically slimmer. My biggest problem with D&D is that it's mechanically bloated. There's lots of sub-mechanics in D&D that really aren't necessary (4e was worse than 3.5 for this -- skill challenges, to name one excess sub-mechanic -- not to mention all of the variations in effect types; push, pull, slide, slow, entangle, etc etc - too many little things). I don't like mechanics and rules getting in the way of our roleplaying. The mechanics (and rules) of the game should help facilitate the game by providing a structure around which we can build our story (so that it's not *just* a collaborative story telling exercise, but actually a game), but not *so much* structure that we spend more time navigating the game system than playing the game.

While you say "any RPG for that can be more combat or roleplay and storytelling based depending on the GM you have, and the players you have." - some games are better suited to certain styles of game than others. Sure, D&D can technically handle a light, fast paced, story-telling oriented, martial arts style game where players fight hundreds of mooks on their way to an epic stand off against a Kung-Fu Master. However, if that's what you want to play you'd be *much* better off using Wushu instead of D&D.

My preferred system is Savage Worlds. The system is light enough that it doesn't get in the way. It's flexible enough that I can adapt it to any setting, and any style of game (I've run traditional fantasy, humourous fantasy, supers, sci-fi and a crazy hybrid home-brew setting that included all of the above). It also plays quickly (by which I mean, a single combat of any sort - social, physical - will about half as long as an equivalent combat in D&D 3.5 or Pathfinder). It's also very brutal (players have a mere 3 wounds, and it features exploding dice - so *everything* is potentially dangerous). These are all features I want in my game. The tagline is "Fast, Furious, Fun" and I think that's an accurate summary of Savage for me.

Now, don't get me wrong - I totally recognize that D&D (and Pathfinder) are the right game for some people. Players and GM's that like a bit of tactical combat (well, a lot of tactical combat) find lots of great things in Pathfinder. These games just don't offer the balance of mechanics and role play that I am looking for.

Just picked up 5e, I'm liking what I'm seeing so far. As far as letting mechanics get in the way of roleplaying, I've always felt that it's up to the GM and Players to bring that into the game. The rules are really just structuring guidelines that can be bent if not outright ignored. As long as they're consistently ignored or bent.

Agreed - rules are guidelines the can be bent and ignored as needed. However, at a certain point it is more work to bend/ignore and manipulate a game to be more like the kind of structure that suits the game you are running than it is to just find a better system (for your needs). That's what I did. When my D&D house rule binder was getting to be a sourcebook in its own right I packed it up, and went scouring the wide world of RPGs for something more suitable to me. Best decision I made as a GM - I've since played a LOT of RPG systems, and those experiences helped me customize the way I run Savage to adapt what I felt was "the best" parts of each.

So what are peoples favorite//least favorite monsters in d&d?
Favorite//least favorite items as well i suppose.
I'm curious, and bored.. yep

Never played or seen 5e yet, hated 4e with a passion. When it came out I tried to adopt it and quickly dropped it in favor of pathfinder. D&D and d20 in general has largely been out of my gaming repertoire for a long time. I started on AD&D like 15 years ago and played D&D and d20 games to death. I am a fan of rules-lite and obscure titles now. Numenera being the closest thing to d20 that I will play. I did join the Sunken Secrets D&D game here though, mostly because I want to play something and it is all that isn't full. I have pretty much exclusively run games for more than a decade so its just nice to play. Would like to now more about 5e D&D though, if anyone cares to share in detail a bit.

I haven't been paying much attention to the new d&d really, i'll check it out when all the books are out and not before where rumors are abound.
I like d20 systems but that might be due to being familiar with them and easily working with them over the years.
The game i'm working on is loosely d20 based, but only in the fact it uses a d20 lol

Picked up 5e, seems to be much better balanced and it goes back to something like 3.5 and pathfinder. I'm still reading through so if you have specific questions let me know and I'll be happy to answer them ( I'll look it up not wing it)

I never really looked into D&D 4e so I'm basing all comparisons off of 3.5e when I talk about 5e. Just so you all know. I'm also only working off of the Player's Handbook. They've made Warlock into a class, which is much more balanced than when it was before. They've added Dragonborn and Tieflings as basic races, also added variations of basic races. More to come.

Going to pick up the 5e Monster manual and try and run a small game with a few friends to see how it runs.

I cut my teeth on Dungeons and Dragons, and have frankly loved every edition. Including 4th edition. Had the rule set for 4th edition come out under an indie developer it would have been lauded. The problem it ran into was it didn't match the style people consider to be "Dungeons and Dragons". I still enjoyed a lot of gameplay inder 4th though.

For D&D I've spent the majority of time playing under the 2nd and 3.X editions, to the point that I've fatigued myself with those rulesets and have never even touched Pathfinder as a result. I can see that it's a better version of the rulse but I spent over a decade with that ruleset, I think I'm spent!

5th edition is shaping up to be a real stand out. The system is basically the better parts of all D&D cribbed into one ruleset with some little additions (Adv/Disadv) sprinkled in for spice.

All that being said about D&D, I don't care for any version of it in my PBP games. For that I love Savage Worlds!

I'm kinda excited to see a Savage Worlds game get underway so I can see how it goes/works.

That being said, I'm not sure 4th would have been lauded under a indie dev, but would certainly have been better received. My biggest complaint to it was that it was such a big departure, and that it came out at the same time that Wizards was pushing an online tool to play games themselves. It reeked of MMO-ness to me, the desire to get a game out and going to draw in a crowd of people who had a small chance to be interested at best, while upsetting dedicated gamers. And devs must have agreed; we saw a lot of the game devs leave Wizards around that time.

Over all, I didn't think 4th was bad. I enjoyed its open form, I liked its simplicity. I didn't like its restrictiveness, any more than I liked an MMO where attacks are somewhat cyclic.

Dungeons and Dragons has some of the best potential for a quality MMO I can think of and they have honestly never capitalized on it. 4th was their best chance to have done it in the traditional form of MMO's but I would much rather see some quirky MMO that doesn't just roll out the usual tropes of an MMO rather than just match WoW.

Hell, my favorite MMO of all time was City of Heroes namely because it was just a tad different from the rest of them.