I just want to reinforce what people are saying: These long-form videos are gold. It's like you're making them for me personally. Couldn't ask for better.
Yeah. I sometimes watch and sometimes just listen but I also really appreciate the treasures of books and magazines shown with their pictures, charts and all.
Ha, it is better if I listen... because if I see the books I will want them for my shelf. It is an amazing thing that WotC isn't smart enough to reprint the old box sets or FR books, as I would definitely buy them all. As I bet most older dudes who played in the late 70s / 80s.
I really enjoy the perspective of folks who have a deep and practical understanding of the evolution of the hobby. I was a little late to ttrpgs (3rd ed and later) and enjoy your curated and well-presented discussions. I did not know the Mountebank was a class available in *any* edition, never mind in the one I started with!
It's fascinating from a historical perspective and cool that people like Joe Bloch and Trent Smith have published their own playable versions of these classes. That said, I've never been a fan of the direction AD&D was trending during this period (UA, etc.). Probably my biggest "hot take" that would call my old school cred into question is that I strongly suspect I would have liked Gygax and Mentzer's 2E even less than Zeb Cook's. Whatever its flaws, the 2E we got was at least fairly back-to-basics in its core rulebooks only iteration.
I love the long form videos! Also: I think when he said “for every letter with the savant listed at the top and the jester at the bottom” he was not trying to say everyone loved the savant over the jester, he was saying that everyone was divided and if there was a letter that loved the savant, there was a letter that loved the jester and they canceled each other out.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, you make the best D&D videos on UA-cam. Don't stress about these things like length of the video (although long is preferred...) or whether your hands are shaking whilst holding a book. People are coming here for your insights and personality. :)
Savants are often in the forgotten realms stories too. An exapmle was in the drizzt series when he came to the surface, and a party was sent to investigate with a frumpy dwarf savant whose name i can't remember. He was a scholar but had a mithril hammer. He was with a group that had one of the 7 sisters i think.
The mystic ended up becoming a class in 2nd Ed. It was found in the Faith's and Avatars of the Realms book for the Forgotten Realms setting. It was a cleric off shoot that brewed potions and made magical candles. The mountebank became a prestige class in 3.5.
That was the book whose name I was trying to come up with during the video. I mentioned that it was out there, and I am aware of it and its goal but I never never read or purchased it.
@@daddyrolleda1 A 2nd printing is fixing to kickstart. The creator put out a video in the last day explaining a lot of where he got the inspiration, and it seems to line up with what you are talking about.
Your deep dives are fascinating, learning the why and back story to D&D lore is worth the video length, I have you on in an ear bug as I carry out boring paper work tasks, yet your schick sticks.
Love the video format as-is, and I was hoping that you'd do such a video/series on the evolution of Psionics in D&D. It seems to be something that folks either love or hate, but it started with Gary and as such is "straight from the tap" D&D content. I think it would be cool to hear what you know about his choice to include them, how he influenced their changes over time, etc.
Thank you for the idea, and I can certainly add Psionics to a list of potential future topics. Thanks for the support, and for watching and commenting. Cheers!
A lot of old D&D classes are based on specific old school fantasy characters. E.g., the Ranger is based on Aragorn, the Paladin draws heavily on Holger Carlsen from Three Hearts and Three Lions, the Thief draws heavily from the Gray Mouser and so on. The Mountebank I suspect was the "Cugel the Clever" character class. Cugel is primarily a con artist who dabbles in magic. Gygax was a big Vance fan so I suspect that's what the Mountebank was meant to represent.
Great video! I’m really enjoying these longer form videos. Great content. Again, I’m impressed by the research you do for your videos. I remember Enworld forum! Thanks for including Gary Gygax’s posts from those boards. Can’t wait for part 2!
I always chuckle when you apologize for the sirens, I never hear them! I think your doing great, I enjoy listening to these bits of the past (even though I do know a bit of it already) as I craft or work on my campaign.
love the channel, but I do find myself often clicking away from your long videos where i might not have something more digestible i can listen to on my lunch break. (at least in my opinion) breaking up these into: a little series of videos called "Gygax's unfinished classes" 1.jester 2.mountebank 3.savant ... etc. would be nice. but it's your channel, if you really like it how it is, then keep it up. Best regards, Jose
In the issue #67 I saw the ad for the game Daredevils. My friend picked that up. I remember making a character but not playing it. Pulp adventures from the 20s and 30s.
Joseph Bloch's pre-release version of Adventures Dark and Deep has had all 4 of theses Gygax AD&D 2e planned classes since at least 2010. He has collated much of the information regarding Gary's proposed 2nd edition on his Greyhawk Grognard blog. In 1e D&D only Magic-Users had 9 levels of spells. Illusionists & other, what I reference as, primary spell casting classes have 7 levels of spells. Specialists Wizards, which would include the Illusionist, did not have 9 levels of spells until 2e AD&D. The Mountebanke (quack who mounts a bench to hawk his wares [such as patent medicines]), "sleight of hand artist" (three-card monte, cup and balls) "juggler", practitioner of stage magic, an inveterate con-man and huckster, relying more on his skills of misdirection and confusion than on physical pilfering, but not entirely unskilled in many of the more traditional thiefly arts as well, a practitioner of confidence tricks. A Savant is one with detailed knowledge in some specialized field (as of science or literature). In D&D terms it's a specialist in knowledge, divination, and detection; it's a Sage with additional magical spell casting abilities. A Mystic is an innate, a member of a Mystery Cult, one whom practices Mysticism. Mysticism is known as attempting to become one with the Divine, the Absolute, the Infinite (Henosis), or unification with what is fundamental in reality: the One, the Source, or Monad, but may refer to any kind of ecstasy or altered state of consciousness which is given a religious or spiritual meaning. It may also refer to the attainment of insight in ultimate or hidden truths, and to human transformation supported by various practices and experiences. In D&D terms the Mystic is an initiate of an inner mystery tradition that seeks direct communion with the multiverse in order to achieve enlightenment. Insight, awareness, and a deep connection with ultimate reality are the hallmarks and ultimate goals of the Mystic. The differences between a Savant & Mystic is not unlike the difference between the words Knowledge & Wisdom or Cognizance & Sapience; the Latin roots Cognosco (cognōscō) & Sapio (sapiō), the Greek roots Gnosis (Γ νῶσις) & Sophia (Σοφíα); the difference between Knowledge gained from external study, learning & Wisdom from innate discernment, self-awareness, self(internal, intrinsic)-experience. I'm also a SoCal resident. I've been to the Ice House for stand-up comedy many a time, but unfortunately not recently. I'm not really a Jazz guy, I'm more into Delta & Chicago Blues.
