It's not my fault 99% of their target audience consist of people on a mental development level of an average Teletubby.

Man, I need some mouse skulls.

I can buy a bag full of raccoon penis bones, but I have to harvest my own mouse skulls one at a time.

Shit, what has this world come to?

>>17499923
If you think that's ridiculous you're overlooking the fact that people think a company is going to take the suggestions of customers when it comes to creating a new system

Yes, OP; This board will be shit for the next six months and you have already elected to be part of the problem.

>ppreg gerymame

>>17499932

Do elves or dwarves have penis bones too?

>>17499932
No bones in penis. Corpora spongiosum and Corpus cavernosum.

What the fuck is the matter with me?

I sympathize with Girls Gone Feywild there. I usually like to make any game I run as dice-light as I can, which makes combat in D&D a bit of a problem. If I can get through a whole session without my players having to pick up the dice more than once or twice, and the players have been genuinely having a good time, I consider it a win.

I'd also sympathize with Mouse Skulls there, because shit. If I could figure out how to make mouse skulls work instead of dice, I totally would.

>>17499940

I'm not bothered because I just use the 4chan catalog to browse /tg/

http://catalog.neet.tv/tg/

>>17499947
>No bones in penis.

OH SHIT, WHAT NOW?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baculum
http://www.skullsunlimited.com/record_variant.php?id=4898

>>17499932
buy a snake and feed it mice

it'll poop out mice skulls for your D&D sessions, and when you have enough you can feed the snake to someone's dog and have a snake skull

>>17499949
>I usually like to make any game I run as dice-light as I can, which makes combat in D&D a bit of a problem.

Why would you be using D&D as a framework if you want to run dice-light? There's tons of systems that would allow you to do so more easily and elegantly.

>>17499947
>No bones in penis

Most mammals have penis bones. They're called Bacculae. Humans are a rare exception to the bacculum rule. Which has interesting repercussions for mating, since the physiological response is a shit ton more involved and requires a lot more arousal than what's necessary for just pushing the bone out the sheathe.

>>17499994
I've had a really hard time finding one for high fantasy.

The last game I tried was Burning Wheel, and it was even more dice-heavy than D&D.

>>17499986
And then if I want a dog skull?

>>17499995

did you just... have that on hand?

>>17500005
dog-eating horse, duh.

>>17500005
Bears.

D&D on Ayashuasca would be cool, if only Ayashuasca didn´t have you throwing up for 6 hours straight.

Seriously, I suggest you do Ayashuasca in a bathtub, a lake, or something, because carrying a bucket around is a fucking hassle while you´re tripping balls.

>>17499932
IT HAS COME FULL CIRCLE.
TO PLAY D&D, YOU MUST SLAY 10 MICE AND BRING ME THEIR SKULLS.
RETURN TO ME FOR YOUR NEXT MISSION WHEN YOU'VE DONE THIS.

>>17500026
Is THAT why you have a glowing exclamation point over your head?

>>17499947

Whales have a penis bone though.

>someone says there's no bones in penises
>/tg/ has links readily at hand not only disproving this, but also giving him a place to buy penis bones in bulk
I love you guys.

>>17500020
>
>Seriously, I suggest you do Ayashuasca in a bathtub, a lake, or something

That sounds like a great way to die of drowning in your own vomit.

>>17499945
In my game, they do not. Goblins however do, which is why they tend towards polygamy and fecundity.

>>17500042
They make great spell components! Bigger ones, like seals and walruses, hell...those could be wands.

>>17500054
And adventurer rape?

A dragon penis bone would make a bitchin' club.

>>17500043
If you can vomit a bathtub full of vomit, drowning is the least of your problems.

>>17500054
Kobold penis bones are going to be on the next random loot table I write up.

There's going to be a whole treasure chest full of them. And the PCs will have no idea. At all.

>>17500068
Dude. You only need a couple inches of fluid to drown.

Also, "lake" was one of the examples given.

>>17500004
I'll write you a system.

You have a few attributes: Might, Magic, and Moxie. Might is used for combat, Magic is used for magic (which is long-term stuff based on rituals) and Moxie is used for rogue and bard type stuff. Each player starts with seven dice to distribute between these attributes. He rolls the dice whenever he does an action that takes dice.
Each character also has health equal to his might; combat is an opposed might roll and whoever wins that roll off deals a wound to the other.

Boom, you have a lighter system than D&D that's perfectly good.

A Girls Gone Feywild T-Shirt would probably sell.

I've ran games under two of these people.

>>17500069

>>17500020

That's because ayahuasca is a brew that comes up to a shit-ton of DXM. Generally, this is taken as part of a ritual ceremony where you don't go anywhere. You sit there, throwing up into the bucket and trying to obtain meaning from the trip.

>>17500069
That makes no sense. Kobolds are reptiles. They don't have penises. They have Chloacas.

>>17500099
>You sit there, throwing up into the bucket and trying to obtain meaning from the trip.

"And what did you discover?"

"That I hate vomiting."

>>17500113

Except that your vomit looks like the Amazon river flowing out of your mouth.

>>17500113
Vomiting can be pretty cathartic man.

>>17500084
That reminds me. I totally need to make the Whizzard in Mage: The Ascension.

It's entirely possible to make in the system. And there's no way to stop me.

Sometimes, I wonder what I've become since I've found /tg/.

>>17500111
Maybe he's playing AD&D. You know, back when kobolds were fucking mammals.

Also, reptiles have penises and they're disgusting.

>>17500004
Legends of Anglerre, FATE's best D&D-esque fantasy supplement, is not exactly rules lite but it is extremely intuitive. You should look it up.

>>17500130

If you're a snake you get TWO penises!

>>17500130
>You know, back when kobolds were fucking mammals.
That can still happen in 3ed.

>>17499940
>Yes, OP; This board will be shit for the next six months and you have already elected to be part of the problem.
This isn't something you can choose or choose not to be a part of. The fifth edition debacle will roll over this board like a storm cloud, and nothing can end the downpour except the passage of time.

It doesn't matter if you discuss the fifth edition, if you discuss the people discussing the fifth edition, if you like it, if you hate it, or if you even care.

The storm has come, and we will all weather it as well as we can.

>>17500154
This.

It's like Avatar or the start of a new season of MLP on /co/. It's just something you have to buckle down, plug your orifices, and wade through.

>>17500154
I'm setting myself objectives. Like create one of the first five 5e shitstorm threads. Make one 5e troll threads in the top ten of a six month period. Make a guy right a post all in caps, he's so annoyed. Insult bingo, see how many offensive names you can get people to call you. Try to engineer a long lasting feud between 5e and some random game that has no serious connection, but which you argue will. Demonstrate how to run an 'elf rape wat do' scenario when we get the first suitable rules preview.

It's gonna be fun.

