The best explanation of the stats is the tomato meme ironically: Strength - Being able to crush a tomato Dexterity - Being able to dodge a tomato Constitution - Being able to eat a bad tomato Intelligence - Knowing a tomato is a fruit Wisdom - Knowing to not put a tomato in a fruit based salad Charisma - Being able to sell a tomato based fruit salad *Note* If anyone states a tomato based fruit salad is salsa, they are a bard
I once saw an image on reddit about that; str was how well you can crush a tomato, dex was how well you can throw a tomato, con was how well you can handle eating a rotten tomato, int was knowing that a tomato is a fruit, wis is knowing not to use a tomato in a fruit salad, and cha was being able to sell a tomato based fruit salad
21:29 so, in 5e if you are running Rules as Written. Spell failure chance for wearing armor you are not trained in, (ie wizard in full plate) is 100%. As per the Casting in Armor note (PHB 201) "Because of the mental focus and precise gestures required for spellcasting, you must be proficient with the armor you are wearing to cast a spell. You are otherwise too distracted and physically hampered by your armor for spellcasting."
As a DM I can confirm that sometimes I'll ask a player for a perception check, mostly because I am the IRL embodiment of Lawful Evil and also because traveling long distance can be boring for my players (and yet they refuse to do time skips). Here's what I'll do to make it interesting. Nat 1: Player in question trips or falls of their mode of transport and takes 1d6 falling damage if they fail a DC 10 dex save 2-9: "Hehe, okay cool. So anyways... 10-17: "hm interesting. Carry on." 18-19: Player notices a group of guys that appear in some way to work for the BBEG -OR- they notice something appears out of place in a room (could be as minor as loose papers covering a desk or could be an enemy that was hiding in a corner) Nat 20: Player notices a cute animal and gets a nice side quest of returning it to the owner in the next village. (this once resulted in the party completely ignoring the BBEG for several sessions and helping an NPC open an animal shelter to help these cute animals because this party assumed after three nat 20's on random perception checks that there are TONS of lost pets in that world.)
There was a supplementary book for D&D 3.0 that had a class theoretically able to get a 50 in an ability score. It led to a conversation about what that actually looks like in-game, which led to the exchange: "What happens if you get 50 INT?" "I think you just become the DM."
You activated my PTSD with that DM asking for a random roll at 11:10 Kip.. had a DM that did that and my group ended up calling that DM "The Walking Roll Devil"
They way I explain them is like: Wisdom is better understanding of pre-existing "common" knowledge. Intelligence is the capacity of discovering, creating, and interpretation of specific knowledge.
In the TSR editions (OG D&D, 1e AD&D, 2e, and the Basic Editions) the stats were used directly, not just the modifiers. Both because the modifiers weren’t really explicitly given, they were built into tables in the books that were indexed by the actual stats, and more directly as a substitute for skill checks. Certain classes would get specific skill-like abilities that used specific dice (thief skills like lockpicking or picking pockets used percentile dice, rolling under a %success chance, as an example), and everyone got saves against certain classes of bad things (petrify/polymorph, death effects, general spells and charms, etc), but if you didn’t have a more specific skill and the DM wanted to a check for something, they’d have you roll a d20, with the goal being to roll UNDER the stat on your sheet by the number given (the most basic checks would by just < or = the stat). Wisdom checks for what we’d now use the perception or investigation skills were the most common by far, but they’d all come up sometimes.
at ll:41 that's the type of DM I am. I just ask for rolls while the party is chilling in the tavern and go "So you got a nat 20, your legendary sword feels the stomp of hundreds of footsteps approaching the village"
There is no spell failure chance in 5e, it is however replaced with the fact that if a caster is not proficient with an armor type, they physically cannot cast spells while wearing that armor.
RAW (Rules as Written) and RAI (Rules as Intended), natural 20s are only automatic successes in 5e for attack rolls. But rule #1 of DnD is what the DM says, goes, and “nat 20 = automatic success in ALL contexts” is an extremely popular and common house rule, leading to generally more imaginative, fast, and fun games-though the absurdity of succeeding at things that really ought to be too silly to work or physically impossible can strain the willing suspension of disbelief, hence why it’s NOT part of RAW; outside of combat the DM reserving the right to say “no” when an action’s success would break the believability of the world or cause other problems for the game is generally a good thing, especially for inexperienced DMs who have trouble riding the line between facilitating one player’s fun and preserving the fantasy for everyone else at the table. I generally like games a little zany, so use that houserule pretty often, but it’s all about making sure everyone is on the same page and the rules fit the tone of the game you and your players WANT to play.