From one Daddy to another Daddy Rolling One, I loved these videos focused on second edition and appreciate your commentary. Just a validation there are some of us still using this system despite its flaws and certainly for its advantages
Thank you so much for watching and commenting, and for your support! I remember years ago on my blog, I was writing a series called "Fun With Any Edition" to talk about good times I had with each edition and what specifically I liked about them, mechanically. The 2E post got the most comments out of all of them! (I never finished the series, though, and I started backwards with 4E, as 5E wasn't even out when I began). But there are definitely a lot of 2E fans out there still!
When that Dragon magazine article came out, I was so excited to play a Mountebank (mostly inspired by the video for the Paul McCartney/Michael Jackson song, "Say, Say, Say"). I was so disappointed when it didn't end up in UA.
You're not alone! I really feel that of the four classes we did *not* get, the Mountebank was the one most people really wanted to see. That's a fun story about that video! I totally remember that song!
Vince Garcia went on to publish "Quest of the Ancients" based off feedback received by readers who submitted letters to Dragon Magazine. QA was compatible with AD&D but d30 based (with d20 and d% options) and incorporated a lot of what readers were requesting as 2nd Ed was in design stage and coming out. His Gypsy class (specifically the male Gypsy) was a lot like the Montebank.
Very cool video, never too long for me! I like a lot of stuff from 2e and really like the modules from this era, especially the Greyhawk stuff. If you can have any of that stuff and can touch on it that would be great! Keep up the great work on the channel, it’s really fun to watch.
Thank you so much for your support and words of positivity. I really appreciate it! I wasn't super active with D&D during the 2E Era (my group had switched to playing Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay) but I can certainly add more 2E stuff to my list of potential topics. Thanks again!
Always happy for Dangerous Journeys coverage. It is actually classless and levelless, close to d100 basic roleplaying system but with its own stuff. There are starting skill packages by archetypes but they not not classes in the D&D sense. Interesting game once you get past the terminology used to avoid D&Disms. The setting is really cool basically earth with the archetypal mythology turned up to 11 and the magic system is quite a cool concept in how it all fits into the world.
28:30 I think you might be talking about my Adventures Dark and Deep game. I went through much the same process as you describe above when creating the new classes; first the Dragon magazine articles, then Gary's various Enworld Q&A's (as well as the ones he did on other forums), and Dangerous Journeys. It was very much a research project. (And there's currently a Kickstarter going on for a new edition of the core rulebooks.)
TSR was coming after everyone in those days. It's one of the reasons why me and a lot of my friends stopped purchasing their products late into the 90s. You couldn't write anything for the game and publish it online without getting a take-down notice. I feel like the antagonism they built with their fan-base is an unsung reason behind their ultimate failure.
My dad was a play tester for Chainmail and Dnd in the early and mid 70s . He would introduce classes that were scrapped in our odnd games. One I remembered was the time tripper which was a Vietnam Era American soldier that was 411ed to the dnd universe. The class was balanced very well and only had limited equipment. Another one was a shape shifter race-class. I would like to know if anyone else remembers these classes and your experience with them.
Thanks so much for sharing my community post. I would love to chat with you in the comments with each Chapter. Love your videos. Maybe one day I'll try using a video editor 😏
Really enjoy the longer videos. Im very used to just listen to the videos while i work or prepare my own campaing. I think maybe a popup sound for the insertion of important images or pages of the books, would be great to ''notify'' about a nice thing to see on the video!!! Im always like alt+tabbing to the video to see some of the interesting material you have to show, speacialy the old editions physical formats!! Love your channel. A fan from Brazil here!!
Oh wow! I had no idea I had fans from Brazil! That's so fantastic to hear, and I like your suggestion about some kind of "pop-up" noise to alert people when there's an image on the screen I think they should see. I will look into that. Thanks for the suggestion! And mostly thank you for watching and commenting, and your support of the channel. Cheers!
Thank you! I'm am considering going back and re-doing some of my history videos as podcasts with an understanding that I of course can't show the thing I'm talking about. We'll see. Thanks for the feedback!
Please continue to make long form videos. I listen to UA-cam at work instead of the radio & I favor interesting content that spans 30 mins plus because I don't have time to constantly fiddle with my phone looking for stuff I want.
Thank you so much for the support! I really appreciate you taking some time to let me know, and I am so happy to keep you company at work. Another long video just posted a few minutes ago! Cheers, and thanks again!
I think Gary’s ideas for classes fit more into 5E than 1E/AE. Subclasses are just themes applied to a class, the difference being the level based abilities. That makes 5E classes rather wordy because there are many abilities. In a way 5E feels somewhat like where Gary was heading. He might even approve of some of the more casual-friendly features if the reason for them was to get more people to play. It’s hard to know why someone did something or what they would do if they had the opportunity. You can’t really say that because he was making things more complex he would continue to believe in that. I’ve had the same job for 35 years and it gets more complex every year. I used to believe in complex solutions but now I have the opposite opinion since I realized the marginal benefit of complexity is totally overshadowed by the difficulty explaining it and the increased chance of errors. It’s quite possible Gary could have totally flipped the way he does things, particularly if he thought simplicity would bring more people into the game. Honestly I think he would approve of 5E but he’d probably prefer to play 3E or Pathfinder due to the tactical stuff.
I love the Unearthed Archana. Could you do a video on the eratta? I would love to know what they changed. Also, love the long form videos. I mostly listen, unless you're showing off art or going over books that i don't have in my collection. It's great to see those.
I like long videos on topics I enjoy, e.g. most old school D&D videos. I prefer shorter videos on most political topics, although if I enjoy the political video, then in that case I like a long video, too. Also, when I’m introducing others to a topic, then I assume they might only be willing to start watching a video if it’s short, so I like short videos for when I’m introducing people to a new topic.
One of my players ran a mountebank, through a whole campaign to completion, as if he was guided by Gygax's ghost. It was a thief/magic-user, and even did the whole fake potions deception.
First of all, two different groups of rules (almost two separate games, in factl) are provided within this book--the basic rules and the advanced rules. -- pg 9 Here is an example. Like why have a basic and advanced version of the game and not just one version of the game?
