my friend bought it after having a lengthy discussion with Varg on a youtube comments section about RPGs lol

I don't know why but I'm always surprised by how willingly he replies to people and how often he will. Anyway, I'm curious to hear what your friend makes of it and, if you guys ever try playing it, how it goes. I'm also curious as to how much of a discussion you could have with Mr Vikernes about RPGs that wouldn't just consist of "D&D has gotten worse, buy MYFAROG, everything else is rubbish and part of the conspiracy".

Warhammer and Warhammer 40K.

It's more than just a tabletop game. It's a real hobby that involves involves building, modeling, painting, and story writing. The only downside is that the models are ridiculously expensive.

I used to have a huge Tyranid army and won probably 75% of my battles. Any one else into this stuff?

In a different age my brother and I would paint WH40K figures and listen to Bolt Thrower. It didn't go very far, since we had no money outside of our parents' limited largesse. I never played because I didn't know anyone and had no army. Nor did I get particularly good at painting (I painted a stormtrooper for Imperial Assault a few weeks back, which turned out ok, if a little too "corpse paint" for my liking). Luckily I recently made friends with an enthusiast of playing with war dolls who walked me through the Warhammer basics. It was a much different experience than I'd expected. We'll be playing the IXth Age now that Warhammer is (by all accounts) a botched crock of balls.

Keeping my own opinions on Warhammer to one side so as to not upset any hardcore fans, there are a fair few people around where I am who are into it and Games Workshop, but then Warhammer World is not too far from where I live.

He showed me the Myfarog book
It looks pretty well done TBH, nice art
No swastikas to be found though LOL
I don't think there's any plans to actually plan a game as we have been embroiled in our own AD&D game for almost 2 years now
There was some talk of trying out 5th ed. so our DM's GF could learn it and play at conventions with him and possibly doing a separate game of Tomb of Horrors with pre-gen characters (because we don't want to send the characters we've been playing for 2 years into a suicide mission)

5e is absolutely amazing and the best fun I've had with the franchise in years.

That's what I keep hearing. Why is that? A friend said it's easier to play custom combinations without awkward leveling and that it streamlined some rules, but he didn't go into it further than that.

What I hate is that, if you ever want to do anything interesting in combat, you had to pick Sorcerer or Warlock (or Wizard, but pffft the other spellcasters are better). Outside of combat, you might have a few neat things here and there (Prestidigitation FTW), but all things are basically equal and your roleplaying skills are your only limit, so the only solid purpose behind classes is picking your combat style...which for melee classes, is "I hit it, my turn's over." If you didn't pick a spellcaster, combat is no fun whatsoever, so your only choice is to min/max the shit out of your skills and avoid combat at all costs to rub it in the faces of the assholes who picked the spellcasters and stop them from having fun.

5e is lame and dumb. 4e is obviously my favorite, but if I wanted a more stripped-down and melee-characters-suck-in-combat option, I'd much rather do 3.5e or Pathfinder. Or, y'know, Call of C'thulhu.

Glad to know! Can you talk about the specifics of the game a bit? You're DMing?

I'm starting my campaign on the 5th and I'm still working on my character, I'm ambivalent towards either lawful neutral or neutral good, not sure yet.

I hate almost everything Zelkiiro likes so I'm sure I'll be happy with 5e!

I don't really agree with anything from this assessment, sorry to hear that your 5e experience wasn't that enjoyable. I actually hated 4e, too.

Not if you like having any choice at all in character creation. Or having your very limited choices matter in any way.

But .. this is literally the opposite of what that friend of mine said about this game.

Your friend was lying. If you pick Rogue, let's say, you only get two choices: What race is he, and which one of two paths is your Rogue gonna go (Assassin or Thief)? Those are literally the only choices you'll ever get to make, as your class features were decided for you ahead of time. You have no say in the matter. You're level 3, you get this thing--you didn't choose it, we at WotC know better than you and have thus chosen it for you.

None of that shit matters because homebrew and house rules. End of story. If you're really gonna limit yourself strictly to what the books says, then you're playing the game wrong.

Eh, it's one thing to do some tinkering but if you think a game sucks it makes more sense to just play something else rather than completely redesign it.

The thing about 5e vs. 4e is that 4e was something completely different from earlier editions and appealed to some people a lot for that reason. 5e went back to a more roleplaying-focused, combat-lite style used in earlier editions (pre-3rd even) but arguably went too lite, and arguably you should just play 2nd ed or 3.5e instead unless you're putting training wheels on for a new group of players.