>>17500178

>Explains it perfectly

>>17500183
People like this make me chuckle heartily.

>>17499938
>what is supply and demand

>>17500183
You know what I do for fun? Walk the dogs at the animal shelter, go make fun of a shitty movie with my friends, or work on my campaign.

. . . just saying.

>>17500206
I do those things too. Except for the dog part, I'm not a dog fan.

>>17500145
>That can still happen in 3ed.
As soon as I read the previous post I knew this reply was coming.

>>17500216
But dogs are a fan of you.

>>17500235
He's very obviously one of those people. You can't honestly be surprised about him not liking dogs.

>>17500069
But who will own those? Goblins?

>>17500245
I'm one of 'those people'? What people?

I like cats; I just don't really have a preference for dogs. When I was a kid we lived in a tenement and the old lady who owned it put out boxes and food for stray cats at the back of the stairs, so at night there were literally twenty or thirty cats that came to sleep and eat. It was pretty incredible, as a kid I loved it. So my favouritism towards cats was set early.

I like how you're trying to conflate enjoying trolling /tg/ with some kind of general personality malaise though.

>>17500252
Kobolds. They're used for piercings, or fertility idols.

Turns out the kobold camp the PCs slaughtered their way into worshipped Tiamat as a fertility goddess. Which would make sense, considering how often kobolds have to fuck away their losses after an adventurer raid.

I'd describe them as "a chest full of polished, engraved kobold bones, each about the length of the largest bone in your index finger," and leave it at that.

>>17500178
Don't forget new Spacemarine codex that makes minor alterations to the fluff and get new big models.

>>17500183
>insult bingo
If you make an image for this, post it. Bingo is /tg/ related.

>>17500275
Then after the edition wars have been going on for a bit and it's clear what insults have been happening, make a new bingo for edition war threads. And we can have edition wars over edition war bingo.

The second panel is unnecessary, but I do love how the comic pretty much sums up the problems D&D 5E faces.

It wants to be everything to everyone, but the RPG community's become way more expansive and weird than any one game could hope to cater for. I mean we all know trying to please everyone never works, but seriously.

>>17500268
stolen for a /d/&d game.

>>17500268
but... those bones come from dead kobolds. Why would you keep penis bones from your own species?

>>17500315
Because they're blessed with the power to make new kobolds by enhancing your horrible kobold sex.

Look, don't ask me to explain religion. We'll be here all night.

>>17500315
Kobolds are weird, bro. And I bet they're like "Why do humans keep their deads ASHES? Humans are fucking weird..." as they continue to gather Kobold doodles after a huge massacre

>>17500315
Maybe they believe in reincarnation, but in order to be reincarnated you have to be impregnated by a dude holding the penis bone of the kobold soul to be reincarnated.

So the bones are all like, the penis bones of kobold heroes and wise wizards and legendary artisans and shit. There aren't just any cocks, you just stole the dick of Kobold Da Vinci.

>>17500315
Because the kobolds are Ancestor Worshipers. And if there's one thing you want to make sure is taken care of in the great beyond, it's your penis.
Stealing it or disturbing it in anyway should bring all kinds of awful mojo on the party.
Kobold Ghosts haunting them, looking for their penis.

There's a campaign idea here

A horrible, horrible idea

>>17500315
...You do know that there are human penises kept in private collections and museums, don't you? And in most cases there isn't even a magical or religious reason, it's just because sentient creatures are fucked in the head.

>>17500315
Are you serious?

>almossi justified.70

>>17500334
> you just stole the dick of Kobold Da Vinci

THIS WILL BE MY NEXT CAMPAIGN'S PLOT HOOK.

I SWEAR IT.

>>17500350
CAPTCHA ate my picture.

>>17500352
OH MAN. Make them want the treasure. Make them steal it, and then have SO many little Kobolds coming for them. They'll have no idea why.

And then drop it on them. Make them feel as though though stole the holy grail and murdered a bunch of little alligators trying to get it back. That'll learn their cock-swipin' ways!

>>17500359
Cockswipers no swiping?

>>17500343
Maybe the reincarnation thing is actually true and you need to go steal the penis of bone of the ancient Kobold Dark Conqueror so he doesn't reincarnate and like, fuck your kingdom over. With his skeletal dick.

And then angry kobold ghosts looking for their missing dicks, because that has to be done.

>>17500353
Charlemagne's cock was an arm??

>Thread regarding 5th edition
>Turns into thread about kobold penis bones

Never change, /tg/
If this goes on long enough, I hope someone archives it.

>>17500373
It's pleased to meet you.

It wants to shake.

>>17500359
I can see it now. A dying little Kobold, accusing them of their crimes like it's the most heinous thing he's ever seen. Spitting up blood, tears of anger running down his little gator face, cursing the names of the "heroes" that stole their precious artifact with his final breath. "I hope you CHOKE on that cock" was his final words.

>>17500352
Plus, making it the dick of Kobold Da Vinci gives you license to trap the shit out of that dungeon and put like, reliquary golems and shit in there.

>>17500265

>I'm one of 'those people'? What people?

>I like cats;

THOSE PEOPLE

Why the fuck are kobolds being given penis bones now? They're reptilian, damn it. They don't have penises to begin with.

They have two hemipenes.

>>17500418
THAT'S WHAT I SAID.

>>17500265
>I like cats
>I'm not a fan of dogs
That is the most disgusting, ignorant thing I've ever heard. You are a fucking pig, I'm glad my grandmother isn't here to see this, you walking curse-to-this-earth.

Whosoever holds this bone, if they be worthy, shall possess the potency of Tiamat.

>>17500418
I believe the proper term is "Croco-dilly"

>>17500418
They're not reptiles, they're dragon-descended. Dragons have enormous cocks, the internet has taught me so.

>>17500435
Goddamn furries putting knots on everything.

And then they have the gall to give female dragons sideways lizard vaginas.

Not that I'm picky at this point; if it's drawn well then into the folder it goes, but still!

>>17500337
>>17500334
DING! Consider this idea stolen. totally using it.

>>17500435
The internet is wrong. Dragons lay eggs and are clearly winged reptiles. They'd have cloacas

>>17500334
>>17500337
Holy fuck. Kobolds in my setting just got a whole lot awesomer.

>>17500435
IF DRAGONS HAD PENISES WE WOULDN'T NEED DRAGON DILDOS, DUMBASS.

>>17500464
Dragon Lesbians! Don't be so narrow-minded.

>>17500460
>dragons
>clearly winged reptiles

They have six limbs and digitigrade legs. Also, they're endothermic, can subsist on minerals, and breathe magical energies.

They're not reptiles, they're dragons.

>>17500460
...I'd argue that I have lots of pics to prove dragon-cocks and you should present some to back your argument... But this is the wrong board, and I don't think I'd want to see a draconian cloacal kiss anyway, I'm not THAT sexually screwed up.
Yet.