There were a lot of convoluted games at the time. Mythus was percentile, skill oriented (mostly), and the acronyms are out of control. The magic system, Heka, seemed like an improvement from Vancian magic, but I can’t decipher how the whole system is supposed to work.
@@josephpince4716 it seems like they were trying to go off the Chaosium Runequest Basic Roleplaying Game system use of the adventurer class (heroic persona) with a background used to make characters distinct but also have some kind of professional distinction. The whole thing seems like a mess. I'm not really sure it's even playable or was really played by anyone.
Thank you! I'm pretty excited. To be honest, I hadn't heard of it until one of Dave Arneson's associates saw one of my videos and invited me to attend!
I love the idea of classes that could have been. Some of them were not different enough to be distinct classes, and some were ill-defined or ill-designed. Still others were tragically never added.
Fantastic. Thanks for all the good, thought provoking content. I love channels that don’t pander to the almighty algorythm. And what the heck, when you have covered everything and just want views, just fill your living room with one million 20-siders.
I have not made one for that specific system yet, mostly because I never really played it and I've been trying to focus on games I actually played first before delving into others. Thanks for the suggestion, though! I'll add it to the list of potential future topics.
IDK if it's based on the Gary Gygax version, but there is a Mystic Class in the Dragonlance setting book for 3E that is a divine spellcaster without a God. May be mentioned later on the video, IDK, still watching
I feel like you’re maybe having a kneejerk reaction to the Mountebank based on the fact that they added a supernatural element to it. From what little I could catch on the page, it’s still a rogue based around charming, hypnotizing, and decieving people.
A thought I often have with D&D classes (mostly looking at the older versions of the game) is that classes really do what their own world. Fighter, Cleric, Thief, and Magic User are fantastic when they are the classes (along with the demi humans). They are broad and cover your bases, they work well together but as you begin to add more specific or highly tailored classes we should also maybe take out those original four. Take as an Example OSE and OSE advanced fantasy. I hold the (probably unpopular) position that the advanced fantasy classes are fantastic if they’re the only classes you’re using. A challenge often with these games is trying to narrow scope and that not every game needs or even benefits from every option. (Do you need the Thief if you have both the Montebank and Acrobat?)
Yes, I can totally see that. I've never been quite sure that it was a strong enough archetype to warrant its own class but could have made an interesting background or kit for a 2E Bard (or Thief).
You mentioned at 28:37 (transcript to jog your memory below) that you were going to link to this what-if Gygax 2e book in the show notes. Do you have that link?
Joseph Bloch's (Greyhawk Grognard's) Adventures Dark and Deep, it's available on DriveThruRPG, but he has an updated version going live on Kickstarter next week.
Now I wonder if Warhammer Fantasy kept its legacy along with “Order and Chaos” (it work since WFRP being morally ambiguous to an extent, like capital C Chaos are evil but Lawful included Dwarfs who would lay a siege to castle just because the owner short changed them two pennies). That or just premise being “average joes in Dark Fantasy”.
@20:00 Gygax claimed he doesn't read other rules systems to avoid plagiarizing them is not shortsighted. Gygax was jealously protective of the Dungeons & Dragons IP, and embroiled in disputes over ownership of the game. In order to cut Dave Arneson out of the TSR future revenues, he concocted Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, and called it a wholly new game, when it was obviously an expansion and elaboration of the original Dungeons & Dragons game that he had collaborated on with Arneson. Gygax was acutely aware of copyright infringement claims and C&D letters that threatened TSR -- he had to drop "hobbits" and replace them with "halflings", they had to remove Cthulhu and Melnibonean chapters from Deities & Demigods. The laws regarding copyright and licensing as applied to games were still being refined during this period, and so Gygax had to be extremely defensive and risk averse, so in that context his claim of avoiding reading other rules systems to avoid stealing from them makes total sense. I suspect that in truth Gygax did study the competition to an extent that he could at least know what they were up to, and to catch them "stealing" from him -- if there was anything he could use in a lawsuit or countersuit.
Actually they didn't have to remove Cthulhu and Melnibone mythos, they had permission and only needed to put in a credit blurb in subsequent printings to keep them in but Gary pulled them anyway because he didn't want to credit others even when it cost him nothing. 😕
The youtube video length meta you reference is a few years outdated. Since time spent on UA-cam became the main algorithm, 30 minute-1 hour videos are the meta, so long as their interesting enough for people to keep watching.
Camera : I would suggest editing to combo both still and 'live'. The 'live' presents a meaningful experience, but a few seconds of a frozen screen whilst you talk should be acceptable to those same people whilst cleaning up the experience for those who like a stationary camera *_whilst you continue to talk_*
Considering how many people find bards to be annoying, one can only imagine how a jester class would be recieved. Personally I am happy that is has not become a core class in any of the later editions!
I like long videos on topics I enjoy, e.g. most old school D&D videos. I prefer shorter videos on most political topics, although if I enjoy the political video, then in that case I like a long video, too.
Your videos would transfer over to Podcasts easily. I think you should do that. You could easily just take the audio from your older videos and load them up as podcasts.
Yes, exactly. I did not articulate that very well at all (the curse of me not scripting my videos and instead talking spontaneously). I tried to say something like "in the style of a D&D-like game..." or something like that, but it wasn't clear at all. Dungeon! was, to my understanding, an attempt to create a Blackmoor style game in a board-game format, and both games (Blackmoor and Dungeon!) were shown to Gary Gygax simultaneously, prior to the writing/publication of Dungeons & Dragons. Thanks for catching that, and I'll try to make it more clear in an upcoming video when I talk about it again.
If 5E introduced the Jester all the clowns and perverts could go play that and they could give me my Bard back... I might even think about playing it. Not saying I WOULD play (nobody is holding me to THAT as a promise...) it, but I'd be more inclined to THINK about it.
