@@scotthuffman3462 I went and looked at the kickstarter, just after the reimagined classes art is the free playtest material you can grab to give it a try. Though it is the alpha rules and beta rules are for backers only it seems.
@@scotthuffman3462 The KS page includes free sample rules (and character sheets) which should be on par with current alpha development (which kept decreasing in price to like 1€ leading to the KS launch, iirc)
Those prices are the kickstarter best prices you'll ever get??? 65 dollars for the regular book and 30 for the PDF.... Oof apparently this game aint for the regular folks.
The prices are absolutely insane. Lightened rules, heavy price. $70 for 1 PDF I just can’t support something so expensive that still has too many rules imo.
@@TakManSan Reverse-engineer the D&D cartoon, where the PC's come to earth to stop WotC & the Pinkertons (with help from our favorite TTRPG YT all-stars)! Write up the One Shot crossover & post it, I'll use it to spice up that Planescape / Spelljammer crossover my group doesn't want but they deserve
I think one thing I've come to discover is that I don't actually care that much about a ttrpg being rules lite, I just care about the rules making sense and supporting a variety of ideas within the fantasy of its genre.
A system being rules lite ultimately just means it's lacking tools, as it's far easier to remove a rule than it is to come up with a new one usually. And like, I remember I tried to learn the FATE system, which I recall was in the realm of rules-lite, but it was one of the few systems I struggled to figure out, when I normally pickup damn near any system's rulebook and probably understand it well enough to gm it pretty quick. Where I struggled with fate, I had an easy time with pathfinder 1e, due to the available resources for it (aonprd and d20pfsrd) being fairly well organized, and being pretty well written, in addition to the rules being largely consistent and specific, making contradictions rather rare, and with the page linking in d20pfsrd, it's pretty easy to find whatever a feature is referencing. The way a system is presented is many times more important to making it easy to understand than the actual rules themselves, and when it comes to the rules themselves, having more codified to read through just means more reference material to gain an understanding of how the system works from, but also means there's more opportunity to end up creating an unreadable list of rules you struggle to figure out what's important in, as pf1e had been for a lot of people Probably the best system for readable rulebooks in my experience tho so far is cyberpunk red, and it's about equivilant in how much is going on in the rules to dnd5e, difference being that you're actually aware of how much is there with cyberpunk red, but still can generally understand it and find what you need, where as in dnd5e, people think they understand it, and think the rules are pretty lite and simple, well before they actually do, as a result of how the rules are presented, which is a large part of why dnd5e is usually presented as the easiest system to learn, beyond just the amount of dnd5e games out there, it's relatively easy to quickly feel confident that you understand it well enough to play or run it, regardless of how much you actually understand it
@@tomykong2915 The whole point of a rules lite game is that not that you need to add rules, but that The GM just makes a ruling. Mausritter, for example, is rules lite but is definitely the most complete set of rules I've ever played or GM'd
@@vijay-c from looking into Mausritter, it's a weird mix in that for most of what it covers, it actively rejects the GM having any control over what happens, far more than even pf1e, but then it just, doesn't cover so much of anything else, making it a super incomplete system, but also incredibly strict in the rules it does have, with damn near anything the players try to do just automatically succeeding, with the only exceptions being if the player is trying something that could lead to getting hurt themselves, which the gm gets to rule whether or not something counts as, and the consequences of that are decided by a roll of the dice and then have a set outcome. Mausritter is an incomplete system, but it's also free, and what is there I'd actually say is really polished, and a good start for creating something further Beyond your specific example which actually served as evidence against your point, making a ruling, is just making a new rule up on the fly, and you can do that in literally any system, it's just frustrating to players because of the inconsistencies doing that randomly leads to, unless you properly write it out, the exact same process behind making homebrew rules, and then follow that rule from then on.
Literally recorded a new vid yesterday, and it turns at the park was both closer to the train tracks AND in the path of these little planes. Fortunately, the timing of my takes worked well around them for once xD
My FAVORITE thing about this video... is how I can SEE the Excitement in your face and voice when you describe some of these rules! Super cool to see the excitement of peoples faces! Such a WELL DONE and great BIG PICTURE on DC20, great feedback too!
On his criticisms, having a simple section on optional rules that change the squares to feet would be really handy. I am also concerned with the Prime Ability issue. I backed the kickstarter, but it is the part of the game I'm most concerned with.
@@Styrixa it's really not hard, I've been playing DC20 using the D&D 5e Foundry VTT, you can do most things in there easily, 1 square = 5 feet, bingo bango, works great
Maybe once the standard set of rules are out optional variants will be looked at. He's mentioned doing a magazine with UA-esque rules. Maybe it could be in there down the line?
Yes, ~ 13:00 Shove action is a thing, so tripping was not the perfect example. I'm making the point that (in my opinion) ALL characters should be able to attempt some version of the ALL the things a battle master fighter can do as maneuvers, without their attempt being made extra difficult.
I think you're looking at it the wrong way, a battle master fighter is someone trained to pull these maneuvers off properly, it isn't that the other people trying it are taking some downside in such a negative way, instead it's the opposite, the battle master is just trained to do it effectively. If you picked up a sword today, after never using one previously, do you really think you could consistently make effective cuts against someone armored or someone skilled defending against it? No, obviously not, and by extension, someone trained for fencing, while they are skilled with a blade, they aren't gonna know how to effectively trip someone with that blade in between striking them more properly, or swap with someone else while defending both themselves and the person they're swapping with from the strikes this manuever would otherwise leave both open to, but they can obviously still try, just less effectively than the guy who trained to do this and has experience doing this. Fighters and rogues both start with the concept of doing something mundane, but with immense skill. Anyone can try and target a vital organ specifically, but unless you know about the body, and know how to actually hit that vital organ, you're less likely to be able to consistently do it, hence why sneak attack is a class feature, they're specifically trained to take advantage of those weak points in the body
I simply use a lot of D&D 3.5 rules in my D&D 5e game and it works surprisingly very well! I always bring the D&D 3.5 rules compendium with me (which is very well formatted and explains many rules much better than the 3.5 core rule books). Whenever I don’t find an option for something in D&D5e or something is unclear (for example what are exactly the consequences of being charmed) I simply use the D&D 3.5 rules compendium and so far it fixes all my problems 😄
In DC20's defense, simplifying square combat into area combat is way easier than changing it the other way around. (in fact Rob Schwalb (Shadow of the Demon Lord) favors area combat but his games use squares by default for this reason)
@@BobWorldBuilder That's exactly what he's saying: If you like it that way, it's pretty easy to covert to it from a grid system; it's barely a speed bump. For those who like using tactical grids, it would be much harder to homebrew specific rules from abstract ones. I have faith that this was very much a part of Dungeon Coach's design calculus.
For the using reactions on other peoples turns, I really love that feature because it really helps players to focus on each other's turns and interact a lot more. So it does slow the combat down, but in a way that everyone starts playing together more during each given turn. Which feels really good for a group game, imo.
Combat doesn’t take any longer than it does in 5e I’ll attest to! The turns are in game considered 12 seconds rather than 6 seconds and I would agree with that as rounds take longer to complete but are more engaging since the players have chances to do a lot off turn. Also I find the combats take less rounds to complete in DC20 than in 5e.
In the end, the problem with combat length is not being interactive. If you're constantly engaged and having fun then length shouldn't matter. Blur roleplay and combat to be one in the same!
I can attest to combat being more engaging. Also i dont think acting outside ur turn actually slows things down at all because the action economy spent outside ur turn is then not spent on ur own turn, shortening it. Overall DC20 combat amongst people familiar with the system is much much quicker than 5e. Combat among new players who dont know how to play is the only time its as slow as 5e.
I agree cause this opens doors to being a support champ that can actually use their “turn” on their allies or enemies turns making reactions like supports do in shows or movies.
Yeah I was gonna say I actually think dnd 5e needs more reasons to pay attention during other peoples turns combat (which is where 90% of the rules are) combat is probably dnd weakest part. I burn my action bonus action and 99/100 rounds that’s all I’ll do and I’ll just sit there waiting for my next turn. For most players that means getting on their phones tuning out the game etc etc.
The whole “tripping a goblin” thing can already be done by any character in 5e by using the Shove (prone) action. No special class or subclass required. The Battlemaster is special because they get to attempt it as part of another attack. _Thunder smite_ and _Eldritch smite_ also give this in a way too.
It seems like, in that way, DC20 is going in the exact opposite way of what Bob indicated he would like. By his description, tripping in DC20 is martial exclusive. So that seems really bad...
@@themonkeys96 Like with 5e; I imagine there is a basic action that anyone can attempt, but that martials have the ability to attempt it while also doing damage.
You can't just expect people to have read the rules for 5e. Some of them are in the DMG, a book that every potential DM has now been warned to never read
DC20 also has a shove mechanic (that any character can use) and you can knock someone prone with the shove action according to the offensive actions list on page 41. But if you don't want to shove someone you can also tackle someone to knock them prone. You can also use the take down grapple maneuver instead of trip to knock someone prone. Every weapon also has a weapon style, and the staff weapon style gives a feature that can help someone be knocked prone. There are a lot of methods to get someone prone in DC20, yes martials would have more options, but all classes hold the capability. Edit: All of these options are codified in the system, and the staff can do it while also doing damage (as of right now).
Green Ronin published the original Blue Rose back in 2005, which was a d20 variant. That system only used the modifier for attributes (dropping the attribute itself). They rolled that out into the True20 as a setting-agnostic core rule book. No hit points, no spell levels - you used damage and willpower tracks; extreme depletion leads to penalties on rolls. Great little system. DC20 sounds like a fun approach! Looking forward to tinkering with it.
I didn't realize they started that so early, since my familiarity came from their Mutants and Masterminds series. I was thinking DC20 reminded me of M&M in a few ways.
The concept alone is amazing. Instead of "Now, everyone quiet, it's your turn" it's "Alright team, it is your groups turn, the attention is on Mike, Mike what are you doing, meanwhile everyone else think how you're gonna help Mike" i'm extrapolating but i just love that concept.
for future reference the MCDMRPG is now concretely using 2d10, it might change under extreme circumstances but theyve needed to settle on it as they start production on some of the premium box sets
@@PhilipDudley3nah even if the highest possible result is the same as a d20, 2d10 is fundamentally different because of the bell curve of probability. They just had to move away fron 2d6 because it made numerical bonuses way too impactful
I think they would have been better off going with 3d6 rather than 2d10. The stats are similar, but d6s are more familiar to most people, and easier and cheaper to buy.
