Dungeons and Dragons

Does Pathfinder count? Cause I'm playing 2e right now.

Personally, I prefer Pathfinder (2e for me, but 1e is tons of fun too).

I think the big thing that keeps me coming back to Pathfinder over 5e (I am running a game for newbies in 5e because they probably don't want to complexity) is that there are actual, hard rules for almost anything you might want to do in the entirety of the game. DnD is always advertised as "do whatever you want and the DM will tell you how it goes!" but the rules for 5e are so combat-focused and simplistic that the DM will inevitably end up homebrewing...well, 80% of the game unless you players or crazily combat focused. Whereas 2e has extensive and widely available rules for freaking everything and it makes it feel so much more like a world compared to 5e. Also, their adventure paths are so awesome and exciting compared to 5e campaigns IMO.

I also am not a big fan of WOTC lately, so that is helping me stick to Pathfinder. Also, they are very LGBTQIA+ friendly!

I play OSE which is B/X DnD with the serial numbers filed off - 2+ years of "Grand Campaign" (West Marches in modern parlance) gaming, and a folder full of dead characters, most of them from the early days when we were still accustomed to the new school gaming style.

I'm a fan of AD&D 2e. It's what was current when I started playing, and I've pored over those books with an intensity only a dorky teenager can muster. The last game I ran was a several-year-long 2e campaign. It's the edition/system I know best, and running it is second nature to me. I typically run homebrewed settings, but I love the diversity of settings published for 2e: Planescape, Dark Sun, and the like really showed how far 2e could be pushed.

The only problem I have with 2e is that my wife did NOT enjoy the system. I'll likely have to figure something else out when I run another game because given the choice between her and 2e, I'm going to go with my wife.

I play AD&D (currently playing though Temple of Elemental Evil). Why? Because the people I play with are proper OG nerds, they played D&D when it was originally released (my DM still has his original red box). As a young whippersnapper coming from 5e it's different I'll give you that. It's a lot harder to min/max and I appreciate that. Mostly it's just fun seeing how DnD evolved, the fact that shenanigans will always ensue means it's still fun as ever but just in it's own special way.

I watched critical roles zelda one shot the other day i was really interested in the d6 mechanic they used.

Seemed very streamlined

You didnt role to attack instead you rolled to defend, and your character had stamina. Esch action they took on their turn used a stamina up. You also needed the stamina tondefend though, so it involved resource management too.

Use a your stamina to wail on an opponent then have non left tl defend if you were unsuccessful seemed like a nice change of pace

About to start running a Savage Worlds campaign. I've always been homebrew-focused and when I wanted to run a medium-fantasy/Old West setting with gunplay, it was pretty obvious 5e wasn't going to fit. Plus noxious WotC crap with OGL and their handling of MtG has me pretty put off by their whole lineup lately.

My local game store has a discord server, and the only posts in the #dnd channel are people from other TTRPGs trying to recruit D&D players.

I play 3.5 I find it’s the perfect balance of skill as well as luck. There aren’t stupid ideas like advantage or anything to muck up the gameplay. Only problem I would say is the excessive bonus adding but that’s not a huge deal. It also probably helps it was the version I learned first and the version my group plays

I've played 7 sessions in a 13th Age campaign, and I love it so far. It has all the core familiar d20 mechanics, but throws away D&D's skill system in favor of explicit mechanics that incorporate PC backstory directly into success and failure in the game.

In 13th Age instead of skills, PCs have "Backgrounds". Backgrounds are rolled like skills, but instead of picking from a list, PCs make up their own.

For example, if your PC's backstory involves being abandoned as a child and growing up on the mean city streets, you might have the background: "Resourceful Urchin". During the session, if your party is tracking down a bad guy in the slums, you could ask your DM: "could I use my Resourceful Urchin background to tap into my contacts and find out if anyone has seen the bad guy recently?" Your DM says "give me a roll" and if you succeed, you advance in your pursuit without negative consequence.

13th Age takes a bit more good faith from both the players and the GM to be fun, but its so great for making the PCs feel special and important in the world in a way D&D doesn't support.

@TigerClawTV

I play 3.x (3.0/.5/PF1e. Folks in my group have different preferences and opinions between the 3, but what I run is mostly 3.5)

We like having a range of options to make characters feel unique.
We like having the game promote tactical movement and positional advantage.

To me, these things help form the groundwork for my own encounter design, suspension of disbelief, and worldbuilding.

4e!

It’s honestly a ton of fun. I like the tactical combat options, I like that everyone has a chance to shine without feeling overshadowed due to other classes, I like the minion system, the cinematic-like skill challenges, some interesting classes, and feats mean a lot.

I don’t think people realize how much 5e is a streamlined version of 4e with some tweaks. And anyone that says 4e isn’t RP heavy - that’s on your groups. We have entire sessions of roleplay no problem.

I'm not actively playing, but I've got a 4e one-shot ready for the next time my group can't do the regular game, and I keep threatening them with 3e.

2e. We like the role playing more than rolling dice to simulate a pen and paper MMO.

What's Dungeons & dragons?