>>17500464
Nope, we have dragon dildos because we don't want to deal with dragons every time we want their penis.

Dragons have their legs directly under their bodies.
They are clearly birds.

>>17500423
I have that guy's book sitting around somewhere.

>>17500475
Why are cloacas and penis-like organs mutually exclusive now? They aren't for ducks.

Oh god now I'm imagining a corkscrew-shaped dragon penis the size of a city bus.

>>17500475
Personally, I'd like to see it. Not to fap to or anything, just for the novelty.

>>17500505
You know, ducks can fire their penises like some kind of demented duck penis gun.

It's still attached of course, but still.

Imagine it.

>>17500505
I need some of this.

>>17500514
You don't have to be ashamed. Side stepping like that isn't fooling anyone.

5th Ed D&D: Dragons and Dicks.

oD&D 1974
aD&D 1978
2e 1989
3.0 2000
3.5 2003
4e 2008
5e 2013(?)

between oD&D and 2e = 15
between 2e and 3.0 = 11
between 3.5 and 4e = 5
between 4e and 5e = 5(?)

time is diminishing between editions releases. At this rate we will have 6th edition by 2016 and 7th edition by 2018. Guys, both 9th and 10th edition will be released in 2020.

>>17500514
>Not to fap to or anything, just for the novelty.
Sure, and I'd like to see a massive flood of painstakingly-drawn female thri-kreen porn for the same reason.

You know... novelty.

>>17500478
Reptiles, birds, same difference. Look at dinos.

>>17500473
The endothermic and subsist on minerals part requires proof. And even the magical energies aren't always that magical. They are evocated, not summoned IIRC.

>>17500542
Draconomicon, 3.5e. Fuck, the 3.5e monster manual states that most metallic dragons subsist on metallic ores.

They are not reptiles or mammals or amphibians. They're their own distinct group.

>>17500542
>The endothermic and subsist on minerals part requires proof.

Races of the Dragon.

>I'm imagining a corkscrew-shaped dragon penis the size of a city bus.

>*welcometo4chan.jpg*

I've spent the last half of this thread trying not to choke while laughing. Penis bones: Rare Component of the Year, all years.

>>17500537
well, that's pretty much what I keep my thrikreen porn around for. Novelty. That and shitspamming.

>>17500551
>>17500557
Ok, I believe you. But wait, so only the evil dragons eat sheep and stuff?

>>17500564
>shitspamming

But Anonymous...

I think at this rate, 5th ed D&D will consist entirely of graphic descriptions, stats, and random charts for penis types

>>17500573
Thrikreen and other bug porn makes great shitspamming material.

Usually gets me b& though.

>this entire thread

>>17500584
THAT'S ALL I AM TO YOU? FINE! I DON'T NEED YOU! I DON'T NEED ANYONE!

>>17500582
You forgot the catgirls and drow as playable races from the first PHB.

Seriously, if they're really trying to make this based on fan-feedback, with most of the people I know who play the newer versions of D&D, the traditional races are going to take a sideline to anything that's dark and edgy and sexy.

>>17500568
In D&D most of the metal and chromatic dragons don't really bother with the sheep-eating/princess kidnapping business. They're too busy stacking their coins up and shapeshifting into humanoids to make more half-dragons.

That being said, the chromatics DO occasionally get up to hyjinks like that, but it's more just because they're feeling dickish than because they draw a lot of nourishment from sheep.

>>17500582
If they're smart they'll enter into an advertising deal with Coca-Cola for size comparison purposes.

>>17500614
Ok, so ma DM homebrewed that, too. I guess not much of value was lost, and it's consistent with the general lower magic feel.

And well, by sheep I also mean dire mammuth and stuff, in case that wasn't clear.

>>17500663
DM fiat always trumps established lore, imo. But yeah, generally speaking as they're written, the dragons in D&D are terrifying forces of nature. They either want to be left the fuck alone, or if they come out to play they raze whole villages for the lulz.

That being said, in a lower magic campaign with a more 'traditional' feel to it, I can completely see changing things like that around to fit better.

>>17500663
actually i believe the way they work in 3.x is that dragons can eat pretty much anything, with meats being the healthiest, but they still can survive off of minerals, with certain minerals being considered delicacies (gems)

>>17500706
DIET
Dragons are carnivores
and top predators,
though in practice
they are omnivorous
and eat almost
anything if necessary. A dragon can
literally eat rock or dirt and survive.
Some dragons, particularly the metallic
ones, subsist primarily on inorganic
fare. Such dining habits, however, are cultural
in origin.
Unfortunately for a dragon’s neighbors,
the difference between how much a dragon
must eat and how much it is able to eat is
vast. Most dragons can easily
consume half their own
weight in meat every day, and many
gladly do so if sufficient prey is available. Even after habitual
gorging, a dragon seldom gets fat. Instead, it converts its
food into elemental energy and stores it for later use. Much
of this stored energy is expended on breath weapons and on
the numerous growth spurts (see below) that a dragon experiences
throughout its life.

>ITT:
>dragon penises
>thri-kreen porn

I have both on my hard drive.

Just sayin'

I think this is the right tread to mention one of the stuid/awesome ideas that I had this morning.

Switched cat genital weirdness.

Instead of there being barbs on the species cock there are barbs on the inside of the vagina!

Imagine the suprise!

>>17500758
No. That's a bad anonymous. You stop that. You stop right now.

>>17500758
so is the fact that catboys have barbed penii the reason that catgirls seem to go after human men?

My god, it's like I've been transported back to /tg/ three years ago

>>17500777
>MFW

>>17500779
IT IS A GOOD PAIN

>>17500777
No, actually. Cats like the barbs. Probably some human women would too.

>>17500783
Schrödinger doesn't count since until we pull down his pants he both has and doesn't have male and female genitalia (of course he seems like a /d/eviant so that may apply after his pants are down too)

>>17500599
Honestly, replacing the boring standard races with the races everyone actually plays would be a major improvement.

Drow, Catfolk, Kobolds, Dragonborn, Warforged and maaaybe humans, and you still have plenty of variety.

>>17500785
>>17500772
>>17500758
>>17500584

Stop trying to make me find arthropods attractive. It's not working. IT'S NOT WORKING DAMMIT IT'S NOT!

>>17500798
>No orcs
>No dorfs
Faggot edition.

>>17500800
Nobody's trying to make you do anything.

The chitin-lust was in you all along.

>>17500789
>Cats like the barbs

Have you asked them?

>>17500809
that sounds like the end of the wizard of oz

>>17500798
Might as well throw some kitsune in there too, since they've been getting steadly more popular over the years.

..Fuck it, scrap D&D5, it's time for a new edition of Ironclaw.