On the topic of point buy vs rolling I think point buy is better because it gives everyone the same opportunities, vs rolling where 1 person at the table ends up with godly stats compared to everyone else's average or bad
If DnD humor is your thing, I would HIGHLY recommend "DM of the Rings" and "Darths and Droids" - long-running series of comics that turns the Lord of the Rings movies and Star Wars movies into DnD campaigns with some brilliant moments.
My opinion on THAC0, being raised on AD&D: it’s mathematically identical to the modern attack bonus system, and the attack bonus system is easier to understand. You can legitimately argue that the specific way they BALANCED Armor classes in 1e and 2e were better than modern editions, or that THAC0 wasn’t AS confusing as people make it out to be (since in practice, most folks just copied over a lookup table from the book that did the math FOR them and never had to do the calculations themselves), but anyone who thinks the THAC0 system itself was BETTER than the attack bonus system is either deluding themselves with nostalgia or actually wants to use THAC0 to gatekeep “casuals” from the hobby and haze those dedicated enough to learn it. It was a clunkier way to do the same thing attack bonus does, that they only ever thought was a good idea because RPGs were a brand new thing. Let it die.
Intelligence is knowing that Frankenstein wasn't the _monster._ Wisdom is knowing that Frankenstein _was_ the monster. THAC0 was actually very easy. Simply subtract the target's AC from your THAC0, and that's the target number you need to meet or beat to hit them. So if you're a Level 1 character with a THAC0 of 20, and your target has an AC of 8, you need to roll a 12 or higher to hit. Base Attack Bonus is the exact same equation but flipped. Simply put, the THAC0 equation is "your THAC0 minus the target's AC equals the number you need to roll to hit", while the BAB equation is "the number you rolled plus your BAB needs to be equal or greater than the target's AC". Armor Class in pre-3rd Edition starts at 10, and decreases as your defenses get better. Leather gives you an AC of 8, chain mail and a shield has an AC of 4, full plate and a shield gives you the coveted AC 0, full plate +1 with a +2 shield and a Ring of Protection +1 grants you and AC of -4, and so on. Lower is better, because it's subtracted from THAC0. I was in a 3.5 campaign once with someone who played a Monk that almost exclusively grappled. The Grapple rules have actually never been as complex as they've been memed to be.
I usually do 4d6, drop the lowest you *may* choose to reroll your lowest score, but you have to keep the result even if it's worse if your total bonuses across all 6 scores equal +3 or less, you can reroll the entire set precisely once, including a new grace roll
@@Darasilverdragon I personally like the "Everyone rolls 2 die" approach (if you're 3+ players) then each player submits one roll, and the rest are chosen by the group from the remaining rolls (if applicable). Once you have 6 numbers, everyone uses those numbers. Of course you can alter it for larger/smaller groups or because of preference.
8:53 There are exactly two instances I can think of where the ability score itself is a necessity onstead of the modifier: 1. Heavy Armor often has a Strength requirement (minimum 13, maximum 15) in order to wear it properly and not have it hamper your movement. 2. Multiclassing by the rules as written requires you to have at least a 13 in both your class's primary stat and the primary stat or stats of the class you wish to multiclass into. Also, 20 being an automatic success (and by extension 1 being an automatic failure) is only applicable to attack rolls and death saving throws. For ability checks and other saves, rules as written, 1s and 20s are just numbers. 21:24 No. In 5e, the interaction between armor and spellcasting has been supremely simplified. If you are proficient with an armor type, you can cast any spells you know while wearing it. If you are not proficient with an armor, even your cantrips will disappear and you'll be unable to cast them. You will also suffer a movement penalty.
So on the topic of spellcasting in armor it’s not usually an issue. However if you are wearing armor (or using a shield) with which you are not proficient, you can’t cast spells as you have to put all your attention to not falling over. (On an unrelated note I’m really enjoying your recent dnd and dnd adjacent content. You’re content is helping me stay positive in the face of the hell that is college and I wanted to say thank you. Stay awesome my guy)
Personally, I am in the camp of "Big number goes in the big box" when it comes to ability scores. I know the modifier is more important, but that's just how my brain works... Also that last "FUCK" is chef's kiss in both animation and pronunciation.