Yes indeed! The cartoon, which debuted in 1983, featured all three new classes that would would eventually appear in "Unearthed Arcana" (from 1985). While many think that the cartoon was just an advertisement for the new hardback, from what I've read, Gary Gygax wrote the book much later as a quick "stop-gap" measure to help raise funds for a cash-strapped TSR. More likely, to me, featuring the new classes, which had first debuted in Dragon Magazine, to help provide advanced promotion for Gary's planned 2nd Edition (which never happened, as you saw in the video). Another reasonable idea to consider is that "Fighter" is a bit too generic, and Paladin (and Cleric) carry too many religious overtones. Rangers have a connection to LOTR, Barbarians to Conan, and Cavaliers to "knights in shining armor" from Arthurian folk tales and more. Thieves and Assassins were avoided due to the negative connotations, but they needed a sneaky character, so they added the Acrobat (dropping the "Thief-" part). Having a wizard in the party of course made sense. As for the Monk, that's the one class I find an odd choice to include but based on process of elimination, the only other choices would have been Illusionist (already covered with the Wizard), Druid (they already had a nature-type with the Ranger), or the Bard (too complicated). Just my thoughts, of course! Thanks so much for watching and commenting, and for your support of the channel!
I think that as a kid playing in the late '80s and early '90s, I would have been super excited for more classes. However, as an adult, I can't help but think that these would have been way unnecessary.
These classes feel half-baked, like they weren’t well play-tested. I wish TSR had created classes that replaced dual-classing. And i wish Gary had redone fighters to have decent features that scaled, so they could keep up decently with wizards.
Think of the different titles for the various ranks of a knightly order or an order of nobility, or the different titles for the ranks of a branch of a nation's military or the different titles for the ranks of nobility, or the different titles for the various ranks of real world clerics (such as Jewish, Christian, Muslim, etc...) & so on...
@@ValamirCleaver But that's an argument for in-universe titles in organizations; most classes weren't assumed to be members of some over-arching class-based hierarchy.
@@boobah5643 The 1e AD&D rules regarding: training to gain a new level, the duels or assassinations necessary for Druids (12th level+), Monks (8th level+) or Assassins (14th level+) to advance, the domain rules that kicked-in at or about "name level" (the attracting of followers & the establishing of home bases, [religious strongholds, freeholds, keeps, fortified towers, Thieves Guilds, Assassins Guilds, fortified monasteries], or the retainers that Cavaliers & Paladins must maintain or the lords that the 2 above classes serve; none of the above examples do not assume "some over-arching class-based hierarchy"???
@ValamirCleaver No. Fighters and magic-users can attract followers because they're famous; there's no organization beyond dealing with whoever claims the land you built your stronghold or tower on. A cleric's shrine might be involved with their church's hierarchy, depending, but Helm's church doesn't get a say on shrines dedicated to Lathander, Tyr, or Sune, so it's not class-based. And thieves' guilds are usually independent, too; attaining high rank in Waterdeep doesn't mean much in Amn or Baldur's Gate. Paladins and rangers often make common cause, but rangers don't really have much organization and paladins, when they have any, are attached to churches like clerics.
I must have read that article dozens of times, and I recall photocopying it to give to my DM to get his permission to play one. You can tell how often I read this magazine by the sad state of the cover that became detached! Thanks for watching and commenting.
Having consumed countless hours of modern OD&D content it's obvious by now that Gygax should have had D&D removed from his hands and others taken over. He would have made a decent #3 or #4 man in the hierarchy. But at the top? Making all the important decisions? NO.
Ha ha not a lot of love for the king of Jesters. Why don't we give some of those acrobat powers to the Thief and not try to create a new class? Sounds like Gary had some regrets about the Monk.
It’s easy to say that with hindsight. At the time there weren’t really too many people with the ability. Sure, there were lots of ideas that would radically change D&D, but trying to keep everything somewhat backwards compatible is difficult. Many people didn’t understand why certain things work as they do - many still don’t including WotC. Rather than being replaced, what Gary should have done is delegate. He’s obviously trying to do too much himself.
@@doctorlolchicken7478 Sure, it's obvious in hindsight. I was freaking eleven years old. How was I to know I was being led around by the nose by a man whose writings made no sense, and who had a whim, scribbled it down,and then let the rest of us be baffled by it. I never read Conan or Fafhrd and never will. It was unfair and idiotic to assume all of us had just because he had.
@@Heike-- Why do you think Appendix N was listed in the DMG? If one can't be bothered to familiarize oneself with the listed inspiration materials is that the author's fault?
Video length? Depends... do you want to make the content that YOU feel contains the message you want to convey, or are you more interested in clicks, attention and fame-whoring? That is not a cheap shot at Professor DM... (or is it?)
Sorry, it isnt ADD, I simply dont have an hour and 15 minutes to spare. I like your content but you need to be much more concise and/or edit. Normally you see this with a new channel and improvements as the channel grows and ages. I guess it depends on whether or not you're happy with a small audience.
I just want to reinforce what people are saying: These long-form videos are gold. It's like you're making them for me personally. Couldn't ask for better.
It be #bedtimelistening style, no eyes needed, no politics.
I enjoy the length of the post, but also like seeing the documents. The pics, maps, and text are fun to see...
Yeah. I sometimes watch and sometimes just listen but I also really appreciate the treasures of books and magazines shown with their pictures, charts and all.
Ha, it is better if I listen... because if I see the books I will want them for my shelf. It is an amazing thing that WotC isn't smart enough to reprint the old box sets or FR books, as I would definitely buy them all. As I bet most older dudes who played in the late 70s / 80s.
I'm sure most of us here could listen to you talk D&D all day!
Fantastic detail. Thanks for giving us all of the breadcrumbs and context.
I really enjoy the perspective of folks who have a deep and practical understanding of the evolution of the hobby. I was a little late to ttrpgs (3rd ed and later) and enjoy your curated and well-presented discussions.
I did not know the Mountebank was a class available in *any* edition, never mind in the one I started with!
Long form for the win, natural, conversational presentation is pure gold.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate the support!
It's fascinating from a historical perspective and cool that people like Joe Bloch and Trent Smith have published their own playable versions of these classes. That said, I've never been a fan of the direction AD&D was trending during this period (UA, etc.). Probably my biggest "hot take" that would call my old school cred into question is that I strongly suspect I would have liked Gygax and Mentzer's 2E even less than Zeb Cook's. Whatever its flaws, the 2E we got was at least fairly back-to-basics in its core rulebooks only iteration.
I love long form videos. I also tend to prefer screenshots instead of camera-on-the-page (though I like seeing video of the physical book covers).
I love the long form videos!