>>17500789
How exactly would you know if cats do or do not like the barbs? Quite apart from their inability to answer questions on the subject, they won't be aware of any other type of penis existing.

At least, I really hope they're not aware of any other type of penis.

>>17500798
>races everyone actually plays
>not dorfs

>>17500820
You never heard a female cat orgasming, have you?

And I am not even the guy you are talking to.

>>17500820
Have you ever actually heard cats having sex?
I WISH I could make my girlfriend scream like that

>>17500798
I've only had one player so far admit to playing non-standard races to mask the fact they're bad at character background and personality.
Aside from him, I've never seen a player who couldn't come up with a creative character concept using the races a campaign allows.

>let's start a 5th ed thread
>what type of penis would a cat like the most?
never change /tg/

>>17500830
Putting something with spikes inside her would probably result in screaming, I'm not sure we should take that as a definite sign of enjoyment.

>>17500824
ITT: People not aware of cat (and other domestic animals') habits. Enjoy your tinted glasses

>>17500824
Well, cats are known for playing with their prey.

>>17500826
Fuck dwarves. I'm thoroughly sick of them, since /tg/ loves to jack off about dwarves any chance they can get.

>>17500830
>>17500828
now the question is, do they prefer with barbs or without

>>17500820
Female cats cannot ovulate without penis barbs scratching them during sex a minimum of three times.

They don't have much choice in the matter.

>>17500838
They're not even spikes, really. They're less hard/sharp than nails.

>>17500838
Have you seen any novelty condoms? They have stuff like "barbs" all over them.

>>17500832
I play a Drow character, but that's in a homebrew setting where the Drow are actually the oppressed servant caste for the high elves. Other than that? Yeah I've always been good with standard races unless the DM wants me to go in another direction.

And yes, I do play dwarves.

>>17500846
Humans are one of the few species that actually has sex for fun apparently.

>>17500832
Eh, thing is, a lot of people are either sick of the core races, or have grown up with completely different approaches to fantasy and thus don't really see what's so good about tall humans with pointy ears or short humans or whatever.

Hell, I'd like to see more settings that use a completely different set of core races. Most D&D settings bore me because they're basically the same shit with slightly different names.

>>17500851
>>17500847
What they said. Think less "morningstar" and more "french tickler."

>>17500824
Well, cat owners who don't get their cats neutered have to use q-tips to keep a female in heat from going too crazy. So some cats are used to orgasms with things other than barbed penis, at least.

I had this thread in another window. I came back to it later. After reading some new posts I realised I couldn't remember what the thread was originally about and had to scroll back up to the top to check.

I missed you old /tg/.

For those who just joined. We are talking about penises, want to join in?

>>17500851
Yes, but those are made of uniformly soft latex.

The barbs on cat penises are made of keratin, aka what your fingernails and hair are made of. They are actually SHARP and they do draw blood from delicate internal skin.

>>17500862
>tall humans with pointy ears
YFW you're aware that DnD elves are shorter than humans.

>tall humans with pointy ears

>>17500873
Huh, you learn something every day. This thread is surprisingly informative.

>>17500890
Clearly he's thinking of the superior and genetically perfect Altmer.

>>17500873
I do believe you, but from what I've heardscratching their tail-bones may be enough if the female is on the height of the heat.

>>17500887
Well, nail-hard (and much more hair-hard) doesn't mean it can't be enjoyable even for humans. Human women masturbated with all sorts of weird stuff, especially when there were no vibrators/dildos.

/tg/, your license to make fun of furries has been revoked because of this thread.

>>17500943
but we're discussing real animals, not anthropomorphized ones

>>17500943
Furries = smalltime next to /tg/

Same with /d/. Ooh, girls with one penis. How scandalous. Come back when she has five more ending in spearheads and covered with barbs.

>>17500943
Since when does /tg/ make fun of furries? Hell, I'm pretty sure tons of furries are into roleplaying and RPGs, for equal parts cybersex and adventuring.

>>17500955

>>17500958
I'll make fun of furries, in the same way I make fun of most subcultures. Just for the lulz, without any real mean-spiritedness or hate behind it.

>>17500943
We have an exemption.

>>17500943
>implying /tg/ isn't furry itself

>>17500943
We don't make fun of furries though, besides sometimes sergaI fags. And sergaI fags are a subset of fa/tg/uy.

>>17500981
can you explain to me why /tg/ seems to hate sergals so much? i've read up on them on 1d4chan and they don't seem to horrible

>>17500983
Purely reactionary. Fun-hating sagefags got tired of seeing them posted a ton, something like three or four years ago. And so a few people used them to avatarfag and troll, which deepened the hatred. Most folks don't give a fuck about sergaIs, not now or then, but some butts are just too hurt to heal.

>>17500983
They were created by a Japanese furry artist with a vore/guro fetish to satisfy said fetish.

Excessive attention was given to the shape of the female genitalia, including a prehensile clitoral hood.

Somehow certain elements of /tg/ began to think they were neat creatures and tried to stat them out for play in D&D.

Other people were quick to point out PREHENSILE CLITORAL HOOD and DEVOURING CHILDREN WHOLE.

>>17500964
There's a That Guy thread in the archives about someone who physically assaulted a DM for being a furry and most of the posts were ripping on the guy for putting hands on someone like that. Pretty much everything 4chan says about any given subculture is just hyperbole and jocular.

>>17499995
> Which has interesting repercussions for mating, since the physiological response is a shit ton more involved and requires a lot more arousal than what's necessary for just pushing the bone out the sheathe.

Bullshit, guys pop boners like cans of pringles.

>>17500989
The people on /tg/ didn't focus on the sexual aspect though. More the aesthetic design and the fluff.

>>17500998
And /tg/ is the only place where you can believe that.

>>17500983
they are disturbing as a race. Nothing extremely original, except for the fact that their mating habits are described in gruesome details by their creator. Their degree of furriness is also the cause of many arguments.

Which makes them *potential* troll material.

Which a handful of guys on /tg/ decided to exploit by making a series of sergal avatar pictures, posting obnoxious, irrelevant, patronizing and polarizing comments about everything in a faux-learned English, stirring shit up everywhere. But they haven't been around for a few months.

>>17500990
But they have cooldown. Not so much with penis-boned creatures.

And some girls aren't able to cause a boner in an average male.

>>17500998
The aesthetic design was centered around being fearsome creatures that devoured creatures whole.

The fluff centered around sexually molesting their prey before devouring it whole.

>>17500990
>Bullshit, guys pop boners like cans of pringles.
Oh man, I could go for a boner right now
...
I mean pringles.

>>17500990
>Bullshit, guys pop boners like cans of pringles.
First of all, based on the way you phrased this I'm gonna guess you are a female who hasn't had much (or possibly any) sexual relationships.
Secondly, I'm gonna guess you don't have much experience with animals that actually have baculums.