@@matthewparker9276 The more dice you add, the more of a bell curve the result will be. 3d6 might work, but you have to accept that rolls VERY rarely land on high and low numbers.
I fully appreciate you taking a measured, informed and unbiased review of what you come across. I've watched dunno how many reviews saying "better than D&D", "D&D killer" and whatnot, but I like this approach better (more like "here's another option for you" instead of "eww, D&D"). Hell, D&D is what we played, improved upon and homebrewed to our liking. Suddenly talking shit about it doesn't sit well with me.
Already backed the DC 20 Kickstarter yesterday. I appreciate the level of wholesome positivity you consistently bring to this space without ever compromising candor.
17:14 there is a book on DM's guild that is this exact concept, but in D&D. It's called "An Orc And An Elf Had a Little Baby", and Ginny Di made a great video about it.
There are definitely UA-cam channels I avoid who post conspiracy videos weekly, but I continue to watch you because I feel you share your opinions, joy, frustrations, etc. Just be you, Bob.
God it's like pulling teeth. They didn't like Pathfinder, they complained about Savage Worlds, and after the group imploded and reformed they finally gave Starfinder a chance because Starfinder was different enough from D&D in *setting*, so stomaching new mechanics went easier.
I like alot of what you talk about here. And it doesn't escape my notice that a lot of the stuff I like is inspired by/borrowed from Pathfinder 2. Action economy (adding an extra action point is nice, as PF2's 3 action economy often feels very cramped), degrees of success (easily the best thing in PF2 imo), and more granular ancestry choices (not a direct "borrow" but definitely in the same vein) are all things I love about PF2 and am happy to see more systems using.
As you look at more rpgs you tend to notice many games borrow from one another. We would have a lot less cool games if everything had to be "100% original never thought of."
I've been running PF2 for about a year and love the 3 action economy and the degrees of success, but have been frustrated by how bloated the numbers get, and most of all the rules granularity that Bob mentioned in the video. I understand why players enjoy having a reminder on their sheet of the cool thing they can do in addition to the standard actions, but from the GM side, the specificity of feats/features combined with the tight math of PF feels like it stifles player creativity to the point where at least once a session I'm having to tell my players that they can't do something that's a really cool idea because it would break this other feature or step on another player's feat, etc. DC20 looks like the lighter, more improv-friendly version of PF I've been trying to figure out how to build, and I love it.
"Why does a goblin get to do two attacks because someone moved near them?" Well, it's because running through or away from a fight tends to leave you open. While engaged it's assumed that you're holding your guard up which is preventing the goblin from finding an opening. The disengage action is there to represent you putting a lot of effort into moving through or away from someone engagement range without leaving yourself open, instead of just turning to run away and leaving your back exposed.
Conceptually, it can be hard to visualize for some people though, realistically, this should be giving you advantage on the attacks you already made against them, as leaving yourself open just makes it easier to attack you, if you made any at all, but that's not something that's easy to do in hindsight. Currently, if you properly follow the logic of this, it essentially implies you should be able to just make more attacks, since if them just letting their guard down lets you attack them more times at normal difficulty, wouldn't it make sense that you could have tried to attack them more times anyways, even if it's even less likely to work?
Consider…one isn’t standing static waiting around to take one swing right? The roll represents the culmination of all one’s attempts to hit another being possibly successful. So the goblin is always swinging at the moving person…having a reaction just means they have a chance of it being successful. Also…everyone has the same opportunity. The weak armed, chicken legged wizard can attack as many times as a 5th lv fighter if the opportunity presents itself. Not that big a deal.
Action points sound amazing for players. I love the idea that a player can say "oh, I'm not moving this turn, so I can do another attack" or the like. As a DM, I am worried about having to track action points for hordes of monsters if they have those too. Excited to see the spell duel stuff, that sounds dope AF. Stacking advantage/disadvantage sounds fun as a player. As a DM the nice part of having them not stack has always been not having to account for all sources of advantage/disadvantage. It's way easier and faster to figure out if there is at least one source than it is to determine how many. I don't know if I would go so far as to homebrew that back to the way 5e does it before trying it out first, but it would be something I'd keep an eye on. Especially if my players started bogging down the game trying to scrounge up sources of advantage. On the other hand, the all in mechanic sounds amazing. I like the exhaustion addition to death saves. I know a lot of people have homebrewed similar things for 5e already, but it just seems like a simple and elegant solution to one of the healing/dying problems 5e has. I will admit to not fully understanding the example used to express the granular rules concern. Yes, fighters in 5e have an ability to perform a trip attack. This allows them to trip enemies as part of an attack. But 5e has mechanics for knocking an enemy prone. Yes, the book labels it as a "Shove" action, but I feel like most DMs aren't caught up on the label so much? If a player says "I want to trip them and knock them prone" it would be weird for a DM to say "no, that's a fighter ability" and not "ok, there are mechanics for exactly what you are trying to accomplish mechanically, let's use those". Perhaps I'm underestimating how pedantic some people can be, but I feel like this particular example is a non-issue.
Yeah I'm not certain how action points and stacking works on the GM side yet. And maybe tripping was a bad example. You're right about Shove. But I think pretty much all battle master maneuvers should just be things that any character can attempt.
@@BobWorldBuilder Anyone CAN attempt most of what a Battle Master can do with maneuvers, but what they CAN'T do is stack damage on top of those things. It typically requires a sacrifice of one's attack to do so.
@@nojusticenetwork9309unfortunately, very few people know the rules of dnd5e and don't know any of this. In dnd5e, there's an explicit thing of being allowed to try damn near anything, just explain what you're doing and the gm says what you roll, if it's even possible. In part, this is kind of my issue with dnd5e, as the way it solves this issue does make it so every single table views different things as achievable through this, so you basically need to learn a new system whenever you join a new table
@@nojusticenetwork9309 i think the youtube app messed up and my reply was deleted, sorry if I'm wrong and it's just not displaying in me end, but that's kinda the thing, anyone can try damn near anything, they just might not be as good as if they had actually trained to do that thing, simple as that, but unfortunately very few people actually know the rules of dnd5e, and don't know that this is codified in the rules of dnd5e as a thing
I don't know if it'll solve everything but I know for a fact there's definitely a lot fewer sources of adv/disadv in the game. Like it's not just given out by traits and stuff, it seems like it'll more be to do with actions or conditions which seems a bit easier to track
As someone who only recently discovered the Alkander's Almanac of All Things, from Dungeon Coach, and currently DMing a D&D 5e campaign that i was about to give up or change to another RPG completely (PF2e, Daggerheart, T20 or any other my players preferred), because of how 5e plays, until i found that book, i am really excited for DC20. Alkander's is already a pretty good way to make 5e more fun (or fun at all), with many ideas and mechanics i already saw and like in other games, but i didn't know how to make it work for 5e. Thank you for showing us some of the characteristics of the game, it sounds pretty good. Action economy is a main thing for me, so the way 5e handles this, that i jokingly say it is an abscence of action economy, it was one of the problems that makes the combat feel slow, less dynamic and fun than other games. And although i like the little i saw about PF2e's action economy, with the 3 action rule etc, DC20 looks like it comes with some great ideias in how to make a now common mechanic something more epic, impactul to the narrative, and way more free and fun for the players.
On the subject of layout, I don’t love the way the playtest doc is structured. It’s not really an important critique, but when I’m looking into a RPG, usually the first thing I want to know is “what cool stuff can I do?” For class-based systems, that means the first thing I want to see is the classes. For me at least, one thing D&D has always done right is put the inspirational/exciting stuff up front. Then once you’re hooked, there’s a couple of hundred pages of homework for you to chew through to be able to play a game by the rules. I saw everyone gushing over this, so I went to skim through the playtest packet, and 20 or 30 pages in, I felt my eyes start glazing over as I sifted through all the various mechanics in the doc. After that, I went back to the table of contents and skipped to the classes section. This sounds like a nitpick, and I haven’t looked deeply enough into the system to know how I feel about about it beyond this, but I do know that once I’ve got the core mechanics to a game down, I only occasionally have to look back at those, but my players (and me anytime I make a fully statted NPC) will need the character building rules every time, so burying them over 100 pages into the book behind a bunch of stuff you may only rarely need to look at doesn’t make sense.
Layout is one of those things that being a professional game design and book publishing company for almost three decades really gives you an advantage on. People can feel the way they want about Hasbro/WotC, but their books tend to be pretty clean. The 4e books, particularly, did an incredible job giving you the goods right away and organizing rules into reference sections. The only one I've ever really disliked is the DMG, but that's because the 4e DMGs were just so great and this one felt like it didn't quite know what it was supposed to teach you.
Good feedback on the formatting! I know for the alpha they’ve been focused on getting the base of the game right, but by later stages they will tackle quality of life like formatting.
Nah, I agree! Usually character creation is more near the start of the book. I assume that will be the case for the core rules, and in the playtest he wanted to get more info up front about how it's a unique system
@@SeanBoyce-gp unfortunately, the layout being asked for here is a large part of why people rarely actually know the rules of dnd5e. Cyberpunk red is a good middleground in my experience, as it gives you a rough overview pretty early on, and rhe structure of a lot of these things, but the specifics of a lot of character options are much later on, being after the generic rules everyone needs to know
Stacking advantages/disadvantages is great in a system that supports it, I'm glad to see that in DC20. Honestly, it's pretty fun in 5e as well, as demonstrated by the internet's favorite feat, Elven Accuracy. I actually understand why the core 5e rules have them cancel each other out, it's way faster than counting them, but they mucked it up by making it incredibly easy to gain advantage in general, which means it is tough to stack buffs, and that makes it rough to specialize as a "one punch man" style hero, the one who doesn't hit often but hits incredibly hard when they do. It doesn't work in 5e partly because of advantages and disadvantages having different durations. If you have Advantage for a minute and you get another Advantage but only for your first attack, remembering that you have double advantage on the first hit but only regular advantage on the second is weird and sticky.
As a consumer, I like that you are no longer doing "only positive" reviews. Reviews that don't cover any negatives of what you're reviewing, don't help anyone. If I buy something that I sawca review on and didn't see anything negative in the reviews, and then find a bunch of things I don't like, then I'm going to get annoyed because I didn't know about it ahead of time because I massy have made a different choice. Subsequently, manufacturers who never see negative reviews may never become aware of things that need to be changed or fixed.