Also: I think when he said “for every letter with the savant listed at the top and the jester at the bottom” he was not trying to say everyone loved the savant over the jester, he was saying that everyone was divided and if there was a letter that loved the savant, there was a letter that loved the jester and they canceled each other out.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, you make the best D&D videos on UA-cam. Don't stress about these things like length of the video (although long is preferred...) or whether your hands are shaking whilst holding a book. People are coming here for your insights and personality. :)
Savants are often in the forgotten realms stories too. An exapmle was in the drizzt series when he came to the surface, and a party was sent to investigate with a frumpy dwarf savant whose name i can't remember. He was a scholar but had a mithril hammer. He was with a group that had one of the 7 sisters i think.
Can’t wait to listen to this one while I walk the dog this afternoon!
Excellent! Sounds like a fun thing to do while walking the dog! I also listen to YT Videos and podcasts while on my morning walk!
The mystic ended up becoming a class in 2nd Ed. It was found in the Faith's and Avatars of the Realms book for the Forgotten Realms setting. It was a cleric off shoot that brewed potions and made magical candles. The mountebank became a prestige class in 3.5.
Rules cyclopedia had a mystic for the BECMI line as well, pretty much BECMI's monk
What do you think of Adventures Dark and Deep? The creator tried to create what 2e would have looked like with all these classes.
That was the book whose name I was trying to come up with during the video. I mentioned that it was out there, and I am aware of it and its goal but I never never read or purchased it.
@@daddyrolleda1 A 2nd printing is fixing to kickstart. The creator put out a video in the last day explaining a lot of where he got the inspiration, and it seems to line up with what you are talking about.
Your deep dives are fascinating, learning the why and back story to D&D lore is worth the video length, I have you on in an ear bug as I carry out boring paper work tasks, yet your schick sticks.
Thank you so much! I really appreciate you saying that, and I'm so glad you enjoy the videos. Cheers!
Mounteback was the bad party member of the newest dnd film. He tricked the main character's daughter into thinking her dad was a bad guy.
Love the video format as-is, and I was hoping that you'd do such a video/series on the evolution of Psionics in D&D. It seems to be something that folks either love or hate, but it started with Gary and as such is "straight from the tap" D&D content. I think it would be cool to hear what you know about his choice to include them, how he influenced their changes over time, etc.
Thank you for the idea, and I can certainly add Psionics to a list of potential future topics. Thanks for the support, and for watching and commenting. Cheers!
A lot of old D&D classes are based on specific old school fantasy characters. E.g., the Ranger is based on Aragorn, the Paladin draws heavily on Holger Carlsen from Three Hearts and Three Lions, the Thief draws heavily from the Gray Mouser and so on. The Mountebank I suspect was the "Cugel the Clever" character class. Cugel is primarily a con artist who dabbles in magic. Gygax was a big Vance fan so I suspect that's what the Mountebank was meant to represent.
Great video! I’m really enjoying these longer form videos. Great content. Again, I’m impressed by the research you do for your videos. I remember Enworld forum! Thanks for including Gary Gygax’s posts from those boards. Can’t wait for part 2!
I always chuckle when you apologize for the sirens, I never hear them! I think your doing great, I enjoy listening to these bits of the past (even though I do know a bit of it already) as I craft or work on my campaign.
love the channel, but I do find myself often clicking away from your long videos where i might not have something more digestible i can listen to on my lunch break. (at least in my opinion) breaking up these into: a little series of videos called "Gygax's unfinished classes" 1.jester 2.mountebank 3.savant ... etc. would be nice. but it's your channel, if you really like it how it is, then keep it up.
Best regards,
Jose
In the issue #67 I saw the ad for the game Daredevils. My friend picked that up. I remember making a character but not playing it. Pulp adventures from the 20s and 30s.
Long videos are great! And thank you for the contents!
I really appreciate that! Thanks for the feedback!
I like the longform. I play it in the back while playing some video games
Oh, very cool! That's a great way of doing it. Thanks for letting me know!
I really prefer the long form videos. That is how I came to the show in the first place.
Joseph Bloch's pre-release version of Adventures Dark and Deep has had all 4 of theses Gygax AD&D 2e planned classes since at least 2010. He has collated much of the information regarding Gary's proposed 2nd edition on his Greyhawk Grognard blog.
In 1e D&D only Magic-Users had 9 levels of spells. Illusionists & other, what I reference as, primary spell casting classes have 7 levels of spells. Specialists Wizards, which would include the Illusionist, did not have 9 levels of spells until 2e AD&D.
The Mountebanke (quack who mounts a bench to hawk his wares [such as patent medicines]), "sleight of hand artist" (three-card monte, cup and balls) "juggler", practitioner of stage magic, an inveterate con-man and huckster, relying more on his skills of misdirection and confusion than on physical pilfering, but not entirely unskilled in many of the more traditional thiefly arts as well, a practitioner of confidence tricks.
A Savant is one with detailed knowledge in some specialized field (as of science or literature). In D&D terms it's a specialist in knowledge, divination, and detection; it's a Sage with additional magical spell casting abilities.
A Mystic is an innate, a member of a Mystery Cult, one whom practices Mysticism. Mysticism is known as attempting to become one with the Divine, the Absolute, the Infinite (Henosis), or unification with what is fundamental in reality: the One, the Source, or Monad, but may refer to any kind of ecstasy or altered state of consciousness which is given a religious or spiritual meaning. It may also refer to the attainment of insight in ultimate or hidden truths, and to human transformation supported by various practices and experiences. In D&D terms the Mystic is an initiate of an inner mystery tradition that seeks direct communion with the multiverse in order to achieve enlightenment. Insight, awareness, and a deep connection with ultimate reality are the hallmarks
and ultimate goals of the Mystic.
The differences between a Savant & Mystic is not unlike the difference between the words Knowledge & Wisdom or Cognizance & Sapience; the Latin roots Cognosco (cognōscō) & Sapio (sapiō), the Greek roots Gnosis (Γ νῶσις) & Sophia (Σοφíα); the difference between Knowledge gained from external study, learning & Wisdom from innate discernment, self-awareness, self(internal, intrinsic)-experience.
I'm also a SoCal resident. I've been to the Ice House for stand-up comedy many a time, but unfortunately not recently. I'm not really a Jazz guy, I'm more into Delta & Chicago Blues.
I like the longer videos. Thank you!
Really happy to hear that! Thanks for the support!