This is objectively correct. Anyone who says otherwise are psychopaths. The fact that this isn't the default on DnDBeyond bothers me to no end. I have to manually toggle it with every new character 😡
@@TheSylveonSurfer its not the default because its stupid and stinky, you literally never touch your ability score unless you just levelled up and get to take an ASI, so it makes more sense to have the number you use for every single roll to be more visable
@tyjames3339 No! It makes more sense to have the bigger number is the bigger box, and the smaller number in the smaller box. This is like the meme where the dude puts all the shapes into the square hole... just because they fit, doesn't mean that's where they go. C'mon! This is basic rocket science we're dealing with here xD. It's not like I'm asking telling people to track their currency weight.
I always use the roll dice method for stats. I like to leave it to chance and then arrange it best I can. Got lucky with a tiefling character; rolled three 6s and with the racial trait (+2 charisma) got a base charisma of 20
For stats my dm had the whole party roll stats and then we could all choose any stat block that someone rolled. With 5-6 players we got some good stats blocks and if there is a stat block that has some ok rolls but also some bad ones he would give the option that if you choose that one then you get inspiration at the start of every session. It can lead to everyone having the same stat block but in the last campaign i took the Faustian bargain it helped out and lead to my character being fun to ad lib for when his negative charisma fucked me over.
With methods for determining ability score numbers we did the "4D6 drop the lowest" for the first time I ever played and I got an 18 and never rolled below 11 while the most experienced player there could hardly roll a double digit to save his life xP
Rules as written regarding Nat 20's is the only two special things Nat 20 do RAW is: 1. Critical hit on attack rolls 2. 3 saves + back to 1hp on death saves Nat 20 being an auto-succeed on skill checks is a VERY common house rule, and is typically balanced by Nat 1 being an auto-fail (which is what BG3 uses). I've heard arguments both ways, and it largely depends on how the table as a group wants to do it. The Nat 20 success and Nat 1 fail does lead to very exciting "against all odds..." moments, but it could also be argued that there shouldn't be a 5% chance for a level 1 player to convince the king of a country to abdicate their throne to the players just because they got lucky. My general stance as a DM is "I'll allow it. But if I do, this also applies to your enemies." So if the players want the Nat 20 Success rule to pull off "against all odds" moments, EVERYTHING else they encounter (every haggling merchant, goblin ambush, BBEG, street urchin pickpocket, etc.) also has the chance to Nat 20 ruin their day.
discussions like this always reminds me of the book's(which book? dunno, one of the d&d ones) definition; 'intelligence tells you it's raining, wisdom tells you to get home so as not to get sick'. :)
Please react to the rest of Jocats crap guides to D&D Also, in 5e wearing armor you're not proficient in as a spellcaster just makes you not able to cast at all; which is why my sorcerer (who I got trained in long swords) has a strength score of 20; just so when I'm out of spell slots I can put on some plate armor and start cutting people in half
9:02 As far as I know, the overall stat number (12 in this case) is only used by itself when multiclassing i.e. to multiclass into a given class, you have to have a stat high enough (determined by the class you want to multiclass into).
Old school DM here. THAC0 (to hit armor class 0) was the new and improved way of doing to hit back in the day. Before that we used attack matrices. THAC0 simplified it. AC started at 10 and your armor would reduce it. Dexterity bonuses could reduce it further as well as magical items. an AC of 3 to 5 was usually normal at start. Base THAC0 was 20. you would then subtract STR or DEX bonuses as well as any + your magical weapon might possess. So a 17 str and a +4 sword you would have a THAC0 of 15. If your opponent had an AC of -1, you would need to roll a 16 to hit them. TLDR: The 5e way of doing it is a bit simplified but much easier to understand and use.
My DM brought up the idea of playing blackjack against him, where he uses casino rules (Hit until 17+, then stand), then he curves the stats down by a number depending on how powerful he wants our characters to be. If we busted, we defaulted to like 8 or 6, and he curved the numbers of the entire party depending on how powerful he wanted us to be. We only did this once but it was a really fun way of deciding stats. Every other time though, we did 4d6, reroll 1s (and 2s if he's having a good day), then drop the lowest.