>>17501008
Learn shit before you say it:
http://goldring.wikia.com/wiki/Sergals
That is the official fluff on the official wiki of the setting that sergals come from.

>>17500990
http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/16037299/#16038331 Found it, skipped to the first post of the story.

>>17501027
Look who's talking. Trancy Mick has a vore fetish and a great deal of the art he's made featuring them centers around this fetish.

Why fa/tg/uys are so keen to overlook this when talking about fuzzy raptors, I don't know.

>>17500873
Hi Edward.

Drugged mouse sexventure? No, thanks, I don't want to play that SlaaneshiSkaven campaign again.

5th edition > penis bones > animal penises > what kind of penises does cats like best > furries

for fucks sake guys

>>17501126
You're right.

Let's get back to thri-kreens.

>>17501128
>.gif
>not animated
damn you for getting my hopes up

>>17501126
It was furries when people starting talking about dragons, immediately after the kobold stuff that was the Only Good Part of this thread.

>>17501128
So... wait. Which part of her am I supposed to look at? I mean... which part's the erotic part?

Is that even a female Thri-Kreen? How do you tell?

>>17501128

Hey, no way, man. We were talkin' about Ladycats!

And I can tell you for free, the penis they like best... Is mine!

>>17501200
I love you.

>>17501162
So you were fine with discussion of kobold penis, but not dragon penis. Is it a size thing?

>>17501220
What about a half-dragon kobold?

>>17501220
It's the fact the kobold discussion was about weirdness and trolling and crazy adventure ideas and the discussion about dragon penis was 'hoo boy dragon cocks, I sure like to look at them nudge nudge'.

>>17501231
>dragon penises make him uncomfortable.

>>17501200
You are now realizing that his penis is very likely barbed.

>>17500183
Achievement unlocked.

>>17501251

One of the books confirmed that it is

>>17501251
Canonically it is. Read Backwards.
The ladies do not appreciate it

>Thread about 5e
>It becomes full blown autism
The next year will be long

>>17500432
I laughed so hard.

>>17501410
Just when /tg/ was starting to get good again too.

Also, I don't get what the fuck is up with sergals. Post pics?

>>17499923
>It's not my fault 99% of their target audience consist of people on a mental development level of an average Teletubby VIEWER.

>>17501542
Stoners?

>>17501529
This is a sergal.

These are sergals.
http://e621.net/post?tags=rating%3Asafe+sergal&searchDefault=Search

>>17501410
The next year will be delicious. I will petition my group to start playing Unknown Armies so I can play an Editiomancer.

ITT

Not like 5h edition could in any way be more shit and casual than 4th edition was.

>>17501701
With tha paradox being you play your edition even if it sucks? Or that you discuss editions although you never played DnD?
The tabu is pretty obvious. But what are your powers? Besides that of the Rage-mancer, whatever they are called

>>17501736
>casual
You're trying too hard

Whelp!

I'm excited to see what sacred cow 5E will mess with next. What if they change the ability scores? Maybe instead of "10 is average, 20 is superhuman, modifier is x/2-5, qualify for feats at odd numbers" we'll simply rank our ability modifiers from lowest to highest. Not that I wish to imply there's something wrong with ability scores, but won't it be fun to watch the ensuing drama over such a small thing?

>>17501676
Sergals legit scare me. I don't care that they have a furry fanbase. Or the fact that they were, like, created 100% for the purpose of furries. They can just SHOVE IT. I think they're fucking scary, I'd like to use them as demons and monsters for shit, they're so god damn unnatural. They could also be some kind of extremely exotic race of villagers and shit on some tropical island.

>>17501894
They look kinda like land sharks.

>>17501886
I'd like to cut the completely superfluous different between ability 'scores' and 'bonuses' and just make them the bonuses. Strength 1 is a +1 bonus, so it actually makes sense.

Though I like the names and functions of the ability scores as is, I think they're distinctive and functional enough.

From what I've heard is that 5e is going to be more like 4e than 4e was. Not sure what how the 4e crowd will react to this, but I know 3.5 fans such as myself will either stick with 3.5 or, if they feel like playing something that isn't CASTER EDITION, 3.5 look-alikes, such as Pathfinder, Legend, and perhaps Mutants and Masterminds as well.

>>17501910
I know, they look like walking chicken sharks! "cluck cluck GUSHUNK!" They're spooky as fuck. The one I posted is just being cute, but I mean look at this thing. SOMEONE MASTURBATES TO THIS THING! It's horrifying. Both the Sergal and that fact.

>>17501916

>More like 4e than 4e

I don't even...what...that's fucking retarded. How can you be more like something than something is itself?

Unless you mean 5e will be more like the way 4e is often perceived as opposed to the way 4e actually is.

>still playing dnd in any form

guys you know gurps exists right

>>17501916
Yeah, I really think Wizards should just give up trying to win back the 3.5 players- their whole thing is that they're happy with their system of choice, despite its flaws. Paizo is making money off them by basically fellating them and selling them the same shit they already own, they're a lost cause.

They're better off leveraging the brand recognition and Hasbro's marketing strength to make a system that's actually new and fixes the problems. And getting some online shit that actually works.

>>17501929
>SOMEONE MASTURBATES TO THIS THING! It's horrifying.

you just explained what i see when i look at sergals.

pic related

>>17501942
Sergals look like dildo's too you? I think they look more like chicken sharks, but okay.

>>17501929
Funnily enough my latest D&D character is a homebrew Sharkman. Hammerhead sharkman to be precise. He's awesome.

>>17501933
It means continuing with the design direction and style that 4e did, moving away from 3.5 and other old edition holdovers.

Funny how this thread's gone all the way back to ontopic.

Anyway, I just want them to OVERHAUL THE GODDAMN FEAT SYSTEM. I think we can all agree on that.

>>17501956
Hell, I'm one of the 3.5/Pathfaggots who were just getting hated on and even I agree with this.

>>17501886
I've always thought negative modifiers were bullshit, personally. Just give a +1 to a score of 2-3, a +2 to 3-4, and so on. 1 means you only just barely have that capacity, and 0 means you don't have it at all. It doesn't change success/failure rates, it's just a cleaner approach, like BAB was to THAC0.
Meh.

>>17501956
>Hammerhead sharkman
Enjoy walking through doors sideways, sucker!

>>17501956
>Anyway, I just want them to OVERHAUL THE GODDAMN FEAT SYSTEM. I think we can all agree on that.

Feats and skill ranks are ridiculously easy to get in Mutants and Masterminds if you don't give yourself superpowers, and if you play a Batman or a swords and sorcery campaign with help from the Warriors and Warlocks book, it's easy to play a character with a lot of both.