From one Daddy to another Daddy Rolling One, I loved these videos focused on second edition and appreciate your commentary. Just a validation there are some of us still using this system despite its flaws and certainly for its advantages
Thank you so much for watching and commenting, and for your support! I remember years ago on my blog, I was writing a series called "Fun With Any Edition" to talk about good times I had with each edition and what specifically I liked about them, mechanically. The 2E post got the most comments out of all of them! (I never finished the series, though, and I started backwards with 4E, as 5E wasn't even out when I began). But there are definitely a lot of 2E fans out there still!
I too prefer your long format videos. I frequently have to pause them in the middle, but I always get back to them.
What do you feel was the Appendix N inspiration for these classes?
When that Dragon magazine article came out, I was so excited to play a Mountebank (mostly inspired by the video for the Paul McCartney/Michael Jackson song, "Say, Say, Say"). I was so disappointed when it didn't end up in UA.
You're not alone! I really feel that of the four classes we did *not* get, the Mountebank was the one most people really wanted to see. That's a fun story about that video! I totally remember that song!
Vince Garcia went on to publish "Quest of the Ancients" based off feedback received by readers who submitted letters to Dragon Magazine. QA was compatible with AD&D but d30 based (with d20 and d% options) and incorporated a lot of what readers were requesting as 2nd Ed was in design stage and coming out. His Gypsy class (specifically the male Gypsy) was a lot like the Montebank.
Very cool video, never too long for me! I like a lot of stuff from 2e and really like the modules from this era, especially the Greyhawk stuff. If you can have any of that stuff and can touch on it that would be great! Keep up the great work on the channel, it’s really fun to watch.
Thank you so much for your support and words of positivity. I really appreciate it! I wasn't super active with D&D during the 2E Era (my group had switched to playing Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay) but I can certainly add more 2E stuff to my list of potential topics. Thanks again!
@@daddyrolleda1 thank you, your channel is a must watch everytime you post a new video. Great job!
Always happy for Dangerous Journeys coverage.
It is actually classless and levelless, close to d100 basic roleplaying system but with its own stuff.
There are starting skill packages by archetypes but they not not classes in the D&D sense.
Interesting game once you get past the terminology used to avoid D&Disms. The setting is really cool basically earth with the archetypal mythology turned up to 11 and the magic system is quite a cool concept in how it all fits into the world.
28:30 I think you might be talking about my Adventures Dark and Deep game. I went through much the same process as you describe above when creating the new classes; first the Dragon magazine articles, then Gary's various Enworld Q&A's (as well as the ones he did on other forums), and Dangerous Journeys. It was very much a research project. (And there's currently a Kickstarter going on for a new edition of the core rulebooks.)
TSR was coming after everyone in those days. It's one of the reasons why me and a lot of my friends stopped purchasing their products late into the 90s. You couldn't write anything for the game and publish it online without getting a take-down notice. I feel like the antagonism they built with their fan-base is an unsung reason behind their ultimate failure.
I remember those days, too! So crazy and, I think, short-sighted!
Thank you for watching and and commenting! I appreciate it!
My dad was a play tester for Chainmail and Dnd in the early and mid 70s . He would introduce classes that were scrapped in our odnd games. One I remembered was the time tripper which was a Vietnam Era American soldier that was 411ed to the dnd universe. The class was balanced very well and only had limited equipment. Another one was a shape shifter race-class. I would like to know if anyone else remembers these classes and your experience with them.
Thanks so much for sharing my community post. I would love to chat with you in the comments with each Chapter. Love your videos. Maybe one day I'll try using a video editor 😏
Thanks, interesting class concepts.
Thank you so much for watching and commenting! I really appreciate it!
@@daddyrolleda1 You're welcome, I support this channel and I appreciate the thoughtful, balanced content you provide.
Really enjoy the longer videos. Im very used to just listen to the videos while i work or prepare my own campaing. I think maybe a popup sound for the insertion of important images or pages of the books, would be great to ''notify'' about a nice thing to see on the video!!! Im always like alt+tabbing to the video to see some of the interesting material you have to show, speacialy the old editions physical formats!! Love your channel. A fan from Brazil here!!
Oh wow! I had no idea I had fans from Brazil! That's so fantastic to hear, and I like your suggestion about some kind of "pop-up" noise to alert people when there's an image on the screen I think they should see. I will look into that. Thanks for the suggestion! And mostly thank you for watching and commenting, and your support of the channel. Cheers!
I really enjoy your videos. I'd love to hear them on a podcast as well.
Keep up the good work!
Thank you! I'm am considering going back and re-doing some of my history videos as podcasts with an understanding that I of course can't show the thing I'm talking about. We'll see. Thanks for the feedback!
Please continue to make long form videos. I listen to UA-cam at work instead of the radio & I favor interesting content that spans 30 mins plus because I don't have time to constantly fiddle with my phone looking for stuff I want.
Thank you so much for the support! I really appreciate you taking some time to let me know, and I am so happy to keep you company at work. Another long video just posted a few minutes ago! Cheers, and thanks again!
Dude, i love you. I Hope you can feel It. Your work is valued.
I think Gary’s ideas for classes fit more into 5E than 1E/AE. Subclasses are just themes applied to a class, the difference being the level based abilities. That makes 5E classes rather wordy because there are many abilities. In a way 5E feels somewhat like where Gary was heading. He might even approve of some of the more casual-friendly features if the reason for them was to get more people to play. It’s hard to know why someone did something or what they would do if they had the opportunity. You can’t really say that because he was making things more complex he would continue to believe in that. I’ve had the same job for 35 years and it gets more complex every year. I used to believe in complex solutions but now I have the opposite opinion since I realized the marginal benefit of complexity is totally overshadowed by the difficulty explaining it and the increased chance of errors. It’s quite possible Gary could have totally flipped the way he does things, particularly if he thought simplicity would bring more people into the game. Honestly I think he would approve of 5E but he’d probably prefer to play 3E or Pathfinder due to the tactical stuff.
I love the Unearthed Archana. Could you do a video on the eratta? I would love to know what they changed.
Also, love the long form videos. I mostly listen, unless you're showing off art or going over books that i don't have in my collection. It's great to see those.
Oh the high Gygaxian…
I like long videos on topics I enjoy, e.g. most old school D&D videos.
I prefer shorter videos on most political topics, although if I enjoy the political video, then in that case I like a long video, too.
Also, when I’m introducing others to a topic, then I assume they might only be willing to start watching a video if it’s short, so I like short videos for when I’m introducing people to a new topic.
One of my players ran a mountebank, through a whole campaign to completion, as if he was guided by Gygax's ghost. It was a thief/magic-user, and even did the whole fake potions deception.