I'm just glad I already converted to Pathfinder 2e. My group is happy with what pathfinder has to offer. I agree my group prefers combat and tactics vs hard core roleplay. That's what made 5e good is it had rules to keep most of both sides happy
That thumbnail out here thinking that the lack of d20 was what stopped the group from playing, instead of "the box doesn't say D&D 5e on it." Personally I've found the FURTHER you get from 5e (either in setting or mechanics but especially setting) the easier it is. You gotta make it different enough that "why not just play 5e" has an answer they have to at least partially concede.
Generally, it's easy enough to say that it has actually comprehensible rules, as dnd5e 100% does not, and mostly relies on making people think they understand them well before they actually do, so they're confindent enough to play, rather than making people actually understand them as quick as possible so they're confident enough to play
As a person who has attempted to film UA-cam videos, it is amazing how LOUD planes, trains and automobiles are. There is a really cool filming spot near me where they also are building an apartment building nearby and apparently construction is mostly beeping. 😅
I figured out how you plan your videos. You use google map to find spots as close to train tracks, parking lots, and airports as possible. Clever. Very clever.
These UA-camrs are doing gods work showing us how easy and fun it is to steal and customize house rules. I have no idea why someone would back a Kickstarter for a handful of fun rules they can use for free.
As someone who homebrews and backs Kickstarters the reason is that sometimes they have new ideas, sometimes they have great combinations of ideas and features I want, and sometimes it’s just to keep creators in the field working on great content. For example I theoretically didn’t need to support Delve! But it will make it easier for me to provide some added content to my own homebrewed games and worlds, including DC20 (easy to convert 5e content), and I get to support Bob and a lot of my favorite UA-cam folks in the TTRPG space (really great group you put together, Bob, thanks)!
@@THELUBINTHEMORNING that’s certainly up to each person what they find value in and also can afford! Since it’s a freebie, I’d still suggest checking out the free playtest but whatever works best for you! Your time is valuable as well!!
I'm with you on the Squares thing. I like to run one-shots in various systems and one thing my players and I always complain about in other systems are the often weird or goofy distance measurements like Squares, Zones, Spaces, Fields, Inches (where an "Inch" is six feet or something -- I kid you not, there's a game that does this). One thing I love about 5e is that they just use everyday measurements for movement and distance. Whether it's Feet or Meters, your players all know what you mean, when you say, "he's 40 feet away." They can visualize that distance in their minds, and they know what that means in terms of their weapons and spells. As opposed to "he's two zones away." "How far away is that again? Is that close? Is that far? I can't picture it." "Uhhh... let me look it up." It doesn't matter whether you play on a grid or hexes or a gridless map and use a ruler, just calling the distance what it is works equally well for everyone.
These background interruptions are reaching Police Squad levels of silliness. I am expecting your next video to be interrupted by a car chase, an ice cream van or some kind of parade. Seriously though, I love these honest reviews you give. Big cheers for collision damage! I use this rule even in D&D. It just makes sense that it would hurt if a minotaur would gore you into a stone wall! 😂
Degrees of success is 100% a good addition to damn near any system, but the method of having a single set difficulty, with specific amounts above and below whatever the difficulty of the task is, regardless of the difficulty or nature of the task, isn't necessarily a good approach generally, having different values for different amounts of success is good, but sometimes there's only yes and no, you did the thing or you didn't, or sometimes it's pretty easy to do the thing good enough, but the bar to do it any better is significantly harder, like some locks are easy to get open, but many times harder to get open without making it obvious it was bypassed at some point, as prying the latch is easier than actually picking some locks, but often prying that latch can make it impossible or at least very difficult to get it back in. For common generic things, like critical hits against an enemy, it can work well to have a universal set amount above any to hit value where it will be a crit, but having that be universal doesn't generally make sense with all the kinds of things people roll for
@@tomykong2915 pf2e already has many types of checks that only have 2-3 conditions instead of all four. A basic attack does nothing on a critical failure, for example (though some things allow a crit fail to be exploited)
Not sure tripping an opponent was the best example here considering every character in D&D 5e has the option of doing that with a Shove attack. It’s just that if you have low strength you’re less likely to succeed at it, and are therefore better off trying something else. This, I imagine, is mostly fixed by the existence of the “Prime Modifier” in DC20.
@@viktore8 That's sort of my concern with the "Rule Granularity" argument. I've not read the playtest sheet or anything, but the Prime Modifier seems like it could be good if executed properly. Idk though. I'm just sticking with 5e w/ Homebrew for now.
I think I agree with both of you: I feel that a single modifier for "whatever their thing is" offers great flexibility in progression direction, so long as it isn't an _automatic everything_ bonus. Realistically, we tend to get a _lot_ better at our specialties, & a bit _worse_ at stuff unrelated to that, as we gain "experience" in life. Learning based on experience; go figure.
One way a generalized "you're good at whatever you decide on" progression can work, is gaining build points. The higher your "Prime Modifier", the more 'feats'\'features'\abilities\statbuffs you could choose. Depending on the phrasing of a given choice, your Prime Modifier could be applied to anything involving that (as opposed to a flat bonus on _every_ type of roll, which would be a weirdly uniformity-making mechanic).
@@viktore8 Fully agree with you. What is the point of abilities to begin with, if you use a prime modifier. Not only that, but it also makes no sense and it takes away so much flavor in character creation. I am not a power gamer, I make characters first and then choose the class/abilities/traits that make sense for that character. This leads to very unoptimized characters, but they do make sense. The reason why I bring this up, I play a fighter with a high intelligence score. Does that score do anything for him in combat? No. Does it give him a lot of flavor and does it makes sense when RP'ing. Hell yes! I love I am not the best fighter in the world, because for my character it makes sense. But with this system... what is the point? I end up with the same character than when I had created the "classic" strength based fighter.
Because some people(like myself) are bored of video games. They're never what you want out of a game. I'm a refugee seeking an analog gaming experience. As for a TTRPG, they're limitless.
Tbh the fomo pressure is really mounting haha. Sucks tho, as ttrpgs are getting more expensive. Like, I'd love to pick up the dc20 book, but $65 for a game I might rarely get to play is not a good thing
This system sounds interesting! Love the death's door mechanic and changes to HP for higher stakes, and custom ancestries is always great to see. I remember, at first, feeling kind of frustrated when D&D 5e stopped doing the whole "plus/minus to certain ability scores" thing for different player races, but by now? I just think it makes sense for it to depend on the specific character, at least often enough to justify it. I agree that the text color and background color combo is an issue, honestly maybe what I'm hearing that most bothers me! Would love to see ttrpgs offer a stripped down, plain text version of their digital rules alongside the digital versions that have a more flavorful look by default, though it's not an answer for physical books. I also prefer abstract movement overall, but agree with other comments that the movement squares can be better adapted to abstract that vice-versa. All in all, great vid, I hadn't heard of this upcoming system and I'm glad I did, I'll check out the kickstarter!
Every D&D UA-camr I sub to advertised them... you win..you win...I backed this project. As did at least one other person in my online D&D group. It really does have potential.
Backed! This may have been said, but I would absolutely love to hear a back and forth conversation about the things you don't love about the DC20 system with your buddy. :) The conversation is pure gold for us gamers.
Great video Bob. This is really interesting and i made we wonder how it compairs to Nimble. I think I will always lean towards less rules. I think the more rules you have the more a player will go to the rules to see what they can do, with less rules they will go to their imagination. That said I will still get this kickstarter because it does have some really good ideas.
In my experience, it very much depends on what those rules actually are, and how those rules are worded. Pf1e is incredibly comprehensive in all the rules it codifies, if you wanna do something, whatever that is, there is a way to do it RAW somewhere among the various rules, just sometimes require optional rules, but the contexts when you use those that action, the specifics of how you achieve it, the combination of features you choose for your chatacter to portray them, all of which are ways to be creative, which directly come from referring to the rules on some level. Personally, I find I can get away with far more creativity with a more explicit set of rules, as with more loose systems, you're gonna need to rely on your gm's rulings for damn near everything you wanna do, so you can't setup for any niche concept, because you don't know how the gm will handle the things you're trying to set yourself up to be good at, so you either need to ask your gm and hope they actually understood what you were asking, and aren't going to make random exceptions that you don't really understand, usually leading to an argument as something that as far as you're concerned, you should be able to do, you're being told you can't or you can't do nearly as well as you understand it, which kinda sucks when that's your main schtick. With all this in mind, you generally start drifting towards things you think everyone will be in agreement on, rather than whatever it is you come up with, and figuring out some way to make it work. My issues with rules lite systems would be greatly diminished if I had a single consistent group though, as then I could actually get a sense for how the group thinks over the course of a few different characters and games, but unfortunately, if I want a consistent group, I'd need to find a group in my city, and most likely would need to gm myself, and most likely would basically be forced to play dnd5e, as it's the most well know, and generally falls onto the jack of all trades, master of none category, where it has broad appeal, but doesn't do any 1 thing particularly well, so it's easy to get everyone okay enough with it
Truly it is always such a big plus for me when a game system allows for mixed ancestry characters. As someone who is of mixed heritage, having the ability to make characters that can not only mirror that but have it reflected in the rules is the coolest thing. Then this has to be my favorite iteration of it. The mechanical and narrative opportunities afforded like this are endless. Nothing is stopping you from picking 1 point abilities from 5 different ancestries and saying that the blood of all of them runs through your veins. Realistically everyone on earth have DNA from multiple places to some degree in their blood. It’s true to real life that there would be so many mixed characters. The representation is amazing and has me so excited to make characters.
13:40 Interesting point about this thought, I know the most obvious thing to apply it to would be Pathfinder 2e. It's what I thought as well. However the devs, especially Mark Schaefer make it clear that just because a feat exists doesn't mean the action can't be attempted with a penalty. Makes sense! A lot of the time feats in PF2e are about condensing how many actions it takes to do something. So anyone can try to jump up and Strike an enemy, but they'll use their whole turn to do it and probably at a -1. Whereas if you have the feat for it, you not only do everything with two actions with no penalty, it actually also makes your jump better.