>>17501974
Sharks don't walk through doors! They GASHUNK!

>>17501970
>it's just a cleaner approach, like BAB was to THAC0.
How did THAC0 work anyways?
I mean, I understand that in 2e the lower your AC was the better it was, but how did the offensive stat system work?

>>17501964
The one flaw that 3.5 and 4th ed share in the same way is that the Feat system is the resident cop-out for options- damn near everything possible is shoved in there, with no traffic control or thought of balance, and feat taxes basically remove the supposed flexibility because you'd have to be an idiot not to take them.

Feats need to be either pruned with a chainsaw, removed and incorporated into class features and options, divided into at least three categories, or all three.

>>17501974
>>17501988
He's also a Barbarian, so that's kind of a given.

>>17501997
I say death to them. Death to feats! Death to ability scores! Death to alignments! Slaughter every cow! Death! Death! Death!

>>17501996
THAC0 is to "To Hit AC 0." Instead of a BAB you got a value that was what you had to roll if you were trying to hit someone with an AC of 0, so lower was better. And if you were trying to hit someone with an AC different than zero, you had to do some subtraction to figure out the number you needed.

It's not like it was extremely difficult, it just seems retarded when you realize they could have implemented using just a straight bonus to the roll and have it be way simpler (which is what BAB did). It seems like complexity for the sake of complexity. More likely the devs just didn't think long enough about their mechanic to realize it was functionally equivalent to a bonus based system and about 4 times as complex.

>>17502007
>>17501988
>I remember the time I made a plan that involved my adamantine greataxe wielding barbarian bursting through a stone wall

>>17502007
Barbarian? But they're always walking around with a semi from thinking about more battle. So he can't get through a door sideways either...how's he get in rooms?!

>>17501916
Your image reminds me that 5e is the nail in the coffin for me visiting GitP even infrequently. Too many fucking grogs. Your post is pretty groggy too, of course.

I've heard that [meaningless phrase] too.

they're jsut realizing what ever other industry has realized

-pander to the larger population, and you don't need a core fanbase

video games, movies, and to some extent books are doing this. i'm surprised tabletop games are taking so long

Shit

Twinkie

>>17502010
The 4e alignment system is so bad I only assume it was meant to be ignored. I think ability scores should stay, but the system should be rebuilt around them to make them more relevant. And random rolling for them can be one of those slaughtered cows.

>>17502013
Wasn't 2e developed by TSR during the time when they literally weren't allowed to playtest?

>>17502013
So say you have a THACO of 10. If you are swinging at an AC0 target you need to roll a 10 to hit them. If you need to hit an AC5 target you would only need a 5 (5 higher AC means 5 lower to hit required). An AC-2 enemy would require you to roll a 12.

Roleplaying is sexual in nature? Who would have guessed!

>>17502026
Random rolling is already a slaughtered cow, they're just selling the meat as an optional system. This is true in 4e and Pathfinder.

>>17502027
Higher AC...worse?

>>17502026
>The 4e alignment system is so bad
????

I never understood why people thought this.

>>17502022
There's some things wrong with this point, mainly that it's very difficult for the RPG PnP industry to 'pander to the larger population' in comparison to those other things you mentioned, to the extent that you likely do need a core fanbase.

However, an extremely important somewhat related point is that you cannot pander only to your old fans, or your core fanbase, or whatever, because that will - in the long term - kill the game completely.

>>17502022
Problem is tabletop arent meant for larger population. There are limits to hom much you can do with marketing and dumbing down.

>>17502022
Pretty much, though a less cynical version is- if you pander to your core fanbase, you'll end up selling ONLY to that core fanbase, which continually shrinks. This is often the death of nerd hobbies, and it's killing anime fast.

>>17502050
The 4e alignment system is basically the 3.5 one with all the non-stereotypical alignments removed and divorced almost entirely from actual game mechanics. There's no real reason to use it.

>>17502052
>There are limits to hom much you can do with marketing and dumbing down.
there really aren't
which is the terrifying part.

>>17502045
Indeed, the whole to-hit system was backwards when compared with 3.x and 4e.

>>17502050
Because it's an alignment system.

>>17502054
Nobody should pretend that RPGers are some kind of special breed, but it is a hobby that, even without the nerd stigma and obscurity surrounding it, is pretty weird to get your head around.

>>17502072
>>17502050
>>17502064
I think the issue is, 3.5's alignment system was bad and stupid too, but it was at least nteresting, and tied into the setting and cosmology in unique ways. 4e divorced the interesting parts from the alignment system, and suddenly there's no more reason to use it.

>>17502045
AC in 2E didn't stand for armor class. It stood for armor chinks. The higher number of chinks your armor had, the more you could be hit.

Yeah, that's the ticket!

>>17502090
It wasn't interesting, come the fuck on. It was lame as shit. Your point is solid though: the whole reason behind the alignment system in 3.5e is that it was codified to some extent in the actual rules. Now that it isn't anymore, let's just finally ditch the fucking thing. Even Gygax admitted he felt it was misrepresented and he would have tried to make it much more clear and less objective.

>>17502090
>is pretty weird to get your head around
Not really. "It's like Skyrim but in your head."

>>17502112
>Don't put points into noncombat skills at the start of the game or hyperzombies will rape you

>>17502099

The one good thing about 4th edition alignment system is that they basically admitted what people had been saying for twenty years.

Lawful good is better good and Chaotic evil is worse evil.

People complained for years because it was pretty obvious that this was the writers thought even if they did not admit to it.

>>17501996
THAC0 (not THACO), is To Hit Armor Class 0, as in "this is what you need to roll...". Low 2e AC is good 2e AC. Hitting AC 5? You need to roll 5 less than your THAC0. Every class except the Fighter starts at THAC0 20, which is equivalent to BAB 0.

2e AC 0 is equivalent to 3e AC 20, 2e AC 20 is equivalent to 3e AC 0. THAC0 20 is equivalent to BAB 0, THAC0 0 is equivalent to BAB 20. A sixth level Fighter either has a THAC0 of 14 or a BAB of 6. Mechanically speaking, it's exactly the same system as 3e and 4e, but it's presented in a way that is less immediately accessible. If someone says they prefer THAC0 to BAB, then you know one of two about them:

1. They don't like change. Maybe they have an irrational attachment to 2e, which is completely fair, because you're allowed to like things and liking things is irrational.
2. They like complex rules as a barrier to letting people play games, allowing them to feel a sense of superiority to those who don't understand the rules. This is less fair.

>>17502137
4e doesn't have BAB.

>>17502155
Yes it does.

>>17502137
To elaborate, THAC0 is the minimum number you need to roll on a d20 to hit a target. So if you've got a THAC0 of 20, you need to roll a 20, but if you've got a THAC0 of 12, you only need to roll a twelve or higher. That's why lower THAC0 is better.