That sounds like so much fun! I would totally play a character like that!
The Mythus core book looks like a very convoluted game.
First of all, two different groups of rules (almost two separate
games, in factl) are provided within this book--the basic rules and the
advanced rules. -- pg 9
Here is an example. Like why have a basic and advanced version of the game and not just one version of the game?
There were a lot of convoluted games at the time. Mythus was percentile, skill oriented (mostly), and the acronyms are out of control.
The magic system, Heka, seemed like an improvement from Vancian magic, but I can’t decipher how the whole system is supposed to work.
@@josephpince4716 it seems like they were trying to go off the Chaosium Runequest Basic Roleplaying Game system use of the adventurer class (heroic persona) with a background used to make characters distinct but also have some kind of professional distinction. The whole thing seems like a mess. I'm not really sure it's even playable or was really played by anyone.
Have fun at DaveCon, Martin.
Thank you! I'm pretty excited. To be honest, I hadn't heard of it until one of Dave Arneson's associates saw one of my videos and invited me to attend!
@@daddyrolleda1 cool. Enjoy. Here’s to hoping I get my grant and get to GenCon and Gamehole Con in 2025…
I love the idea of classes that could have been. Some of them were not different enough to be distinct classes, and some were ill-defined or ill-designed. Still others were tragically never added.
Fantastic. Thanks for all the good, thought provoking content. I love channels that don’t pander to the almighty algorythm. And what the heck, when you have covered everything and just want views, just fill your living room with one million 20-siders.
Ha! Thanks for the support. I appreciate it! I'm really happy to hear you're enjoying the channel and content. Cheers!
Did you ever make a video about Dangerous Journeys? I xannot find it. Thank you.
I have not made one for that specific system yet, mostly because I never really played it and I've been trying to focus on games I actually played first before delving into others. Thanks for the suggestion, though! I'll add it to the list of potential future topics.
IDK if it's based on the Gary Gygax version, but there is a Mystic Class in the Dragonlance setting book for 3E that is a divine spellcaster without a God.
May be mentioned later on the video, IDK, still watching
I didn't mention it, but you're right. I'd completely forgotten about that one, and I even own that book!
Thank you for watching and commenting!
I feel like you’re maybe having a kneejerk reaction to the Mountebank based on the fact that they added a supernatural element to it. From what little I could catch on the page, it’s still a rogue based around charming, hypnotizing, and decieving people.
Mystic did appear as a priest class in 2e in one of the FR pantheon books.
A thought I often have with D&D classes (mostly looking at the older versions of the game) is that classes really do what their own world.
Fighter, Cleric, Thief, and Magic User are fantastic when they are the classes (along with the demi humans).
They are broad and cover your bases, they work well together but as you begin to add more specific or highly tailored classes we should also maybe take out those original four.
Take as an Example OSE and OSE advanced fantasy. I hold the (probably unpopular) position that the advanced fantasy classes are fantastic if they’re the only classes you’re using.
A challenge often with these games is trying to narrow scope and that not every game needs or even benefits from every option.
(Do you need the Thief if you have both the Montebank and Acrobat?)
Good characters follow the basic tenets of both of his classes of interest mentioned
Mountebank does feel almost like the 2nd edition and later Bard, more like a thief with some magical abilities (illusionist presumably)
Yes, I can totally see that. I've never been quite sure that it was a strong enough archetype to warrant its own class but could have made an interesting background or kit for a 2E Bard (or Thief).
Joseph Bloch has created Adventures Dark and Deep which is very much what Gary would have liked.
You mentioned at 28:37 (transcript to jog your memory below) that you were going to link to this what-if Gygax 2e book in the show notes. Do you have that link?
Joseph Bloch's (Greyhawk Grognard's) Adventures Dark and Deep, it's available on DriveThruRPG, but he has an updated version going live on Kickstarter next week.
Cool video
39:45 Oh, how the times have changed…
Ranger and Cavalier were OP
Now I wonder if Warhammer Fantasy kept its legacy along with “Order and Chaos” (it work since WFRP being morally ambiguous to an extent, like capital C Chaos are evil but Lawful included Dwarfs who would lay a siege to castle just because the owner short changed them two pennies).
That or just premise being “average joes in Dark Fantasy”.
Mountebank is my favorite American feline!
I definitely prefer longer-more in depth videos. 20-30 min is optimal for me, up to 45 is fine and up to 60 is managable.
Thank you for the feedback! I appreciate it.
@20:00 Gygax claimed he doesn't read other rules systems to avoid plagiarizing them is not shortsighted. Gygax was jealously protective of the Dungeons & Dragons IP, and embroiled in disputes over ownership of the game. In order to cut Dave Arneson out of the TSR future revenues, he concocted Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, and called it a wholly new game, when it was obviously an expansion and elaboration of the original Dungeons & Dragons game that he had collaborated on with Arneson. Gygax was acutely aware of copyright infringement claims and C&D letters that threatened TSR -- he had to drop "hobbits" and replace them with "halflings", they had to remove Cthulhu and Melnibonean chapters from Deities & Demigods. The laws regarding copyright and licensing as applied to games were still being refined during this period, and so Gygax had to be extremely defensive and risk averse, so in that context his claim of avoiding reading other rules systems to avoid stealing from them makes total sense. I suspect that in truth Gygax did study the competition to an extent that he could at least know what they were up to, and to catch them "stealing" from him -- if there was anything he could use in a lawsuit or countersuit.
Actually they didn't have to remove Cthulhu and Melnibone mythos, they had permission and only needed to put in a credit blurb in subsequent printings to keep them in but Gary pulled them anyway because he didn't want to credit others even when it cost him nothing. 😕
The youtube video length meta you reference is a few years outdated. Since time spent on UA-cam became the main algorithm, 30 minute-1 hour videos are the meta, so long as their interesting enough for people to keep watching.
Camera : I would suggest editing to combo both still and 'live'. The 'live' presents a meaningful experience, but a few seconds of a frozen screen whilst you talk should be acceptable to those same people whilst cleaning up the experience for those who like a stationary camera *_whilst you continue to talk_*
Considering how many people find bards to be annoying, one can only imagine how a jester class would be recieved. Personally I am happy that is has not become a core class in any of the later editions!
I like long videos on topics I enjoy, e.g. most old school D&D videos.
I prefer shorter videos on most political topics, although if I enjoy the political video, then in that case I like a long video, too.
