Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

A good deal of my more "mainstream" friends have no stigma or bad stereotypes of DnD, and it seems like with enough push, they could be convinced to play. I fondly remember the last day of school when I brought a home-made arena fighting RPG and played with a few friends using erasers and pencil sharpeners to represent our characters.
We also had a lot of fun chasing each other around with plastic weapons in the house.
The nerd culture is definitely thriving, and I doubt D&D will go anywhere, unless Wizards seriously messes it up.

Mannahnin wrote:ie: People who've heard of the Mayan calendar but don't know anything about it. Personally, I think we get Shadowrun.

Back to the topic, I'm enjoying playing and running 4E, but I could absolutely see myself playing 3.5 or PF again. They're more Simulationist, where 4E is more abstract and Gamist.

BTW, everyone knows in 3.5 you put 1 rank in Jump so you can land on your feet when you jump. Powergamers all know, anyway. :lol:

Win! I have had a running commentary in my mind for years where I check off various points in the Shadowrun history versus real life to see how we are stacking up. Although I regret spending my Xmas in 2012 in a internment camp, it'll be okay when I bust out and take over the weather.


On the 4E vs 3.5E thing, I loved 3.5E. It was broken as all crap after a while, but that made it fun. I remember having a Bard/Paladin/Sublime Chord/Something Else that wore plate, could cast max level wizard, bard and a bunch of paladin spells while charging the crap out of you. You just can't powergame in any system like you could in 3.5E.

Now 4E is a great deal of fun and has really simplified things. Although now that new books are coming out fast and furious, the creep has started. I don't think it will get as bad as 3.5, but the nature of the game is More books = more loopholes.

More importantly in 4E, they errata and FAQ like crazy and consider their system to be a living creature. This has done more for the new game than anything else. They now use the community to keep an eye on 'broken' (both brokensadface and OMGbroken) and fix them in post.

Cheers to WOTC

Is this a joke? I know this thread has been around for a little bit now though. This question is always asked and the answer is always no. D&D will never die out as long as people have an imagination.

That being said I don't like 4E. Too simple. Pretre had it right with 3.5 being broken as hell but that was fun! It challenged me to build and explore the rule set to get the most out of my character. I just don't feel that with 4E.

If you dont like simple, your should try playing the Dresdin Files. The only game I've ever played where your first and maybe your second session will be spent makeing your character.

Grimpost wrote:Is this a joke? I know this thread has been around for a little bit now though. This question is always asked and the answer is always no. D&D will never die out as long as people have an imagination.

That being said I don't like 4E. Too simple. Pretre had it right with 3.5 being broken as hell but that was fun! It challenged me to build and explore the rule set to get the most out of my character. I just don't feel that with 4E.

I encourage you to give it a second shot (4E). I felt that it was really simple to start with, but I am finding additional nuances that I missed when I started it. That and the addition of new books makes it start to expand into the 3.5 realm of 'Any rule you could possibly want'.

Really, 4E is about taking out the boring BS and annoying stuff that slowed games down and getting to the good stuff. It's streamlined without being dumbed down. If you ever want to see how complex 4E can get, take a stroll over to the Char Opt boards on Wizards' site. Those guys are freaking crazy.

I've wandered though the boards to see what the hot builds were. I have a friend that lives on the opt boards and regales interesting builds. The building of a character is okay, not exactly what I am looking for, and once the character is completed you only end up using 1-2 attacks and on occasion your encounter/daily. Comparing a wizard from 3.5 to 4th just seems sad. Not saying 4th doesn't have a place in the industry, just not for me.

I just don't enjoy it.

Now I do like me some Dresden so I will take a looksee at the game, thanks Catytpelius.

We quit with the new Edition, its pretty pointless now.


Pathfinder is better now, i wont be buying a dnd book ever again..

We quit with the new Pathfinder, its pretty pointless now.


4E is better now, I wont be buying a Paizo book ever again..

I played a game of pathfinder on free RPG day...It was like, meh. The artwork was what turned me off. I've always had a soft spot for D&D artwork/.

Dungeons & Dragons is dying because the High lords of Terra deemed it a heretical activity! And anyone found playing it will have the Space Marines (thats me) Commit Exterminatis on Their home world!

yes dungeons and dragons is not dying its dead


Automatically Appended Next Post:
very dead

Highlords of terra, "Chapter master Arkayne! Go Commit Exterminatus on those guys for playing DnD"

Arkayne, "Hell YEAH!!!!"


BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM

It all comes down to what you like. I guess I enjoy a system that still lives and breathes, new expansions, etc.

I have practically every 3.5 book put out by Wizards for core rules, but I like new stuff and after a while 3.5 got stale. So now I have 4E and new stuff comes out all the time.

Add to that the fact that with my limited gaming expenditures, I can just pay $15.00/month for my gaming group and get access to everything they put out about a month later through the Char Builder / Resource Tools and I'm a happy gamer.

If 4E isn't your cup of tea, so be it. Play Pathfinder or whatever, no hard feelings.