Now, when you attack, the defender's AC is added to your roll as a bonus. It starts at 10 and goes down as you get better armor, eventually going into negatives. So if you attacked an unarmored person with a THAC0 of 20, and rolled a 10, their AC of 10 would get added to your roll and you'd manage to hit them. That's why lower AC is better.

Needless to say, this was highly counterintuitive. I, for one, prefer the newer version found in 3e and later, where the attacker adds their own Attack Bonus to a roll and tries to go higher than the defender's AC; I find its simple, straightforward nature to be more elegant.

I know exactly what D&D needs: Mystery.

Starting with 3E and going over the top in 4E, the game has lost all of it's mystery. The players are too focused on the game part of everything, and not the role playing. Players don't care about the fluff ''oh that scary tentacled monster, sure, whatever...what's it's ac?''. Even more so, all character abilities are straightforward. If a character casts a spell, or uses an ability a set, exact thing happens.

1.Get rid of Knowledge checks. Or at least come up with a system to make them less of an impact. I've seen too many games where the players just ''read the MM page'' by making a high knowledge check, and then win the fight in two rounds by exploiting the monsters weakness and what they know about it. This type of thing must stop. The idea that a simple roll gives you knowledge of every single monster in the multiverse is dumb.

A great twist would be to make knowledge checks something like 50% unreliable. After all, not every sage is a know it all, and sometimes whole nations will believe the wrong thing.

2.Add simple variants to monsters. A lot like mini templates or monster class abilities. That way, no monster is 'by the book'. So no one can know exactly what a single monster can or can't do. Make things like spell like abilities more like ''can cast one 2nd level arcane spell 3/D'' not just ''casts knock 3/d''. Maybe even a system where monsters can 'cash in' abilites and switch them for others.

3.Make magic dangerous. So that when anyone uses any magic, anything can happen. Not so much that they die, just might be harmed or effected. Make it dangerous to use magic vs magic, have wild things happen, both good and bad. Give magic the awe and wonder it should have. Get rid of spellcraft and such, make magic so unique that no one can really understand it...all you can do is just use your experience and go by what you see. But get rid of the ''I have ranks in spellcrat so I know every single spell and magic effect in the multiverse'' crap.

4.Add more mystery to events. When ever a character tries something, always have a random chance that something might happen, good or bad. So a character can't just 'I swing my sword'', as something else might happen. You could build up a network of feats, classes and spells around this...with the risk of making events more extreme.

5.Make the DM ruler, not the rule books. So page one of each rule book says something like ''the rules here are second to what your DM says''.

>>17501894
Everyone loves Sergals

even Nintendo

>>17502210
>>17502213

Never design a game. Ever. You'll just embarass yourself.

>>17502246
I think he already did.

It's called Realms of Atlantasia.

If there's one good thing that might come out of this, it's 4e books getting cheaper.

>>17502246
Seriously, agreed. Many DMs do not deserve the kind of power put in their hands because well over half of them don't know what the fuck they're doing; if you give them the go-ahead to ignore everything *in the book* they will do this and ruin their own games every time.
Good DMs don't need to be told that they can make choices against the rules sometimes, so long as they make sense and add to the game.
You might not realize it, but a MINORITY of people actually like having inconsistent effects. Most people just want to do exactly what they intend to do when they sit down to roll the dice for an action, not worry about having to roll something else because of a chance of "oh sorry my sword arm just seized up and now my sword is chipped". Nobody in any group I have EVER played with liked bizarre random events.

>>17502137
>2. They like complex rules as a barrier to letting people play games, allowing them to feel a sense of superiority to those who don't understand the rules. This is less fair.
Or they simply understand basic arithmetic.
"Oh no I have to switch around a minus to a plus? UNINTUITIVE GARBAGE, GIVE ME AoO FLATFOOT ARGUMENTS
EVERY DAY OF THE WEAK"

Fuck you.

>>17502275
It is objectively superior to accomplish the same thing in the same way in less steps. Nobody's saying THAC0 is hard, but it's pretty fucking dumb to want something that takes a little longer to calculate off-hand if it doesn't actually do anything a simpler system doesn't.
There is no arguing this. This is one of the very fundamentals of game design; you don't play chess by moving a piece, moving it back to its original spot, then moving it to where you moved it in the first place again; there's no point in it.

>>17502271
And most DMs don't WANT that responsibility, their role is hard enough already without the system conspiring against them.

>>17502275
Exhibit A.

Reminds me of how fighting game fans are so incredibly hostile to their games having a control scheme that actually makes sense.

>>17502289
>you don't play chess by moving a piece, moving it back to its original spot, then moving it to where you moved it in the first place again; there's no point in it.
Unless you're an indecisive twat like me anyway

>DMs shouldn't have control of the game over anything not explicitly stated in the rulebooks
>THAC0 was complicated
>Thri-Kreen porn
Never breed.

/tg/ - Fantasy Junk

>>17502289
THAC0 wasn't even designed.
It's just a shorthand formula for the DM Tables 2E put into the Core rules for some reason.

It used to be that you rolled and the DM just compared it to a list on his Screen.

>5th ed
>penis bones
>kobold penii
>dragon dildos
>thrikeen porn
>cat genitals
>sergals
>THAC0

just another thread on /tg/

>>17502308
Truly, we are in a new golden age.

>>17502306
It's pretty funny how so many terrible legacy mechanics that grognards attach to are completely unnecessary and in fact design afterthoughts.

>>17502318
>It's pretty funny how so many terrible legacy mechanics that grognards attach to are completely unnecessary
Like classes and vancian magic, amirite?
>and in fact design afterthoughts.
They weren't "designed afterthoughts" at all.
It's just that the people who put together 2E were not the people who designed the actual system.

But you keep on talking out of your ass.

>>17502327
Way to strawman, bro.

>DMs shouldn't have any say
You are everything wrong with D&D.

>>17502308

>>17502332
>implying that anyone said that
The DMs who need to be told this don't deserve the power to turn the game into their own fantasy, which is exactly what most of them will do with it.
Good DMs already know that they can do whatever they need to to make the game better.

>>17502350
What other board can switch between fetish discussion, softcore porn, intelligent discussion of gameplay mechanics and edition wars at the drop of a hat all in one thread?

>>17502356
>good DMs already know they can ignore the very book that teaches them how to DM
And you call THAC0 counterintuitive.

>>17500558
> welcometo4chan.jpg

>>17502365
The first thing any DM learns is that he has the power to change things as he sees fit.
Those that don't learn that despite it being blindingly obvious and pretty much outright stated in every edition are not the ones who you want to be running a game.
You want to know why people used the rules for 3E and 4E so often? BECAUSE IT'S MORE FUCKING CONVENIENT THAN MAKING SHIT UP EVERY TIME YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING. This is especially true of 3E, where a careless houserule could wreck the game's balance unlike anything else because it was so touchy.