Your videos would transfer over to Podcasts easily. I think you should do that. You could easily just take the audio from your older videos and load them up as podcasts.
Dungeon! the board game was created *before* the RPG, in my understanding.
Yes, exactly. I did not articulate that very well at all (the curse of me not scripting my videos and instead talking spontaneously). I tried to say something like "in the style of a D&D-like game..." or something like that, but it wasn't clear at all. Dungeon! was, to my understanding, an attempt to create a Blackmoor style game in a board-game format, and both games (Blackmoor and Dungeon!) were shown to Gary Gygax simultaneously, prior to the writing/publication of Dungeons & Dragons.
Thanks for catching that, and I'll try to make it more clear in an upcoming video when I talk about it again.
If 5E introduced the Jester all the clowns and perverts could go play that and they could give me my Bard back... I might even think about playing it.
Not saying I WOULD play (nobody is holding me to THAT as a promise...) it, but I'd be more inclined to THINK about it.
Didn't some of these get used in the animated series? Barbarian, and acrobat?
Cavalier is also in the animated cartoon.
Yes indeed! The cartoon, which debuted in 1983, featured all three new classes that would would eventually appear in "Unearthed Arcana" (from 1985). While many think that the cartoon was just an advertisement for the new hardback, from what I've read, Gary Gygax wrote the book much later as a quick "stop-gap" measure to help raise funds for a cash-strapped TSR. More likely, to me, featuring the new classes, which had first debuted in Dragon Magazine, to help provide advanced promotion for Gary's planned 2nd Edition (which never happened, as you saw in the video).
Another reasonable idea to consider is that "Fighter" is a bit too generic, and Paladin (and Cleric) carry too many religious overtones. Rangers have a connection to LOTR, Barbarians to Conan, and Cavaliers to "knights in shining armor" from Arthurian folk tales and more. Thieves and Assassins were avoided due to the negative connotations, but they needed a sneaky character, so they added the Acrobat (dropping the "Thief-" part). Having a wizard in the party of course made sense. As for the Monk, that's the one class I find an odd choice to include but based on process of elimination, the only other choices would have been Illusionist (already covered with the Wizard), Druid (they already had a nature-type with the Ranger), or the Bard (too complicated).
Just my thoughts, of course! Thanks so much for watching and commenting, and for your support of the channel!
I think that as a kid playing in the late '80s and early '90s, I would have been super excited for more classes. However, as an adult, I can't help but think that these would have been way unnecessary.
These classes feel half-baked, like they weren’t well play-tested. I wish TSR had created classes that replaced dual-classing. And i wish Gary had redone fighters to have decent features that scaled, so they could keep up decently with wizards.
o/ Also prefer long videos!
Good to know! Thank you so much for watching and commenting, and for your support of the channel. I really appreciate it!
I never understood level titles. How would a character even know what level they were? So weird. Even as an 11-year old, I never saw any use for them.
War game holdover.
Think of the different titles for the various ranks of a knightly order or an order of nobility, or the different titles for the ranks of a branch of a nation's military or the different titles for the ranks of nobility, or the different titles for the various ranks of real world clerics (such as Jewish, Christian, Muslim, etc...) & so on...
@@ValamirCleaver But that's an argument for in-universe titles in organizations; most classes weren't assumed to be members of some over-arching class-based hierarchy.
@@boobah5643 The 1e AD&D rules regarding: training to gain a new level, the duels or assassinations necessary for Druids (12th level+), Monks (8th level+) or Assassins (14th level+) to advance, the domain rules that kicked-in at or about "name level" (the attracting of followers & the establishing of home bases, [religious strongholds, freeholds, keeps, fortified towers, Thieves Guilds, Assassins Guilds, fortified monasteries], or the retainers that Cavaliers & Paladins must maintain or the lords that the 2 above classes serve; none of the above examples do not assume "some over-arching class-based hierarchy"???
@ValamirCleaver No. Fighters and magic-users can attract followers because they're famous; there's no organization beyond dealing with whoever claims the land you built your stronghold or tower on. A cleric's shrine might be involved with their church's hierarchy, depending, but Helm's church doesn't get a say on shrines dedicated to Lathander, Tyr, or Sune, so it's not class-based. And thieves' guilds are usually independent, too; attaining high rank in Waterdeep doesn't mean much in Amn or Baldur's Gate. Paladins and rangers often make common cause, but rangers don't really have much organization and paladins, when they have any, are attached to churches like clerics.
i prefer dragon 72 version of cavalier
I must have read that article dozens of times, and I recall photocopying it to give to my DM to get his permission to play one. You can tell how often I read this magazine by the sad state of the cover that became detached!
Thanks for watching and commenting.
Having consumed countless hours of modern OD&D content it's obvious by now that Gygax should have had D&D removed from his hands and others taken over. He would have made a decent #3 or #4 man in the hierarchy. But at the top? Making all the important decisions? NO.
Ha ha not a lot of love for the king of Jesters. Why don't we give some of those acrobat powers to the Thief and not try to create a new class? Sounds like Gary had some regrets about the Monk.
It’s easy to say that with hindsight. At the time there weren’t really too many people with the ability. Sure, there were lots of ideas that would radically change D&D, but trying to keep everything somewhat backwards compatible is difficult. Many people didn’t understand why certain things work as they do - many still don’t including WotC. Rather than being replaced, what Gary should have done is delegate. He’s obviously trying to do too much himself.
@@doctorlolchicken7478 Sure, it's obvious in hindsight. I was freaking eleven years old. How was I to know I was being led around by the nose by a man whose writings made no sense, and who had a whim, scribbled it down,and then let the rest of us be baffled by it. I never read Conan or Fafhrd and never will. It was unfair and idiotic to assume all of us had just because he had.
@@Heike-- Why do you think Appendix N was listed in the DMG? If one can't be bothered to familiarize oneself with the listed inspiration materials is that the author's fault?
Video length?
Depends... do you want to make the content that YOU feel contains the message you want to convey, or are you more interested in clicks, attention and fame-whoring?
That is not a cheap shot at Professor DM... (or is it?)
Sorry, it isnt ADD, I simply dont have an hour and 15 minutes to spare. I like your content but you need to be much more concise and/or edit. Normally you see this with a new channel and improvements as the channel grows and ages. I guess it depends on whether or not you're happy with a small audience.
Maybe watch the video on 1.5x speed? 😂