D&D isn't dying though. I'm fairly sure that WOTC is doing fine; there are always new geeks hitting middle school with a thirst for adventure.

Dark Sun might get me to buy 4E though.

Samus_aran115 wrote:I played a game of pathfinder on free RPG day...It was like, meh. The artwork was what turned me off. I've always had a soft spot for D&D artwork/.

What art is that?

Because THE art from me and D&D goes back a ways - the true masters of the art were busy from the late 70's to maybe the late 80's - which is, I'm guessing, before you were born!

Alpharius wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:I played a game of pathfinder on free RPG day...It was like, meh. The artwork was what turned me off. I've always had a soft spot for D&D artwork/.

What art is that?

Because THE art from me and D&D goes back a ways - the true masters of the art were busy from the late 70's to maybe the late 80's - which is, I'm guessing, before you were born!

hell yeah! nothing says "i'm a barbarian coming from the frozen primitive wastelands" like a painting of a barbarian in a furry bikini with a girl with fluffy feathered hair and too much eyeshadow/blush at his feet!

Counterpoint- What sort of namby pamby barbarian brings a woman with him? They're all about living off the land, and taking the women of their victims as they carve a swath of destruction out of civilization.

What if your enemies' women are ugly?

Like you were invading New Jersey or something?

Whats wrong with a female barbarian?

All, my characters tend to be female.

Catyrpelius wrote:Whats wrong with a female barbarian?

All, my characters tend to be female.

We accept you. Just be who you are, man.

Pssh I think your just jealous that my female Barbarian looks better in a mini skirt and high heals then your male Barbarian does.

While we're on the subject of gender equality, why can't your female barbarian also rape and pillage women, townsfolk, and the occasional unwary sheep with the rest of them?

Now if your enemy's women are ugly, you have three options-

A. Apply the bag of holding to the head

B. Enslave them to keep the rest of your harem/entourage from having to ruin their figure with manual labor. Nothing ruins a good unwary sheep faster than having to go out and graze. Have your Jersey girls bring it vegetables and fruit.

C. Both.

The correct sequence of events is Rape, Pillage, Then Burn it To the Ground!

Yikes!

So, D&D is dead then?

Alpharius wrote:Yikes!

So, D&D is dead then?

Indeed. Would you help me take it to the Cleric to be raised, stranger?

Monster Rain wrote:

Alpharius wrote:Yikes!

So, D&D is dead then?

Indeed. Would you help me take it to the Cleric to be raised, stranger?

what is this i hear? a QUEST???!?!! sign me up. perhaps we can meet others interested in doing so for no particular reason at the inn.

warboss wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

Alpharius wrote:Yikes!

So, D&D is dead then?

Indeed. Would you help me take it to the Cleric to be raised, stranger?

what is this i hear? a QUEST???!?!! sign me up. perhaps we can meet others interested in doing so for no particular reason at the inn.

If only there was a way for a person to tell a story that allows others to interact much like characters in a play. I wonder...

Ok, everyone make a perception check.

Catyrpelius wrote:The correct sequence of events is Rape, Pillage, Then Burn it To the Ground!

You know, in a sequence of events none of those actions seem particularly noteworthy. You kind of shrug it off as though it were a viking bad habit (aww, he's raping and pillaging again).

The trouble is, if I said I was going to rape someone, that's pretty serious. What does pillaging and burning add to the affair that could possibly cover such horrific actions? Mind you, I prefer to rape, pillage and burn simultaneously, but even the other vikings tend to call me a fetishist.

Alpharius wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:I played a game of pathfinder on free RPG day...It was like, meh. The artwork was what turned me off. I've always had a soft spot for D&D artwork/.

What art is that?

Because THE art from me and D&D goes back a ways - the true masters of the art were busy from the late 70's to maybe the late 80's - which is, I'm guessing, before you were born!

The older editions artist were very neat to their styles, I happen to like some of Brom's works, the style was interesting ( Dark sun was such a good idea imo ). Now the new books art...I can find some of the new art to be rather good and so on. Then their is some pieces of art ether in the books or the covers that is just strange. The art is not completely horrible but a good amount of the ones that I tend to dislike don't use colour theory if they do it's not always where it needs to be. But as with all things there are a good amount that are good and I enjoy. I just wish the ones with the "use darker/lighter tone/shade for lighting/shading etc " would change it. If it's a blue fire, the cool and cold tones/shades would be used. Again this is all a matter of style I guess.

As far as if D&D is dead or dying? I guess it depends, Which this seems to be already stated but I have noticed there is a very large portion that happen to play the 4th edition( The realms like Dark Sun seem to be a hit around where I've been anyways.) I still happen to know many friends and people alike to play 2nd and 3.5 editions as well.

Also, this thread brings this to mind I hope this hasn't been posted here ( I don't recall seeing it lately or in the search at least with what I typed but anyways could be wrong.)
D&D meet This person's D&D Room. http://www.acaeum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8714

Edit: Spelling.