Відео

I believe historically, combat duration can actually very quite a bit, especially as groups increase. come in for a scuffle for a little bit retreat, scuffle, retreat, etc. And personally I do often find that if combat is too quick too often you dont have time to do something interesting or more then just deal as much damage as fast as possible. I like those sorts of blood pumping quick and deadly scraps too, but I think there is a place for both quick and protracted engagements somehow.

i’ve been playing with the base concept of a character having three elements to balance in a round. 1. what they want to do 2. how likely are they to succeed at those things 3. how reactive they want to be which is essentially 1. what happens on a successful action 2. what is the likelyhood of succeeding at that action 3. how compromised are your defenses while you do thar action and you can subtract some from any one of the three to add something to one of the other two. like: -recklessly attack, lowering your defenses but increasing your likelyhood to succeed. -decreasing your likelyhood to succeed, but on a success also doing something more like tripping your opponent as well as dealing normal damage (or simply dealing more damage) -decreases the damage on a successful hit, but bolstering your defenses (like going for a safer sword cut you are more confident in recovering and defending from)

the ability of armor to TAKE and HOLD ground is a really underutilized dynamic, and tbh at least on a formation fighting level is really the defining element of heavy infantry. a light infantry unit can harass a heavy one, but definitionally must give way and retreat when a heavy infantry formation advances on them outside of extenuating circumstances. The defining element of heavy infantry on a tactical level is its ability to take and hold ground.

Interesting presentation and I am completely with you. Hence I designed in my homebrew TTRPG system that during a combt take (not round) each engaged combatants rolle at the same time once for the offensive and once for the defensive. The difference between offensive and defensive result decides not only if you hit but also how hard you hit. So even an unarmed combatant can land a crippling if not even a deadly blow when he hits the right spot. Best you cover up in some armour to lessen the chance to hit a vulnerable part on your body. In any case you have picked my interest and I will have look into your Renaissance-Fantasy Setting "Streets of Peril". I love Landsknechts despite being Swiss and so Swiss mercenaries are of course ma favorites 😉

Sweet! Black Lodge Games pointed me. I will for sure be checking it out. Good luck bud.

Any plans for solo/coop rules?

Sounds sick! Streets of Peril had cool dice mechanics, so consider me interested ⚔️

I want to hear about adventure modules

The art looks really cool and evocative. Not sure I need another game system but I will check it out.

Using different colored dice is a cool idea - i have couple suggestions about that. 1. Not everyone can get their hands on 3 different-colored sets of d6 unfortunately. I would suggest to stick to one pool of dice but keep different "success thresholds". But maybe that is the main idea if players have only one set of dice. 2. Maybe move success thresholds up a bit? Make "white dice" score on a 6, "red dice" on a 5 and "black dice" on a 4? This would reduce amount of successes overal and make counting a bit easier in my opinion. If you want to keep exploding dice - you might make it 5 -> 4 -> 3 (but i would've just redo exploding dice mechanic to say that only "black" and "red" dice can explode as "white" dice are too basic to do that - this would make having skills and oaths an important part because someone who rolls black/red dice on attack becomes much scarier than a niovice squire who rolls white dice on his fencing manouvers). That's my two cents, just a food for thought.

Is this not burning wheel

Great points! I would like to temper the urgent situations thing with more stable adventure opportunities like location based adventures, dungeons and such which can be visited at any point. My experience is that campaigns easily have kind of constant urgency which can take away the sandboxness. But I love the idea of competing urgent situations as a way to introduce dilemmas occasionally. Also looking for opportunities to link different adventures, npc's locations etc can be a great source for inspiration. I haven't done this yet but from what you were saying about factions, I got the idea of using oracles and spark tables (or other randomization tools) to figure out how factions that PC's don't actively confront develop. This way you don't have to make every decision of whether those factions succeed or not and randomization can otherwise bring really cool elements into play you'd never think of as a GM. I enjoy being surprised like that as GM. Enough rambling on my part. Clearly very inspiring video! Thanks!

The art is amazing!

This is awesome. Somewhere in there, I think you actually addressed the exact combat system I've been working on and told me exactly how it could be improved, by the way.

are there dragons?

Combat sounds like generally the right idea. Legit insights into real life melee makes me hopeful. I'm interested mostly in what mechanics you're planning to bring for tracking factional relationships in domain management and the hexcrawl

Where do the red and black dice come from?

This feels fresh and I love the artwork! I'll be checking this out!

As someone who is using several houserules to make the choice of weapon and armor in D&D more meaningful and realistic this project sounds very interesting to me. And the art is just gogeous! One question: does this system have oppurtunity attacks? It drives me crazy how in D&D5e you can just drink a potion or load a crossbow in melee combat without any restrictions.

does the combat differ from streets of peril? and if so, what is the mechanic or rule that stands out most to you? besides the obvious addition of magic

Game sounds great! Looking forward for the hex crawl adventure. Are there any opportunities for mass combat or sieges?

You have stolen my ideas.

I’m sold, where can I buy?

This guy is a great swordsman and an even greater nerd. Check out his game.

Looking forward to it!

I am currently designing a TTRPG and you hit on everything I have been working on lol. To me Opportunity attacks make more sense when a monster moves into your melee range rather than leaving it. Also having less HP but dodging, parry and blocking until you finally get struck for half your health has meaning instead 80 HP. Thank you for making this, I’ll definitely check out you stuff.