This is also kinda how it works in dnd5e, though instead of it taking longer, it'd usually be that it just doesn't work as well, or you'll be at disadvantage or something. You're untrained and trying a complicated maneuver, do you really think it'll work as well as when the guy trained for it does it? Pf1e also generally follows this principle of generally allowing anyone to try the mundane combat stuff the martials do just without the benefits to it that the martial classes or feats have for it, though unlike pf2e, it's all codified in pf1e, and the features referencing these features generally are worded as an addition or alteration to the version anyone can do
Stuff a character can do outside of their turn actually speeds up play in my games because it keeps everyone involved and watching the action. When players aren't active on others turns, a lot will mentally checkout, myself included
Hey Bob, for the record, I have been wanting to try out your rules-lite movement for awhile now. Tbh, the only reason I haven't is because my players are so used to it and several have built themselves around moving really fast and they like to calculate exactly HOW fast they're moving lol. When we played Symbaroum, that system doesn't do numbers-based movement by default, but my players were thrown by that idea for a little bit because they legitimately were like "Well how far can I move then?" And when I told them "Just tell me where you're headed and we'll see if its reasonable" they were astonished lol
@gryphon7675 I backed the D20 kickstarter of Symbaroum. I have most of what was offered but I haven't prepped it to run. What do you think of the setting since you've ruin it? How were your players with it?
I liked Pirates of the Cursed Seas, which used the short (S) and long (L) edges of a playing card for movement. Movement speeds went S, L, SS, LL, SSS and you'd just lay down the card, slide your token along it and repeat a max of 3 times according to the above.
Personally, the biggest reason I like explicit rules, over abstract, is having everyone on the same page on what is and isn't reasonable, for more abstract zone systems, I like when they use ranges for how wide those zones tend to be, whether those ranges are based on actual measurements or a reference point, like arms reach, I want something to work off of, that's my biggest issue with most zone based things, beyond the added difficulties in making your environment matter, as you can always just say that since there is cover within a certain zone, someone cannot attack you without moving to another zone, even if, depending where within each zone each character is, they might be exposed or in cover, and both people could be looking at this and thinking that they were and were not behind cover respectively
@@kanislupus1195 Personally, I love it! I picked up the Core book by chance at a bookstore because the art looked great lol. I ran the introductory module "The Promised Land" and we had a Session 0 night beforehand where I spent the majority of the time talking about the setting and the vibe and then went over character creation. It was such a different vibe from our normal D&D games (which are normally quite silly and the power scaling is completely broken) that I think we all appreciated the grounded nature of the system. Reminder that we were playing the Symbaroum system, not the Ruins of Symbaroum 5e compatible thing. It felt gritty, dark, and the danger was very real. It made their triumphs and choices all the more impactful. We haven't done it since bc we're trying to finish our multi-year D&D game, but everybody said they want to return to it eventually!
16:14 Hero Points are already a variant rule in the Dungeon Master's Guide but they work a bit differently. Page 64: Hero points work well in epic fantasy and mythic campaigns in which the characters are meant to be more like superheroes than the average adventurer is. With this option, a character starts with 5 hero point at 1st level. Each time the character gains a level, he or she loses any unspent hero points and gains a new total equal to 5 + half the character's level. A player can spend a hero point whenever he or she makes an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw The player can spend the hero point after the roll is made but before any of its results are applied. Spending the hero point allows the player to roll a d6 and add it to the d20, possibly turning a failure into a success. A player can spend only 1 hero point per roll. In addition, whenever a character fails a death saving throw, the player can spend one hero point to turn the failure into a success.
I love the way you play dnd. I was an exclusively rules-light player and GM, and your videos showed me that it is possible for me to have fun with dnd too. Like, honestly, probably would never have come back to it after hating my 3.5 experience if not for your videos. Just want to throw it out there after seeing the “I hate the way you play dnd” comment in the video. ❤
Have you ever checked out Fabula Ultima. Its a JRPG Fantasy TTRPG. I just started playing it with a group and I'm loving it. It has a big focus on everyone creating parts of the world, during session 0 (although our group worked on about half the world map over an month) and during actual play. It has a very fun and interesting way to build characters and has a lot of streamlined equipment and exploration mechanics that I want to try to adapt to 5e. Most of the character options of the core rulebook are pretty simple. Even if you're not a JRPG or fantasy anime person, I would recommend checking it out.
Other content creators would edit out planes, trains, and automobile car alarms. Not Bob, no siree! Bob wants us to know the true torture of interruptions he endured just to bring us this information while touching grass. Thanks for the warning, Bob. We'll stay indoors to do game prep. 😀
Great video. I never thought your previous ones were too positive, but rather balanced. I've been burned by a few RPG kickstarters recently, but I'll check this one out. Sounds very interesting.
Great video Bob! Don't let ppl make you feel bad for doing things differently at the table. Like - your recent buyers guide was great for new players. But to counter that as well - IMO everyone has their own style of game and in a lot of your videos you come back to this point of treating d&d like it is complex math rocket science, amd its kind of a bad take. Dumbing D&D down to all these base roles makes it lose what makes it special. If folks wanna do that style - go play like Wrath Of Ashaladon d&d boardgame 😂 or a starter box. Eitherway, 😊 can't wait tl check out your upcoming book and DC20's as well. Keep up the great work!
The "open combat maneuvers to anyone" idea was done in Shadow of the Demon Lord. I think you might enjoy it, or it's brother Shadow of the Weird Wizard.
Thank you for the indepth look at DC20 all the mechanics you talked about are amazing and i have downloaded the free rules and play and dc20 feels amazing and just FUN too play
Bob, read the pf2e core books! I know you mentioned that DC20 is between 5e and pf2e, but there are a ton of rules influences here that pf2e needs to get credit for
Bob, I am with you man! I don't like gridded combat either. I don't enjoy the rigid absolutes of the physicality of the grid. "oh I'm sorry you missed by one square, you don't get to attack." What? No, you are in the area? Yeah go ahead and make your attack. I agree with many of your ideas. Thanks for the breakdown.
I gotta admit the community support behind this is getting me more and more interested All my favorite DND creators are behind it Just gotta hear from Ginni D and dungeons and discourse now 😂
3:05 Bob, seriously, don't use audio effects on outside videos: with your track record, I was honestly thinking an eagle was about to attack or do a flyover 😂
Regarding your complaint with trip, there is a shove action any character can take that specifies you can sacrifice 1 space the target is pushed to make the target prone
Haha I've been thinking about this! That's the sound of my camera's stopping the recording, but it is only captured in audio if the microphone is not connected to the camera. That's why it's not picked up in these outdoor videos, but I've been thinking about just recording the sound separately so I can add it in :P
Talking about examples: tripping is included in the basic combat rules in 5E - if you succesfully shove your opponent, you may make them prone or move them 5 feet away from you.
I know that Nimble cites Dungeon Coach as inspiration. But there aren't really "new" RPG ideas anymore. There are thousands of games out there and it's more about putting your own spin on a mechanic and trying to combine mechanics that haven't been until now... or they haven't been since 'some game' in the early 90s. Edit: I didn't mean this to sound negative lol, just saying that one will ALWAYS be able to draw connections between RPGs
Alot of players might not like ur rule light approach but I LOVE it. I have been a dm for a month and I found out that I dont enjoy the rule heavy approach at all! And that trip mechanic thing, that hit! Everyone should indeed be able to trip another character. Loved the video Bob! And keep building!
💥 DC20 Kickstarter (affiliate): www.kickstarter.com/projects/thedungeoncoach/dc20?ref=6re5tc
Daggerheart's beta was free to try. Can't get invested if I never get the chance to try it.
@@scotthuffman3462 I went and looked at the kickstarter, just after the reimagined classes art is the free playtest material you can grab to give it a try. Though it is the alpha rules and beta rules are for backers only it seems.
@@scotthuffman3462 The KS page includes free sample rules (and character sheets) which should be on par with current alpha development (which kept decreasing in price to like 1€ leading to the KS launch, iirc)
Those prices are the kickstarter best prices you'll ever get??? 65 dollars for the regular book and 30 for the PDF....
Oof apparently this game aint for the regular folks.
The prices are absolutely insane.
Lightened rules, heavy price.
$70 for 1 PDF
I just can’t support something so expensive that still has too many rules imo.
Had trains, had planes, now we need some automobiles.
No ships though.....
Car alarm
Then I will take to the SEA!
Bring the horses too!
@@jessatlife As longs as they have names...
WotC sending drone on Bob is the most WotC moment (plane noises)
✈✈✈✈
lol but they didnt drop an owl bear on his head so thats a plus :)
Pinkerton Drone Operator?
@@TakManSan Reverse-engineer the D&D cartoon, where the PC's come to earth to stop WotC & the Pinkertons (with help from our favorite TTRPG YT all-stars)! Write up the One Shot crossover & post it, I'll use it to spice up that Planescape / Spelljammer crossover my group doesn't want but they deserve
They track Bob with AI that falls between the cracks in their AI policy...
I think one thing I've come to discover is that I don't actually care that much about a ttrpg being rules lite, I just care about the rules making sense and supporting a variety of ideas within the fantasy of its genre.
A system being rules lite ultimately just means it's lacking tools, as it's far easier to remove a rule than it is to come up with a new one usually.
And like, I remember I tried to learn the FATE system, which I recall was in the realm of rules-lite, but it was one of the few systems I struggled to figure out, when I normally pickup damn near any system's rulebook and probably understand it well enough to gm it pretty quick. Where I struggled with fate, I had an easy time with pathfinder 1e, due to the available resources for it (aonprd and d20pfsrd) being fairly well organized, and being pretty well written, in addition to the rules being largely consistent and specific, making contradictions rather rare, and with the page linking in d20pfsrd, it's pretty easy to find whatever a feature is referencing. The way a system is presented is many times more important to making it easy to understand than the actual rules themselves, and when it comes to the rules themselves, having more codified to read through just means more reference material to gain an understanding of how the system works from, but also means there's more opportunity to end up creating an unreadable list of rules you struggle to figure out what's important in, as pf1e had been for a lot of people
Probably the best system for readable rulebooks in my experience tho so far is cyberpunk red, and it's about equivilant in how much is going on in the rules to dnd5e, difference being that you're actually aware of how much is there with cyberpunk red, but still can generally understand it and find what you need, where as in dnd5e, people think they understand it, and think the rules are pretty lite and simple, well before they actually do, as a result of how the rules are presented, which is a large part of why dnd5e is usually presented as the easiest system to learn, beyond just the amount of dnd5e games out there, it's relatively easy to quickly feel confident that you understand it well enough to play or run it, regardless of how much you actually understand it
But they are more than willing to sell you those tools.
This is why I love PF2e and will most likely love D20
(Also love a billion other systems 😂🎉
@@tomykong2915 The whole point of a rules lite game is that not that you need to add rules, but that The GM just makes a ruling.