>>17502210

> Wizards start with upwards of 200IQ equivilent
> "By beating DC 25 monster knowledge, You don't know that a troll's metabolism causes rapid reproduction of muscle and skin, nor that it stops when exposed to extreme heat."
> Get choked by the PC playing the wizard.

>>17501997
I've been playing D&D since 3e and I still have no idea as to what a feat is supposed to present.

In my opinion, feats should be entirely optional. All customizability should come from the character's class and skill choices, with there being enough room for customization within the character archetypes without a need for feats.

As an optional system, feats could be worked into something completely different instead of the clusterfuck of numerical bonuses and other unrelated madness that they are at the moment.

>>17500069
We all know that Kobolds have two hemipenes covered in razor sharp barbs, since they are lizards.
They could also have bones inside them since they used to be dogs...the perfect raping implement.

>>17500373
See, there is amisconception, he wasn't called Charles magne, but Charles main, "hand" because he was found of fisting.

>>17502623
The switch to '-magne' was an attempt by embarrassed medieval historians to make him a respectable figure.

>>17502521

Simple. A feat is a metagame construct that allows for a bit of character customization.

>>17502210
Or make plots that lead in to subplots that lead in to subplots that leads in to a massive clusterrapefuck

Earliest depiction of dragon penis (and balls) I can think of.

>>17502210
>wizard trains for his entire life to master arcane arts
>spends every second day learning about the enemies he might face and the written history of the world
>travels
>encounters troll
>lol i'll just spam magic missile

On Sergals/Scary Beasts

It isn't hard to make such a creature be disturbing...you take traits from an animal people naturally fear, and mix it with weird animals everyone recognizes to some degree.

SO lets make some weird creatures /tg/

Imagine an anthro feline, with the poison barbs of a platypus, long digits with webbing. Fur is feline looking but water resistant so slick and oily when wet. We'll give it cat slit eyes but with water-proof-eye-lids, you know, the secondary eye lids that cover the eye but can be seen through. Laid back, sleek, pointy ears, elongated but still feline like head. Detachable snake-like jaw for added heebie jeebies.

Now you have a horrible, sentient, anthro creature that stalks the waters at night... absconding with fishermen and little boys who play at night by the sea side....

>>17502973

>the secondary eye lids that cover the eye but can be seen through.
nictitating membranes is the term you're looking for.

>>17502210
Making spells and abilities tie in to fluff more, like 3e rather than 4e, can add to mystery: instead of being a bundle of stats and scores, monsters react differently depending on what kind of power you use on them, like a mud to stone spell slowing a clay golem. This makes the game run on sense over numbers, makes monsters more unique, and rewards players for using their minds and figuring out what might do something useful to their foe.

Knowledge checks can have increased DCs, so that the expectation is that you have a fair chance of learning the basics (name, where it lives, who it eats) of a monster of an appropriate CR, with learning more details (hints at its weaknesses) for monsters with a CR 5-10 less than you, and "reading the MM entry" for monsters with a CR more than 10 below your level. DM rolls secretly, and if you fail by 5 or more, false information. Fail by 10 or more, dangerously false information. Common monsters would have slightly lower DCs, and rarer and unique monsters would have higher ones, to the point that any roll would only reveal the basics of a never-before-seen creature.

>>17503205
>and rewards players for using their minds and figuring out what might do something useful to their foe.
No, it rewards CASTERS.
AGAIN.
That's the last fucking thing I want to have to deal with again.

>>17503221
Yeah, because it's not like whether swords or maces work best against skeletons is relevant for fighters. Or where a monsters weak spots are is relevant to rogues or archers. Or what kind of flattery works best on dragons is relevant to bards.

>>17503355
He's talking about
>Making spells and abilities tie in to fluff more, like 3e rather than 4e, can add to mystery: instead of being a bundle of stats and scores, monsters react differently depending on what kind of power you use on them, like a mud to stone spell slowing a clay golem. This makes the game run on sense over numbers, makes monsters more unique, and rewards players for using their minds and figuring out what might do something useful to their foe.

>>17502064
I always thought alignment was retarded in and of itself and ignored it entirely.

>>17502271
>Nobody in any group I have EVER played with liked bizarre random events.
I'd say botches are an exception. But only if the GM is actually able to turn them into humorous scenes. They can also work to spice up the plot.

But yeah, generally everything should be pretty predictable.

>>17502293
>Reminds me of how fighting game fans are so incredibly hostile to their games having a control scheme that actually makes sense.
It gets even funnier if you throw SSB into the mix. With the fucking casual fucktards who are bothered by competitive gamers who prefer to have a proper control scheme. They are told to go back to Street Fighter if they want balanced gameplay, which is just utter bullshit. It really pisses me off.

>>17503221
How about making EVERYONE magical?
Just have them have different specializations. A wizard sucks at casting quickly and efficiently, while a close combat caster never learned to do strong attacks, rather using his magic like a Jedi.
And then you have the physical classes being innovative by doing stuff like a rogue learning to walk on walls, then drop from the ceiling during a fight to stab an enemy in the back while the fighter takes his attention.

>>17502746
Looks like horsecock.

>>17502350
You new here?

>>17504167
I just realized the irony of this suggestion...
Basically, the idea is to make the complaints true. But by making them true, the actual basis of the complaints would vanish.

Penny Arcade actually has the right of it.

The biggest problem facing D&D as a brand, a product, is how to keep selling it. A lot of the edition wars get deadlocked when someone insists "Well, if you don't like it, don't play it."

A company just can't survive on that attitude. Leaving factions of its fanbase in the dust every new edition isn't sustainable, and all the ideas they came up with to try and keep players playing (and paying) according to their models and ongoing content didn't really catch the world on fire.

If they want 5th edition to take off, they need to find a way to retain all their fans, even the ancient ones who sealed themself off from the world back in first or second edition and built a little fortress of them and their old gaming group-mates. All the little exile communities need to be returned to the fold, and be made to pay again. If that means turning D&D into more of a collective whole, a medium that can absorb all players and their wildly varying games and playstyles and even rules systems, that's what they have to do.

>>17505619
More than that, I think they need to get new fans. Because a fan's a fan when it comes down to it. They need to push more into the mainstream.
But to do that, they need an existing playerbase unified in the new edition, so you're still right to a degree.

>>17505619
The best way to revive D&D is to keep a firm direction. D&D was always combat focused - So flesh out the combat. Make it extremely tactical and awesome.
Just don't neglect the out-of-combat experience. Balance spells and the like in a way that they serve narrative purpose.
In 4e, one low level spell turns the blood of enemies into stone. That's retarded.