That, I'll agree with--5e is a beginner's RPG. It is infuriatingly light on mechanics, stiflingly bereft of any choice of any kind, and is generally useful for only the absolute bare minimum of your tabletop RPG needs. Which is good if you're new to the whole thing, but I can't possibly fathom how any experienced D&D player could possibly ever want to play 5e when superior editions like 3.5e, Pathfinder, and 4e exist.

But .. my friend is a DM. He wouldn't lie to me .. w- .. would you? Would you, Joe?

He wouldn't. Zelkiiro is just a MMORPG-weirdo.

Yeah I think he doesn't realize that game and combat choices can exist out of things the game explicitly tells you that you can do.

Yes, yes, houseruling is a thing. Yep. I would like some houseruled abilities for my Rogue, then. I would like:

- Knockout (melee attack for double damage + knock enemy unconscious)
- Tumbling Strike (full movement without provoking opportunity attacks + melee attack for triple damage + do it all in a minor action)
- Arterial Slice (melee attack for double damage + hits enemy's Reflex, so roll that save + ongoing damage equal to my Sneak Attack damage)
- Hilt Slam (melee attack + stun the enemy + slide the enemy away 25 ft.)
- Swift Parry (gain a huge defense bonus against one attack + gain Advantage against the attacker for a turn)
- Ghost of the Rooftops (climb a small wall or make a short leap without making any checks)
- Clever Strike (melee attack + gain Advantage for the attack as long as an ally is adjacent to the target)
- Imperiling Strike (melee attack + enemy takes penalty to their AC and their Reflex save equal to my Strength modifier)
- No Escape (melee attack if enemy moves away from me or ranged attack if enemy hides + double damage attack + knock them prone)
- Leaping Dodge (an immediate action that lets me use Athletics to jump out of the way before an attack hits me)
- Bloody Path (free move action + all enemies I provoke opportunity attacks from must hit themselves with it + all enemies MUST make these attacks)

So yes, I would like all of these. I mean, it should be no problem, right? Houserules and all?

Yeah me too. I've been playing D&D since the Elmore red box basic set in 1984 and 5e is the best version of D&D for me since 1e. I love how it got rid of the game within the game that was introduced in 3.x, that is maxing your "build" and plotting your character advancement to make sure when you hit X level you had Y feat to make sure you could take Z prestige class. It had a trillion fiddly bits to make sure a player could spend a lot of time away from the table pouring through 50 splatbooks to go over new feats and build options. The thing is in 10 years of trying to make 3.x into a fun game all those things didn't do anything to make the game more fun at the table. It was always great when a player would have to spend 5 minutes making sure all the various bonuses from feats, spells, and crap were added up and no stacking rules were violated, etc. And as the DM I pretty much quit having foes use dispel magic as it created the game halting recalculation of everyone bonuses since the game assumed everyone was layered with buffing spells and of course the PC were layered with buffs. 4e came out and to me was more of a table top miniatures skirmish game with some RP elements over the top of that. It killed most of the D&D sacred cows and split the D&D fanbase in half as half or more when to Pathfinder to keep the d20 thing alive. I have a few issues with 5e but overall it makes running a D&D game fun again. 3e was more like having another job, and 4e wasn't a game I was interested in. I love how 5e isn't flooding the market with add on books, aka booster packs, it got away from the assumption that players are just covered with magic items, and kept the modifiers from getting out of control so the power curve was a lot less, and it got rid of the assumption that you are using grids and minis. Its a lot more friendly to casual players too.

Zelkiiro raises Straw Man army.

House rules don't (or at least shouldn't) reduce to more min/maxing. I feel like you could be using your nerd power for good. I know there's an alignment joke in there somewhere, but I'm far too newbish to deploy it. It would basically be like throwing an apple at a tank.

I'd like to do some tabletop wargaming, but I'd be more interested in Bolt Action or Flames of War.

So you outright admit that a Rogue's only options in combat are "I hit it, I'm done." or "I shift away and I shoot it, I'm done."

"B-But roleplaying!"

You can roleplay with any system. Nothing will ever inhibit that. You pick a game for its mechanics to use alongside the roleplaying. 5e is a terrible game for anyone but beginners, because its mechanics and character creation choices are basically nonexistent.