Mausritter, for example, is rules lite but is definitely the most complete set of rules I've ever played or GM'd
@@vijay-c from looking into Mausritter, it's a weird mix in that for most of what it covers, it actively rejects the GM having any control over what happens, far more than even pf1e, but then it just, doesn't cover so much of anything else, making it a super incomplete system, but also incredibly strict in the rules it does have, with damn near anything the players try to do just automatically succeeding, with the only exceptions being if the player is trying something that could lead to getting hurt themselves, which the gm gets to rule whether or not something counts as, and the consequences of that are decided by a roll of the dice and then have a set outcome.
Mausritter is an incomplete system, but it's also free, and what is there I'd actually say is really polished, and a good start for creating something further
Beyond your specific example which actually served as evidence against your point, making a ruling, is just making a new rule up on the fly, and you can do that in literally any system, it's just frustrating to players because of the inconsistencies doing that randomly leads to, unless you properly write it out, the exact same process behind making homebrew rules, and then follow that rule from then on.
Bob is officially the Vehicle Magnet...
Literally recorded a new vid yesterday, and it turns at the park was both closer to the train tracks AND in the path of these little planes. Fortunately, the timing of my takes worked well around them for once xD
It's the Pinkertons coming to shut him up!
Maybe Bob is a transformer? And he is summoning the Autobots
- Yeah, my son is a vehicle magnet.
- wow! What kinds of vehicles does he sell?
- no mag-NET, mag-NET
- rrrrrright...
My FAVORITE thing about this video... is how I can SEE the Excitement in your face and voice when you describe some of these rules! Super cool to see the excitement of peoples faces! Such a WELL DONE and great BIG PICTURE on DC20, great feedback too!
On his criticisms, having a simple section on optional rules that change the squares to feet would be really handy. I am also concerned with the Prime Ability issue. I backed the kickstarter, but it is the part of the game I'm most concerned with.
@@Styrixa it's really not hard, I've been playing DC20 using the D&D 5e Foundry VTT, you can do most things in there easily, 1 square = 5 feet, bingo bango, works great
Maybe once the standard set of rules are out optional variants will be looked at.
He's mentioned doing a magazine with UA-esque rules. Maybe it could be in there down the line?
@@q267scott He’s also mentioned a GM book with variant rules.
my favorite part were the planes overhead. 😄 ✈✈✈
Yes, ~ 13:00 Shove action is a thing, so tripping was not the perfect example. I'm making the point that (in my opinion) ALL characters should be able to attempt some version of the ALL the things a battle master fighter can do as maneuvers, without their attempt being made extra difficult.
I think you're looking at it the wrong way, a battle master fighter is someone trained to pull these maneuvers off properly, it isn't that the other people trying it are taking some downside in such a negative way, instead it's the opposite, the battle master is just trained to do it effectively. If you picked up a sword today, after never using one previously, do you really think you could consistently make effective cuts against someone armored or someone skilled defending against it? No, obviously not, and by extension, someone trained for fencing, while they are skilled with a blade, they aren't gonna know how to effectively trip someone with that blade in between striking them more properly, or swap with someone else while defending both themselves and the person they're swapping with from the strikes this manuever would otherwise leave both open to, but they can obviously still try, just less effectively than the guy who trained to do this and has experience doing this. Fighters and rogues both start with the concept of doing something mundane, but with immense skill. Anyone can try and target a vital organ specifically, but unless you know about the body, and know how to actually hit that vital organ, you're less likely to be able to consistently do it, hence why sneak attack is a class feature, they're specifically trained to take advantage of those weak points in the body
I simply use a lot of D&D 3.5 rules in my D&D 5e game and it works surprisingly very well! I always bring the D&D 3.5 rules compendium with me (which is very well formatted and explains many rules much better than the 3.5 core rule books). Whenever I don’t find an option for something in D&D5e or something is unclear (for example what are exactly the consequences of being charmed) I simply use the D&D 3.5 rules compendium and so far it fixes all my problems 😄
@@janbiela8596 that’s a really interesting observation and game tip! Thanks! 🙏
Death's door is such a cool way to implement having a Boromir moment
In DC20's defense, simplifying square combat into area combat is way easier than changing it the other way around.
(in fact Rob Schwalb (Shadow of the Demon Lord) favors area combat but his games use squares by default for this reason)
In the case of movement/distance, simple is a matter of opinion. To me, abstract is more simple.
Yea I think that’s why ICRPG added some more in that regard - easier to go from concrete to abstract than the reverse.
@@BobWorldBuilder I think it's just a matter of trust in your GM when he says: "I'm just saying we're not going RAW, we are going simple and fair."
@@BobWorldBuilder That's exactly what he's saying: If you like it that way, it's pretty easy to covert to it from a grid system; it's barely a speed bump. For those who like using tactical grids, it would be much harder to homebrew specific rules from abstract ones. I have faith that this was very much a part of Dungeon Coach's design calculus.
It's easy to ignore a grid in grid-based games, but it's hard to add to non-grid games.
In the next episode, watch as Bob tries to avoid planes and trains by going to the marina!
🏊♂
and then we get to hear ship horns (hopefully an old timey awooga)
*FOGHORN NOISES*
"So I'm in the middle of the open sea as I record this, so hopefully--🐳"
For the using reactions on other peoples turns, I really love that feature because it really helps players to focus on each other's turns and interact a lot more. So it does slow the combat down, but in a way that everyone starts playing together more during each given turn. Which feels really good for a group game, imo.
Combat doesn’t take any longer than it does in 5e I’ll attest to! The turns are in game considered 12 seconds rather than 6 seconds and I would agree with that as rounds take longer to complete but are more engaging since the players have chances to do a lot off turn. Also I find the combats take less rounds to complete in DC20 than in 5e.
In the end, the problem with combat length is not being interactive. If you're constantly engaged and having fun then length shouldn't matter. Blur roleplay and combat to be one in the same!
I can attest to combat being more engaging. Also i dont think acting outside ur turn actually slows things down at all because the action economy spent outside ur turn is then not spent on ur own turn, shortening it. Overall DC20 combat amongst people familiar with the system is much much quicker than 5e. Combat among new players who dont know how to play is the only time its as slow as 5e.
I agree cause this opens doors to being a support champ that can actually use their “turn” on their allies or enemies turns making reactions like supports do in shows or movies.
Yeah I was gonna say I actually think dnd 5e needs more reasons to pay attention during other peoples turns combat (which is where 90% of the rules are) combat is probably dnd weakest part. I burn my action bonus action and 99/100 rounds that’s all I’ll do and I’ll just sit there waiting for my next turn. For most players that means getting on their phones tuning out the game etc etc.
The whole “tripping a goblin” thing can already be done by any character in 5e by using the Shove (prone) action. No special class or subclass required.
The Battlemaster is special because they get to attempt it as part of another attack. _Thunder smite_ and _Eldritch smite_ also give this in a way too.
It seems like, in that way, DC20 is going in the exact opposite way of what Bob indicated he would like. By his description, tripping in DC20 is martial exclusive. So that seems really bad...
@@themonkeys96 Like with 5e; I imagine there is a basic action that anyone can attempt, but that martials have the ability to attempt it while also doing damage.
You can't just expect people to have read the rules for 5e. Some of them are in the DMG, a book that every potential DM has now been warned to never read
DC20 also has a shove mechanic (that any character can use) and you can knock someone prone with the shove action according to the offensive actions list on page 41. But if you don't want to shove someone you can also tackle someone to knock them prone. You can also use the take down grapple maneuver instead of trip to knock someone prone. Every weapon also has a weapon style, and the staff weapon style gives a feature that can help someone be knocked prone.
There are a lot of methods to get someone prone in DC20, yes martials would have more options, but all classes hold the capability.
Edit: All of these options are codified in the system, and the staff can do it while also doing damage (as of right now).
True, though tripping was just one example. I think pretty much everything the battlemaster can do should be fair game.
Holy shit DC20 spent a LOT of money today. You are like the 5th channel I follow that released a DC20 ad today lol
They definitely wanted to get the word out! Ads yes, but some creators also threw in just for love of the game!!
I really like the outdoor filming, not only because I am partial to trees. I also like the random background noises!
As an old DM, I thumbs up the lighter background, as well as darker/larger font
Appreciate you pointing out the low constrant between text colour and page background colour. Let's keep our books accessible :)
Green Ronin published the original Blue Rose back in 2005, which was a d20 variant. That system only used the modifier for attributes (dropping the attribute itself). They rolled that out into the True20 as a setting-agnostic core rule book. No hit points, no spell levels - you used damage and willpower tracks; extreme depletion leads to penalties on rolls. Great little system.
DC20 sounds like a fun approach! Looking forward to tinkering with it.
I wish True20 had taken off.
I didn't realize they started that so early, since my familiarity came from their Mutants and Masterminds series. I was thinking DC20 reminded me of M&M in a few ways.
The concept alone is amazing. Instead of "Now, everyone quiet, it's your turn" it's "Alright team, it is your groups turn, the attention is on Mike, Mike what are you doing, meanwhile everyone else think how you're gonna help Mike" i'm extrapolating but i just love that concept.
for future reference the MCDMRPG is now concretely using 2d10, it might change under extreme circumstances but theyve needed to settle on it as they start production on some of the premium box sets
I like that better mechanically, but I worry that not using a d20 derivative will hurt their marketability to the masses
Sounds like they're trending towards.2 then 1 d20. As all mass product RPGs do. Shame.
@@PhilipDudley3nah even if the highest possible result is the same as a d20, 2d10 is fundamentally different because of the bell curve of probability. They just had to move away fron 2d6 because it made numerical bonuses way too impactful
I think they would have been better off going with 3d6 rather than 2d10. The stats are similar, but d6s are more familiar to most people, and easier and cheaper to buy.
@@matthewparker9276 The more dice you add, the more of a bell curve the result will be. 3d6 might work, but you have to accept that rolls VERY rarely land on high and low numbers.
I fully appreciate you taking a measured, informed and unbiased review of what you come across. I've watched dunno how many reviews saying "better than D&D", "D&D killer" and whatnot, but I like this approach better (more like "here's another option for you" instead of "eww, D&D").
Hell, D&D is what we played, improved upon and homebrewed to our liking. Suddenly talking shit about it doesn't sit well with me.
I don't think it is "talking shit" about D&D per se, but rather about what Wizards and Hasbro have been doing with it.
Already backed the DC 20 Kickstarter yesterday. I appreciate the level of wholesome positivity you consistently bring to this space without ever compromising candor.
17:14 there is a book on DM's guild that is this exact concept, but in D&D. It's called "An Orc And An Elf Had a Little Baby", and Ginny Di made a great video about it.