I liked how you ended the video with talking about conventions. Knee jerk reaction vs. validity. There's definitely some valid claim, such as the creeps we've met and kicked out over the years. Working in a similar industry and it's true, some people need help. My thoughts are that: I don't think the table is the right place for it. If you need mental health help, then you need to get that help with a professional. GMs aren't equipped for it, AND it puts a burden on other players. In fact it could also harm the other players by having exposure to, not the tools, but to someone who needs MH help and hasn't had their needs met. Not that discriminating is good, but exposing to harm is bad. I don't know about you, but even as professionals dealing with a lot of this heavy stuff isn't a walk in the park, and I would think twice about having someone like that at my table because, although I might be equipped for it, the other players aren't.

Wow! This sounds like a very exciting project! Every single component (domain play rules, evocative setting, mass combat rules, etc) all sounds like stuff that I want that is missing from the rpg space right now. I really hope you nail these rules, but even if they arent perfectly to my personal liking, im confident this will be a very fun game for the setting alone. - Nothing really beats an rpg designed with a particular setting and particular style of play in mind.

You're basically covering the most important thing when you say it treats players like they're soft. There's no need for this kind of stuff, it just codifies and depersonalizes talking to your players and replaced it with forms. Caters to the worst people

I'm personally in favor to the idea that people should be open about wanting to use safety tools in the games I run or participate. It's a great way to filter out weirdos that would derail the campaign if allowed to participate. The more vocal and adamant they are about their want for safety tools in the game, the more sure I am that they're not the kind of people I'd want to interact with. And no, having something like a session 0 and talking about expectations and wants is not a safety tool and I'm not going to allow those weirdos to claim decent human behavior and common sense as part of their BDSM-inspired gamification of normal human social interaction.

Such a place of privilege to come from to dismiss other people's issues because they don't bother you.

Bruh dude you are making a really big deal out of nothing if you don’t like it just don’t do it this is dnd for gods sake you can literally do anything this won’t affect your games so why whine about it 😂

I've seen people mark down so much stuff on those checklists that i think they might be playing from a bunker.

What a bunch of nonsense, why have I ever subscribed to such a channel?

I juse see how safety tools are used as the problem because they are pushed by the people who do have mental issues and only listen to their own echo chamber.

Isn't talk to the GM or another player aside if a behavior that is bothersome persists a safety tool in and of itself? It seems to me what you are suggesting is that you do not need formalized safety tools, but the less formal safety tools have been a part of RPGs since probably their start.

Great video, wild what I've been missing

Here before this hits Reddit/X. :D

my safety tools are sticks and stones

You missed the point on two key aspects. 1 - WotC and other companies conquered by DEI are producing the content that they do nowadays with the goal of flooding the market SO MUCH with their woke stuff in order to make very hard for people to discern what is good and bad content (and no, good and bad things are not "in the eye of the beholder", they are objective things), 2 - the push to use "safety tools" are a result of a school of thought created by Freud which the result is the pathologization of the private life, where every social relation is disfunctional by default and must be treated somehow (literal hell on earth). That notion came to D&D via kink culture, because those degenerates invaded the hobby to massage their egos and their constant need for self affirmation.

Combats in RPGs are tough... They should wear a helmet, and their medications.

💯 -- truly enjoyed this video. I've tried hundreds of TTRPG systems with cinematic to ultra-realistic for many decades. Your insights into making combat intuitive are excellent advice.

Dungeon World and its family of games do this pretty well. 2d6 + STR/DEX, likely +1 or +2. 6 or less, the enemy hits. 7-9, you trade blows. 10 or more, you hit the enemy and can optionally deal more damage to trade blows anyway (bestial man!). Armor reduces damage. Since the average of 2d6 is 7 with a steep bell curve, and your highest bonus for most of the game will be +2, melee combat is quite dangerous. It does kind of incentivize you to fling yourself into getting outnumbered though.

Great advice, even more reason why I love Mythras/Classic Fantasy. Hits all those great points you mention for exciting and fear filled combats

I really enjoyed this dissection! I think a tabletop game should be intentional about how it approaches monsters vs. people, so that the players within the game understand how the world is intended to be interacted with. Keeping monsters, well, MONSTROUS can help keep them dangerous, keep them horrifying. Making monsters more like people makes them more empathetic, prone to redemption. Those are very different games, indeed! In my game, I drew the line really clearly: the game is People versus Monsters. The horrors out there are not to be redeemed, and you must be careful when talking with them, for they are deceptive and nefarious. They are cruel manifestations of evil, of darkness, and of chaos. People, on the other hand, no matter how evil, can be reasoned with and shown mercy. They don't fight to the bitter end, they want to live! (It's not a fantasy setting, but in a game like D&D all the humanoid species would be People; humans, elves, orcs, etc. They are all working together against foes of pure nightmare)

Really glad the algorithm put your channel in my path! As an indie ttrpg dev myself, this video was very helpful as I look to the horizon for my own crowdfunding campaign. Subbed immediately!

Very good video! Though I'm not fond of monsters as a whole separate category personally. Blurring the lines between man, monster, and animal is how I try to do things and it makes for very interesting scenarios for my players... they're often pressed to make the best decision among a number of very terrible ones. But I'm not a DND guy though... Call of Cthulhu sends it's regards👽🤘

Based. Reject evil Reject the moderns who refuse objective morals.

I was increasingly off-put by the arguments in this video until I saw the bible verse and then suddenly it made sense - not the arguments, no, I still totally disagree with them - but the fact that you were making them. Perhaps you should advertise the religiosity of this channel, because the perspective contained here makes absolutely no sense without a religious mindset. Wouldn't have bothered clicking if I'd known, honestly. It's simply not of use to me. Those who want this sort of content could find it more easily with proper labeling, and those who have no interest could avoid it.