You're missing the point entirely. You are roleplaying. You can literally say that your character attempts anything you can conceivably think of, given the situation - are you in a tavern? "My character picks up a stool and throws it." A castle? "My character jumps off the stairs, grabs the chandelier, cuts the rope, drops it onto the enemies below." You then work out which skills and stats affect your ability to perform those actions, the DM decides how generally hard it is and/or the ability of the enemy to resist those attacks. All that shit you listed reads like an MMO and is absolutely dull as dishwater from a roleplaying standpoint. If all you can think of is "I hit it, I'm done," and "I shift away and shoot it, I'm done," then you're a horrible roleplayer.

Like I said before - if you want to play a turn-based strategy game then that's fine. But different games encourage different types of play, and if you're playing a game that gives you 50 billion MMO abilities to use, players will use those. If the game gives you very few actual abilities and then encourages you to think outside the box (as 5e does), then players will do that. There are systems that do that better than 5e, but 4e is not one of them and personally I would rather stab myself with a fork than play 4e. But some people think spreadsheets are fun.

But as soon as I say, "Alright, I'm gonna use my mace to clock this guy over the head and stun him for a turn," or, "I take my battleaxe and chop at the guy's leg, rendering him immobilized for the rest of the fight!" the DM is just going to give me a flat "NO." So much for that.

Maybe your DM is terrible? You sound like a really poor roleplayer to be honest.

5e is a terrible game for anyone but beginners? Yet its selling better than 3e did per Wizards and has steadily been outselling Pathfinder despite Pathfinder having 20 different character power up books. Go to a RPG forum like Enworld and you find the long term players are having a great time with 5e. 5e has been a massive success. If gaming fun revolves around a lot of mechanical powers and stuff then 3e or 4e or PF is more your game for sure, nothing wrong with that. I find 5e a lot of fun to play and a ton of fun to DM. Combats are faster and we can run multiple fights a session where before it was more of a slog. Seems like for us the emphasis is more on the adventure, exploration, and combat rather than having 4 hour sessions that are just one fight, or have fights run over multiple sessions at higher levels.

I've only played D&D a few times (only the latest edition), so I still consider myself very much a beginner. I've played a Star Wars RPG once and a Call of Cthulhu game once, but I've got a good deal of experience role playing in MMOs. I think the thing is a lot of it comes down to phrasing. If you say "And I charge in with my battle axe and start swinging, decapitating all in my way" or "And I aim my blaster and hit a vital part on the engine, blowing up the speeder" then the DM/GM/other players are likely to sigh and say "No, you don't." but if you said it more along the lines of "I aim and attempt to shoot blah blah" or "I ready my battle axe and swing for the orcs I charge towards" then they're more likely to say "Okay, cool. So roll blah blah to succeed."
I think with role playing, succeeding at things is often less interesting, personally, than failing because if something goes wrong you have to think of alternatives to get around a predicament. If you succeed you just get more stuff or more points/abilities/another level. If you fail you often get more story.
Personally, I prefer playing a game that is more roleplay and story based than combat and dice-rolling heavy, which is probably why when I've been involved in RP in MMOs we've practically ignored game mechanics and used emotes and text chat, and from the limited tabletop experience I've got, I preferred playing Call of Cthulhu to D&D because of how story heavy it is, (as well as just preferring Lovecraftian horror to D&D/Tolkienian fantasy). But of course, RPGs are adaptable for different preferences and player types.

Personally I like the abstract nature of a lot of RPG combat systems like AD&D and now 5e, though it is less so than the former. I've played hyper detailed systems like Harnmaster and all the detailed hit locations and effects and all that didn't make the game for fun IMO. D&D is fine with me, AC is how hard it is to "damage" a target, HP is how tough a target is in terms of physical toughness, skill, etc. An attack roll is really multiple swings of a sword and the effects and all that is a bit abstract. Reflects D&D's wargame roots. For things like jumping off a balcony and grabbing the chandelier and swinging into a foe I'd just probably say make a dex check then attack, maybe at disadvantage on the attack or something. You don’t want to make some called shot so powerful that there is no point in doing anything else. Every shot is at the eyes to try and blind, which makes the 300 HP giant a push over. But I find the fighter types have enough interesting abilities to do some specific actions and I'll rule on the rest. The thief in my game is constantly roaming the battlefield doing sneak attacks as he can, doing a lot of damage. IN older additions the thief was more of an out of combat specialist in the dungeon with trap finding, locks, and the like. Since MMO becan to influence game design the class has become the "squishy damage dealer" which they did OK in 5e.