I love The Dungeon Coach. I follow him over on TikTok, and his rules changes are a breath of fresh air
There are definitely UA-cam channels I avoid who post conspiracy videos weekly, but I continue to watch you because I feel you share your opinions, joy, frustrations, etc. Just be you, Bob.
God it's like pulling teeth. They didn't like Pathfinder, they complained about Savage Worlds, and after the group imploded and reformed they finally gave Starfinder a chance because Starfinder was different enough from D&D in *setting*, so stomaching new mechanics went easier.
Savage Worlds is the best, though
as a Pathfinder player all those "NEW BETTER NOT DND" annoy me so much when they are so painfully similar to it...
@@cheesusabidas77 maybe its actually that Pathfinder isn’t perfect and has some major flaws that inherently put off a lot of players.
I hope we get an ice cream truck cameo in your next filming location.
I like alot of what you talk about here. And it doesn't escape my notice that a lot of the stuff I like is inspired by/borrowed from Pathfinder 2. Action economy (adding an extra action point is nice, as PF2's 3 action economy often feels very cramped), degrees of success (easily the best thing in PF2 imo), and more granular ancestry choices (not a direct "borrow" but definitely in the same vein) are all things I love about PF2 and am happy to see more systems using.
None of these things originated in PF2, though.
As you look at more rpgs you tend to notice many games borrow from one another. We would have a lot less cool games if everything had to be "100% original never thought of."
I've been running PF2 for about a year and love the 3 action economy and the degrees of success, but have been frustrated by how bloated the numbers get, and most of all the rules granularity that Bob mentioned in the video. I understand why players enjoy having a reminder on their sheet of the cool thing they can do in addition to the standard actions, but from the GM side, the specificity of feats/features combined with the tight math of PF feels like it stifles player creativity to the point where at least once a session I'm having to tell my players that they can't do something that's a really cool idea because it would break this other feature or step on another player's feat, etc. DC20 looks like the lighter, more improv-friendly version of PF I've been trying to figure out how to build, and I love it.
"Why does a goblin get to do two attacks because someone moved near them?"
Well, it's because running through or away from a fight tends to leave you open. While engaged it's assumed that you're holding your guard up which is preventing the goblin from finding an opening.
The disengage action is there to represent you putting a lot of effort into moving through or away from someone engagement range without leaving yourself open, instead of just turning to run away and leaving your back exposed.
Exactly this.
Conceptually, it can be hard to visualize for some people though, realistically, this should be giving you advantage on the attacks you already made against them, as leaving yourself open just makes it easier to attack you, if you made any at all, but that's not something that's easy to do in hindsight.
Currently, if you properly follow the logic of this, it essentially implies you should be able to just make more attacks, since if them just letting their guard down lets you attack them more times at normal difficulty, wouldn't it make sense that you could have tried to attack them more times anyways, even if it's even less likely to work?
Consider…one isn’t standing static waiting around to take one swing right? The roll represents the culmination of all one’s attempts to hit another being possibly successful. So the goblin is always swinging at the moving person…having a reaction just means they have a chance of it being successful. Also…everyone has the same opportunity. The weak armed, chicken legged wizard can attack as many times as a 5th lv fighter if the opportunity presents itself. Not that big a deal.
Action points sound amazing for players. I love the idea that a player can say "oh, I'm not moving this turn, so I can do another attack" or the like. As a DM, I am worried about having to track action points for hordes of monsters if they have those too.
Excited to see the spell duel stuff, that sounds dope AF.
Stacking advantage/disadvantage sounds fun as a player. As a DM the nice part of having them not stack has always been not having to account for all sources of advantage/disadvantage. It's way easier and faster to figure out if there is at least one source than it is to determine how many. I don't know if I would go so far as to homebrew that back to the way 5e does it before trying it out first, but it would be something I'd keep an eye on. Especially if my players started bogging down the game trying to scrounge up sources of advantage. On the other hand, the all in mechanic sounds amazing.
I like the exhaustion addition to death saves. I know a lot of people have homebrewed similar things for 5e already, but it just seems like a simple and elegant solution to one of the healing/dying problems 5e has.
I will admit to not fully understanding the example used to express the granular rules concern. Yes, fighters in 5e have an ability to perform a trip attack. This allows them to trip enemies as part of an attack. But 5e has mechanics for knocking an enemy prone. Yes, the book labels it as a "Shove" action, but I feel like most DMs aren't caught up on the label so much? If a player says "I want to trip them and knock them prone" it would be weird for a DM to say "no, that's a fighter ability" and not "ok, there are mechanics for exactly what you are trying to accomplish mechanically, let's use those". Perhaps I'm underestimating how pedantic some people can be, but I feel like this particular example is a non-issue.
Yeah I'm not certain how action points and stacking works on the GM side yet. And maybe tripping was a bad example. You're right about Shove. But I think pretty much all battle master maneuvers should just be things that any character can attempt.
@@BobWorldBuilder Anyone CAN attempt most of what a Battle Master can do with maneuvers, but what they CAN'T do is stack damage on top of those things. It typically requires a sacrifice of one's attack to do so.
@@nojusticenetwork9309unfortunately, very few people know the rules of dnd5e and don't know any of this. In dnd5e, there's an explicit thing of being allowed to try damn near anything, just explain what you're doing and the gm says what you roll, if it's even possible. In part, this is kind of my issue with dnd5e, as the way it solves this issue does make it so every single table views different things as achievable through this, so you basically need to learn a new system whenever you join a new table
@@nojusticenetwork9309 i think the youtube app messed up and my reply was deleted, sorry if I'm wrong and it's just not displaying in me end, but that's kinda the thing, anyone can try damn near anything, they just might not be as good as if they had actually trained to do that thing, simple as that, but unfortunately very few people actually know the rules of dnd5e, and don't know that this is codified in the rules of dnd5e as a thing
I don't know if it'll solve everything but I know for a fact there's definitely a lot fewer sources of adv/disadv in the game. Like it's not just given out by traits and stuff, it seems like it'll more be to do with actions or conditions which seems a bit easier to track
As someone who only recently discovered the Alkander's Almanac of All Things, from Dungeon Coach, and currently DMing a D&D 5e campaign that i was about to give up or change to another RPG completely (PF2e, Daggerheart, T20 or any other my players preferred), because of how 5e plays, until i found that book, i am really excited for DC20. Alkander's is already a pretty good way to make 5e more fun (or fun at all), with many ideas and mechanics i already saw and like in other games, but i didn't know how to make it work for 5e.
Thank you for showing us some of the characteristics of the game, it sounds pretty good. Action economy is a main thing for me, so the way 5e handles this, that i jokingly say it is an abscence of action economy, it was one of the problems that makes the combat feel slow, less dynamic and fun than other games. And although i like the little i saw about PF2e's action economy, with the 3 action rule etc, DC20 looks like it comes with some great ideias in how to make a now common mechanic something more epic, impactul to the narrative, and way more free and fun for the players.
Great video, breakdown, and critique, Bob! Thanks for jumping on the DC20 HYPE TRAIN! Cant believe we broke $500k in less than 24 hrs!
Bob! Now with planes, trains, AND automobiles!
Tbh i always love hearing planes in the background
I was reading this comment meanwhile listening to F35s flying overhead.
@@miladoon9121 I'm so jealous! That's my favorite!
On the subject of layout, I don’t love the way the playtest doc is structured. It’s not really an important critique, but when I’m looking into a RPG, usually the first thing I want to know is “what cool stuff can I do?” For class-based systems, that means the first thing I want to see is the classes. For me at least, one thing D&D has always done right is put the inspirational/exciting stuff up front. Then once you’re hooked, there’s a couple of hundred pages of homework for you to chew through to be able to play a game by the rules. I saw everyone gushing over this, so I went to skim through the playtest packet, and 20 or 30 pages in, I felt my eyes start glazing over as I sifted through all the various mechanics in the doc.
After that, I went back to the table of contents and skipped to the classes section. This sounds like a nitpick, and I haven’t looked deeply enough into the system to know how I feel about about it beyond this, but I do know that once I’ve got the core mechanics to a game down, I only occasionally have to look back at those, but my players (and me anytime I make a fully statted NPC) will need the character building rules every time, so burying them over 100 pages into the book behind a bunch of stuff you may only rarely need to look at doesn’t make sense.
Layout is one of those things that being a professional game design and book publishing company for almost three decades really gives you an advantage on. People can feel the way they want about Hasbro/WotC, but their books tend to be pretty clean. The 4e books, particularly, did an incredible job giving you the goods right away and organizing rules into reference sections.
The only one I've ever really disliked is the DMG, but that's because the 4e DMGs were just so great and this one felt like it didn't quite know what it was supposed to teach you.
Good feedback on the formatting! I know for the alpha they’ve been focused on getting the base of the game right, but by later stages they will tackle quality of life like formatting.
Nah, I agree! Usually character creation is more near the start of the book. I assume that will be the case for the core rules, and in the playtest he wanted to get more info up front about how it's a unique system
@@SeanBoyce-gp unfortunately, the layout being asked for here is a large part of why people rarely actually know the rules of dnd5e. Cyberpunk red is a good middleground in my experience, as it gives you a rough overview pretty early on, and rhe structure of a lot of these things, but the specifics of a lot of character options are much later on, being after the generic rules everyone needs to know
I Love ALL Bob World Builder videos! Especially his fair and well thought out reviews.
Stacking advantages/disadvantages is great in a system that supports it, I'm glad to see that in DC20. Honestly, it's pretty fun in 5e as well, as demonstrated by the internet's favorite feat, Elven Accuracy. I actually understand why the core 5e rules have them cancel each other out, it's way faster than counting them, but they mucked it up by making it incredibly easy to gain advantage in general, which means it is tough to stack buffs, and that makes it rough to specialize as a "one punch man" style hero, the one who doesn't hit often but hits incredibly hard when they do.
It doesn't work in 5e partly because of advantages and disadvantages having different durations. If you have Advantage for a minute and you get another Advantage but only for your first attack, remembering that you have double advantage on the first hit but only regular advantage on the second is weird and sticky.
Death's Door feels almost exact to the one presented in Darkest Dungeon, or may be i'm just imagining things
It might well be! Pretty much everything in RPGs has been done these days, and it's a matter of making adjustments or combining ideas in new ways.
Or they could just do it like we did in AD&D: you die when you have negative hp equal to your level.
As a consumer, I like that you are no longer doing "only positive" reviews. Reviews that don't cover any negatives of what you're reviewing, don't help anyone. If I buy something that I sawca review on and didn't see anything negative in the reviews, and then find a bunch of things I don't like, then I'm going to get annoyed because I didn't know about it ahead of time because I massy have made a different choice. Subsequently, manufacturers who never see negative reviews may never become aware of things that need to be changed or fixed.
You likely had a student pilot practicing "touch and go" landings in the background.
Yeah I knew there was a small airport nearby (idk the terminology, but for little planes) but I did not know I was in their path haha
@@BobWorldBuilderAirfield is probably the more appropriate term
I just found out about dc20 and I REALLY want to try it
Give it a go, the 0.8 alpha pack is free on the DC20 website I believe
If you need some people to play with, head over to the DC20 West Marches there’s plenty of players, GMs, and games you can jump in!
I'm just glad I already converted to Pathfinder 2e. My group is happy with what pathfinder has to offer. I agree my group prefers combat and tactics vs hard core roleplay. That's what made 5e good is it had rules to keep most of both sides happy
Sounds like PF2 is a great fit for your table! You might still want to look at DC20 for ideas you can port into your home game.
13:06 the battlemaster text over the runner in the background killed me 💀
That thumbnail out here thinking that the lack of d20 was what stopped the group from playing, instead of "the box doesn't say D&D 5e on it." Personally I've found the FURTHER you get from 5e (either in setting or mechanics but especially setting) the easier it is. You gotta make it different enough that "why not just play 5e" has an answer they have to at least partially concede.
Generally, it's easy enough to say that it has actually comprehensible rules, as dnd5e 100% does not, and mostly relies on making people think they understand them well before they actually do, so they're confindent enough to play, rather than making people actually understand them as quick as possible so they're confident enough to play
As a person who has attempted to film UA-cam videos, it is amazing how LOUD planes, trains and automobiles are. There is a really cool filming spot near me where they also are building an apartment building nearby and apparently construction is mostly beeping. 😅
I figured out how you plan your videos. You use google map to find spots as close to train tracks, parking lots, and airports as possible. Clever. Very clever.
Very kind words about the Coach, Bob. Well said.
Definitely gonna give this a look as I'm always open to creative ideas.
“Hey whys that guy filming over there? The Airshow is on the other side of the park.”
These UA-camrs are doing gods work showing us how easy and fun it is to steal and customize house rules. I have no idea why someone would back a Kickstarter for a handful of fun rules they can use for free.
As someone who homebrews and backs Kickstarters the reason is that sometimes they have new ideas, sometimes they have great combinations of ideas and features I want, and sometimes it’s just to keep creators in the field working on great content. For example I theoretically didn’t need to support Delve! But it will make it easier for me to provide some added content to my own homebrewed games and worlds, including DC20 (easy to convert 5e content), and I get to support Bob and a lot of my favorite UA-cam folks in the TTRPG space (really great group you put together, Bob, thanks)!
@@GlenFinney As is your right. Hand waving initiative order and combining action types isn't worth shelling out though.
@@THELUBINTHEMORNING that’s certainly up to each person what they find value in and also can afford! Since it’s a freebie, I’d still suggest checking out the free playtest but whatever works best for you! Your time is valuable as well!!
Backed this Kickstarter this morning!
Quadruple advantage is clearly how Bard killed Smaug.
True that!
I'm with you on the Squares thing. I like to run one-shots in various systems and one thing my players and I always complain about in other systems are the often weird or goofy distance measurements like Squares, Zones, Spaces, Fields, Inches (where an "Inch" is six feet or something -- I kid you not, there's a game that does this).
One thing I love about 5e is that they just use everyday measurements for movement and distance. Whether it's Feet or Meters, your players all know what you mean, when you say, "he's 40 feet away." They can visualize that distance in their minds, and they know what that means in terms of their weapons and spells. As opposed to "he's two zones away." "How far away is that again? Is that close? Is that far? I can't picture it." "Uhhh... let me look it up."
It doesn't matter whether you play on a grid or hexes or a gridless map and use a ruler, just calling the distance what it is works equally well for everyone.
These background interruptions are reaching Police Squad levels of silliness. I am expecting your next video to be interrupted by a car chase, an ice cream van or some kind of parade.
Seriously though, I love these honest reviews you give. Big cheers for collision damage! I use this rule even in D&D. It just makes sense that it would hurt if a minotaur would gore you into a stone wall! 😂
Aw hell yeah let's go DC20 Team!!
Everyone you got on April first is out here promoting a kickstarter haha
@@torva360 hahaha aw hell yeah XD I’m flattered XD
As an avid pf2e player, I like degrees of success. Needing to beat the check by 10 is a tall order, and I think 5 makes for a better amount
Yes the 5 makes it far more common and feels better.
Degrees of success is 100% a good addition to damn near any system, but the method of having a single set difficulty, with specific amounts above and below whatever the difficulty of the task is, regardless of the difficulty or nature of the task, isn't necessarily a good approach generally, having different values for different amounts of success is good, but sometimes there's only yes and no, you did the thing or you didn't, or sometimes it's pretty easy to do the thing good enough, but the bar to do it any better is significantly harder, like some locks are easy to get open, but many times harder to get open without making it obvious it was bypassed at some point, as prying the latch is easier than actually picking some locks, but often prying that latch can make it impossible or at least very difficult to get it back in.
For common generic things, like critical hits against an enemy, it can work well to have a universal set amount above any to hit value where it will be a crit, but having that be universal doesn't generally make sense with all the kinds of things people roll for
@@tomykong2915 pf2e already has many types of checks that only have 2-3 conditions instead of all four. A basic attack does nothing on a critical failure, for example (though some things allow a crit fail to be exploited)
Not sure tripping an opponent was the best example here considering every character in D&D 5e has the option of doing that with a Shove attack. It’s just that if you have low strength you’re less likely to succeed at it, and are therefore better off trying something else. This, I imagine, is mostly fixed by the existence of the “Prime Modifier” in DC20.
Because why have some characters be good at something when everyone can be good at everything. Not a fan of the prime modifier.
@@viktore8 That's sort of my concern with the "Rule Granularity" argument. I've not read the playtest sheet or anything, but the Prime Modifier seems like it could be good if executed properly. Idk though. I'm just sticking with 5e w/ Homebrew for now.
I think I agree with both of you: I feel that a single modifier for "whatever their thing is" offers great flexibility in progression direction, so long as it isn't an _automatic everything_ bonus.
Realistically, we tend to get a _lot_ better at our specialties, & a bit _worse_ at stuff unrelated to that, as we gain "experience" in life. Learning based on experience; go figure.
One way a generalized "you're good at whatever you decide on" progression can work, is gaining build points. The higher your "Prime Modifier", the more 'feats'\'features'\abilities\statbuffs you could choose. Depending on the phrasing of a given choice, your Prime Modifier could be applied to anything involving that (as opposed to a flat bonus on _every_ type of roll, which would be a weirdly uniformity-making mechanic).
@@viktore8 Fully agree with you. What is the point of abilities to begin with, if you use a prime modifier. Not only that, but it also makes no sense and it takes away so much flavor in character creation.
I am not a power gamer, I make characters first and then choose the class/abilities/traits that make sense for that character. This leads to very unoptimized characters, but they do make sense. The reason why I bring this up, I play a fighter with a high intelligence score. Does that score do anything for him in combat? No. Does it give him a lot of flavor and does it makes sense when RP'ing. Hell yes! I love I am not the best fighter in the world, because for my character it makes sense.
But with this system... what is the point? I end up with the same character than when I had created the "classic" strength based fighter.
Man it's an exciting time to play RPGs. So many good new games coming out
That's the spirit! :)
Because some people(like myself) are bored of video games. They're never what you want out of a game. I'm a refugee seeking an analog gaming experience. As for a TTRPG, they're limitless.
Tbh the fomo pressure is really mounting haha. Sucks tho, as ttrpgs are getting more expensive. Like, I'd love to pick up the dc20 book, but $65 for a game I might rarely get to play is not a good thing
This system sounds interesting! Love the death's door mechanic and changes to HP for higher stakes, and custom ancestries is always great to see. I remember, at first, feeling kind of frustrated when D&D 5e stopped doing the whole "plus/minus to certain ability scores" thing for different player races, but by now? I just think it makes sense for it to depend on the specific character, at least often enough to justify it. I agree that the text color and background color combo is an issue, honestly maybe what I'm hearing that most bothers me! Would love to see ttrpgs offer a stripped down, plain text version of their digital rules alongside the digital versions that have a more flavorful look by default, though it's not an answer for physical books. I also prefer abstract movement overall, but agree with other comments that the movement squares can be better adapted to abstract that vice-versa. All in all, great vid, I hadn't heard of this upcoming system and I'm glad I did, I'll check out the kickstarter!
Fantastic video! I really appreciate the constructive feedback included in this review
Every D&D UA-camr I sub to advertised them... you win..you win...I backed this project. As did at least one other person in my online D&D group. It really does have potential.
I would say for movement, the rules do say 1 space = 5 feet. So it's using the same maths as d&d but it's defaulting to the more popular option now
Backed! This may have been said, but I would absolutely love to hear a back and forth conversation about the things you don't love about the DC20 system with your buddy. :) The conversation is pure gold for us gamers.
Great video Bob. This is really interesting and i made we wonder how it compairs to Nimble. I think I will always lean towards less rules. I think the more rules you have the more a player will go to the rules to see what they can do, with less rules they will go to their imagination. That said I will still get this kickstarter because it does have some really good ideas.
In my experience, it very much depends on what those rules actually are, and how those rules are worded. Pf1e is incredibly comprehensive in all the rules it codifies, if you wanna do something, whatever that is, there is a way to do it RAW somewhere among the various rules, just sometimes require optional rules, but the contexts when you use those that action, the specifics of how you achieve it, the combination of features you choose for your chatacter to portray them, all of which are ways to be creative, which directly come from referring to the rules on some level.