I wish my group who I've been gaming with for a few decades in some cases were into games like Call of Cthulhu but they are not the type of players who enjoy role playing someone scared like a Lovecraft protagonist. They are like "enough of this shit, fuck those deep ones, we are going to get a bunch of 12ga shotguns and dynamite, we will show them who is boss". Horror gaming just never fit us. We are much more old school gamiest in our approach than trying to have communal story time which also kind of makes games like CoC a challenge.

I'd love to play Traveller but never have been able to get everyone on board. D&D is great for beer, bongs, and pretzels adventure and tomb robbing.

That's what I'm thinking. 5e has been an absolute blast for me and literally none of the criticisms that Zelkiiro has given apply to my games at all. I'll answer your question a little later on with a better post, Tony. I haven't forgotten about ya.

Some people are playing for the mechanics of the game and without things lie a Kung-Fu grip power than gives real mechanical advantages they are not happy and combat is the focus of the game. Thats cool and fine, 4e is perfect for that, but Zelkiiro seems like he thinks his way is the only way and anyone who things different is pretty much wrong. Me, I like games quicker and more simple.

I absolutely can't stand the mechanics-heavy style of games like 4e, I'm with you. I like simple and quick, I can add all the flavor and excitement in my game through storytelling. And 5e still has plenty of mechanics for people who like to get more gritty and tactical with combat, I don't agree at all that it's worthless to play anything except for a caster. I also don't think there's anything wrong with playing 4e but it certainly wasn't fun for me.

This, all of this.

I know in my party when I have played D&D there's been myself and one or two others who have played characters who have been conversing with NPCs and exploring, roaming and such with combat to a minimum, whilst there's been a couple who are very "shoot first, ask later" type of players meaning a lot of time is spent waiting for them to roll and work out all the stats and whatnot. So personally, I find if a story is flowing and everyone is feeling immersed in the roleplay, having to stop and roll feels intrusive when it's too frequent or takes too long. That's why for myself, if I see an RPG described as being "spreadsheet heavy" or even "combat heavy", I lose almost all interest in it. Perhaps this'll change as I play more tabletop RPGs or play D&D more. But then, naturally a good DM will know the players and their play styles and preferences and adjust accordingly.

What the wholesome Indiana fuck are you talking about? I said nothing of the kind. Get your shit together, man.



Dude, even I know that's not how this works.

I'm a big Bolt Action fan - on the wall above my computer there are hanging a couple of trophies from my 2015 run as best Axis general in local tournaments. Pretty cool prizes actually, MDF silhouettes of an MP40 and MG42.

My late war Waffen SS army includes:

3 Tigers
2 Panthers
2 Stug III
1 PZ III J
1 PZ IV H
3 Opel Blitz trucks
2 Hanomag half tracks
2 sdkfz 234/4 armoured cars
PAK 40 anti tank gun
1 Nebelwerfer
Medium howitzer
6 SS Cavalry
2 fixed-placement MG42 teams
Medium mortar team
2 sniper teams
and around 60 infantry models including flamethrowers, panzerschrek teams, panzerfausts, assault rifles, the works


With Bolt Action 2nd edition just around the corner I got a great deal from a local supplier. They had the starter set with the new rulebook, American airborne guys, German Grenadiers + Hanomag, ruined farm terrain, dice and counters and a bonus plastic infantry box of your choice for $100 AUD. Grabbed a British infantry box and swapped the US guys for another one. So for that hundred bucks I ended up with the core of a British army, some extra dudes for the Krauts and the rest of the gear.

Interested to see what they do with the 2nd edition rules as I was heavily involved in playtesting the community ruleset that adapted the 1st edition rules and corrected many of the issues we found with the first version. From what I can see most of the adaptations have been adopted with the exception of any point changes. There was only one major one anyway, light machine guns being costed at 5 points rather than 20 points as per the original. So considering that they didn't want to re-do the army books (with the exception of Armies of Germany which suffered from "first book syndrome") I think that was a win for community consultation on game development, and the guys from Warlord were really cool about taking the feedback.

I bought the D-Day invasion set with the US and German forces and a ruined house, but I've only painted a few figures. None of my gaming group are into modeling and all that so they are just sitting in my massive pile of figures to be painted.