Personally, I find I can get away with far more creativity with a more explicit set of rules, as with more loose systems, you're gonna need to rely on your gm's rulings for damn near everything you wanna do, so you can't setup for any niche concept, because you don't know how the gm will handle the things you're trying to set yourself up to be good at, so you either need to ask your gm and hope they actually understood what you were asking, and aren't going to make random exceptions that you don't really understand, usually leading to an argument as something that as far as you're concerned, you should be able to do, you're being told you can't or you can't do nearly as well as you understand it, which kinda sucks when that's your main schtick. With all this in mind, you generally start drifting towards things you think everyone will be in agreement on, rather than whatever it is you come up with, and figuring out some way to make it work. My issues with rules lite systems would be greatly diminished if I had a single consistent group though, as then I could actually get a sense for how the group thinks over the course of a few different characters and games, but unfortunately, if I want a consistent group, I'd need to find a group in my city, and most likely would need to gm myself, and most likely would basically be forced to play dnd5e, as it's the most well know, and generally falls onto the jack of all trades, master of none category, where it has broad appeal, but doesn't do any 1 thing particularly well, so it's easy to get everyone okay enough with it
Truly it is always such a big plus for me when a game system allows for mixed ancestry characters. As someone who is of mixed heritage, having the ability to make characters that can not only mirror that but have it reflected in the rules is the coolest thing. Then this has to be my favorite iteration of it. The mechanical and narrative opportunities afforded like this are endless. Nothing is stopping you from picking 1 point abilities from 5 different ancestries and saying that the blood of all of them runs through your veins. Realistically everyone on earth have DNA from multiple places to some degree in their blood. It’s true to real life that there would be so many mixed characters. The representation is amazing and has me so excited to make characters.
13:40 Interesting point about this thought, I know the most obvious thing to apply it to would be Pathfinder 2e. It's what I thought as well. However the devs, especially Mark Schaefer make it clear that just because a feat exists doesn't mean the action can't be attempted with a penalty. Makes sense! A lot of the time feats in PF2e are about condensing how many actions it takes to do something. So anyone can try to jump up and Strike an enemy, but they'll use their whole turn to do it and probably at a -1. Whereas if you have the feat for it, you not only do everything with two actions with no penalty, it actually also makes your jump better.
This is also kinda how it works in dnd5e, though instead of it taking longer, it'd usually be that it just doesn't work as well, or you'll be at disadvantage or something. You're untrained and trying a complicated maneuver, do you really think it'll work as well as when the guy trained for it does it?
Pf1e also generally follows this principle of generally allowing anyone to try the mundane combat stuff the martials do just without the benefits to it that the martial classes or feats have for it, though unlike pf2e, it's all codified in pf1e, and the features referencing these features generally are worded as an addition or alteration to the version anyone can do
Stuff a character can do outside of their turn actually speeds up play in my games because it keeps everyone involved and watching the action. When players aren't active on others turns, a lot will mentally checkout, myself included
Bob out there raiding Lara Crofts wardrobe...
And getting away with it too!
Bob hitting us with the Plane-ist DC20 review
Hey Bob, for the record, I have been wanting to try out your rules-lite movement for awhile now. Tbh, the only reason I haven't is because my players are so used to it and several have built themselves around moving really fast and they like to calculate exactly HOW fast they're moving lol.
When we played Symbaroum, that system doesn't do numbers-based movement by default, but my players were thrown by that idea for a little bit because they legitimately were like "Well how far can I move then?" And when I told them "Just tell me where you're headed and we'll see if its reasonable" they were astonished lol
@gryphon7675 I backed the D20 kickstarter of Symbaroum. I have most of what was offered but I haven't prepped it to run. What do you think of the setting since you've ruin it? How were your players with it?
Yeah, it sounds like they really enjoy specific measurements. But you did the perfect thing by showing them abstract movement in another system!
I liked Pirates of the Cursed Seas, which used the short (S) and long (L) edges of a playing card for movement. Movement speeds went S, L, SS, LL, SSS and you'd just lay down the card, slide your token along it and repeat a max of 3 times according to the above.
Personally, the biggest reason I like explicit rules, over abstract, is having everyone on the same page on what is and isn't reasonable, for more abstract zone systems, I like when they use ranges for how wide those zones tend to be, whether those ranges are based on actual measurements or a reference point, like arms reach, I want something to work off of, that's my biggest issue with most zone based things, beyond the added difficulties in making your environment matter, as you can always just say that since there is cover within a certain zone, someone cannot attack you without moving to another zone, even if, depending where within each zone each character is, they might be exposed or in cover, and both people could be looking at this and thinking that they were and were not behind cover respectively
@@kanislupus1195 Personally, I love it! I picked up the Core book by chance at a bookstore because the art looked great lol. I ran the introductory module "The Promised Land" and we had a Session 0 night beforehand where I spent the majority of the time talking about the setting and the vibe and then went over character creation.
It was such a different vibe from our normal D&D games (which are normally quite silly and the power scaling is completely broken) that I think we all appreciated the grounded nature of the system. Reminder that we were playing the Symbaroum system, not the Ruins of Symbaroum 5e compatible thing. It felt gritty, dark, and the danger was very real. It made their triumphs and choices all the more impactful. We haven't done it since bc we're trying to finish our multi-year D&D game, but everybody said they want to return to it eventually!
16:14 Hero Points are already a variant rule in the Dungeon Master's Guide but they work a bit differently. Page 64:
Hero points work well in epic fantasy and mythic campaigns in which the characters are meant to be more like superheroes than the average adventurer is.
With this option, a character starts with 5 hero point at 1st level. Each time the character gains a level, he or she loses any unspent hero points and gains a new total equal to 5 + half the character's level.
A player can spend a hero point whenever he or she makes an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw The player can spend the hero point after the roll is made but before any of its results are applied. Spending the hero point allows the player to roll a d6 and add it to the d20, possibly turning a failure into a success. A player can spend only 1 hero point per roll.
In addition, whenever a character fails a death saving throw, the player can spend one hero point to turn the failure into a success.
"Live from Kittyhawk, I'm Bob Worldbuilder"!
I love the way you play dnd. I was an exclusively rules-light player and GM, and your videos showed me that it is possible for me to have fun with dnd too. Like, honestly, probably would never have come back to it after hating my 3.5 experience if not for your videos. Just want to throw it out there after seeing the “I hate the way you play dnd” comment in the video. ❤
The more I hear, the more I like
I'd love to see a supercut of Bob just getting interrupted by vehicles over and over.
RAW anyone can make an opponent trip (shove action), it's just that the BM can do it while attacking
Have you ever checked out Fabula Ultima. Its a JRPG Fantasy TTRPG. I just started playing it with a group and I'm loving it.
It has a big focus on everyone creating parts of the world, during session 0 (although our group worked on about half the world map over an month) and during actual play. It has a very fun and interesting way to build characters and has a lot of streamlined equipment and exploration mechanics that I want to try to adapt to 5e. Most of the character options of the core rulebook are pretty simple. Even if you're not a JRPG or fantasy anime person, I would recommend checking it out.
13:15 Dungeon Coach (Alan) please have a look at this feedback 💜
Wow - That was very carefully navigated!
I enjoy and seem to learn from all of Bob World Builder videos
I LOVE the battle master running in the background. Well Done Bob, well done!
Other content creators would edit out planes, trains, and automobile car alarms. Not Bob, no siree! Bob wants us to know the true torture of interruptions he endured just to bring us this information while touching grass. Thanks for the warning, Bob. We'll stay indoors to do game prep. 😀
Great video. I never thought your previous ones were too positive, but rather balanced. I've been burned by a few RPG kickstarters recently, but I'll check this one out. Sounds very interesting.
Great video Bob! Don't let ppl make you feel bad for doing things differently at the table. Like - your recent buyers guide was great for new players. But to counter that as well - IMO everyone has their own style of game and in a lot of your videos you come back to this point of treating d&d like it is complex math rocket science, amd its kind of a bad take. Dumbing D&D down to all these base roles makes it lose what makes it special. If folks wanna do that style - go play like Wrath Of Ashaladon d&d boardgame 😂 or a starter box.
Eitherway, 😊 can't wait tl check out your upcoming book and DC20's as well. Keep up the great work!
The "open combat maneuvers to anyone" idea was done in Shadow of the Demon Lord. I think you might enjoy it, or it's brother Shadow of the Weird Wizard.
Thank you for the indepth look at DC20 all the mechanics you talked about are amazing and i have downloaded the free rules and play and dc20 feels amazing and just FUN too play
19:17
“You die. The end. Good day, sir. “
I felt like I had stolen some fizzy lifty drinks from Willy Wonka.
Bob, read the pf2e core books! I know you mentioned that DC20 is between 5e and pf2e, but there are a ton of rules influences here that pf2e needs to get credit for
"The d20 that people know and love" - And have spent a hefty chunk of change on - Me, a dice goblin
Bob, I am with you man! I don't like gridded combat either. I don't enjoy the rigid absolutes of the physicality of the grid. "oh I'm sorry you missed by one square, you don't get to attack." What? No, you are in the area? Yeah go ahead and make your attack. I agree with many of your ideas. Thanks for the breakdown.
Bob: "Custom Ancestries: This probably the future..."
Steve Jackson: "Oh? You all finally caught up to 1986?"
I gotta admit the community support behind this is getting me more and more interested
All my favorite DND creators are behind it
Just gotta hear from Ginni D and dungeons and discourse now 😂
3:05 Bob, seriously, don't use audio effects on outside videos: with your track record, I was honestly thinking an eagle was about to attack or do a flyover 😂
Regarding your complaint with trip, there is a shove action any character can take that specifies you can sacrifice 1 space the target is pushed to make the target prone
I'm conditioned to wanna hear the little "boodoloop" of the camera at the end of Bob's videos haha
Haha I've been thinking about this! That's the sound of my camera's stopping the recording, but it is only captured in audio if the microphone is not connected to the camera. That's why it's not picked up in these outdoor videos, but I've been thinking about just recording the sound separately so I can add it in :P
I'm only 3 minutes in and the way you declared your biases and how they may have impacted your review was awesome. I hope that becomes more standard.
You are a mastermind Bob!
Talking about examples: tripping is included in the basic combat rules in 5E - if you succesfully shove your opponent, you may make them prone or move them 5 feet away from you.
DC20 Backed! Let's go!!!
Great video @BobWorldBuilder, DC20 is on my radar for some while, I'm really excited to try it out and your review increased my excitement!
A few of these rules are exactly the same as Nimble. I wonder if one was inspired by the other or if both authors just figured out the same thing.
I know that Nimble cites Dungeon Coach as inspiration. But there aren't really "new" RPG ideas anymore. There are thousands of games out there and it's more about putting your own spin on a mechanic and trying to combine mechanics that haven't been until now... or they haven't been since 'some game' in the early 90s. Edit: I didn't mean this to sound negative lol, just saying that one will ALWAYS be able to draw connections between RPGs
Alot of players might not like ur rule light approach but I LOVE it.
I have been a dm for a month and I found out that I dont enjoy the rule heavy approach at all!
And that trip mechanic thing, that hit! Everyone should indeed be able to trip another character.
Loved the video Bob! And keep building!