21:13 Regarding Spell Failure: Yes, it was mostly for game balance. A few popular "fanon" lore rationalizations include: * armor might make the somatic gestures difficult for casters * metal inhibits the flow of magical energy through the caster 5e removed the rule, leaning more toward "armor proficiency will generally deter casters from wearing heavy armor". If the character _wants_ to use feats to train their proficiency in heavier armor, they can.
21:10 They simplified that rule. In 5e if you are proficient with the armor you are wearing, you can cast spells with no issue, if you are not proficient with the armor, you can't cast spells at all.
Bread, cheese, Mayo, bread: no Bread, cheese, meat, Mayo, bread: yes Never played dnd but I feel like a combination of point buy and roll would be fun. You get a standard point pool size but are forced to roll your stats and can use any points not used by the rolls.
My general rule for rolling hit points at higher levels: if you take the tough feat you roll and take average or lower, if not taking tough feat you roll and take average or higher. It keeps it fairer for those who aren't taking that feat
I'd eat a burger with mayo if they wouldn't overload the sauces. Don't like drippy burger. thin spread of mayo with light squeeze of katsup and mustard. Grapple mechanics was covered in the early series of Darths and Droids. The millennials won't get it but a phonebook so thick it can crack the table just for the grapple mechanic. Fun fact about D&D spell mechanic, it was modified to fit 8bit programing and then slotted into the original Final Fantasy for the NES. Didn't matter how much MP you had you had a finite number of spells per lvl then you had to find an or use a tent or better. you had to rise your lvl to open more slots or higher tier slots then buy spells. If you have a black mage in your party after he uses up all his slots get him the highest accuracy weapon so he can hit.
I think the number of people who've gotten to sit through a whole PROPER Capital C Campaign has always been low among the herd of D&D players. and probably been lowered since 2k. I'd be surprised if the majority of players today have managed a complete ADVENTURE.
Somatic components are the hand motions that a caster does to cast the spell that use it. 'Still spell' feat lets you remove this. so a dwarf mage in full plate and a tower shield (95% spell fail) will cast sill spells or non somatic spells at 0% spell fail. my favourite was 'true strike' as it had no somatic component and 'Mordenkainen's Disjunction' or 'Mage's Disjunction' to debuff foes as it also is a non somatic spell. all somatic spells had to use a slot 1 level higher, this was in 3.5e... fun times
The lemon tree is a semi-obscure Tumblr meme, It also is said to be the origin of the word 'Lemons' on AO3, Tho it's very much a "if you know you know" kinda deal.
Speaking of limiting stats to 3, there’s actually a TTRPG called Perfect Draw, which mimics duelist kingdom era Yugioh. It has 3 stats for rolling: Passion, Skill, and Friendship.
NGL...I've only played one campaign of D&D 5e and it was a bog standard campaign that my local tabletop store rolls out to teach the newbies who've NEVER played 5e before, it's literally the same campaign every time to make it easier on rotating DMs who teach the game if someone can't make it. I was a Tiefling Rogue ...cause I wanted to play a Rogue for my first game and Tiefling just happened to be the pre-made character model the store was using. My group called me "Hellboy"...because I was the sane, rational member of the group trying to keep the pyro wizard from BURNING DOWN AN ORPHANAGE to intimidate someone. It was a month long campaign...bonus: it's a free campaign, you don't have to pay the store anything or buy any products...just gas and food but it ends around...like 9pm. I had a lot of fun though...but can't get my own friends to play...mostly cause 3 of them have NEVER played a full D&D styled TTRPG and only me and my one other friend have and he's the only one who's ever been a DM/GM...and he doesn't wanna be a "forever DM" so yeah...guy who's NEVER run a game like that before in his life has to man up and do it if I wanna get my group together and play a TTRPG. Though my friend has agreed if we ever get anything going we'll rotate in and out so we each get a chance to be a PC and not just a forever DM.
I would say knowing if you can limbo under a table or just tank it to the face is more important to the roleplay aspect of D&D then the mechanical. And it makes problem solving more interesting if you can't just stop the boulder from rolling in one room then easily and deftly dodge arrows in the next because its the same stat. It comes down to whether you care more about roleplay or more about the fighting. If you only care about combat, then sure simplifying the system benefits combat encounters and makes them flow easier. But then you tend to lose out on options on how to challenge players in puzzle rooms and social encounters. Life isn't simple, and D&D is about the life and struggles of a party of misfits running around slaying dragons and laying tavern keeps. EDIT: Nat twenty and one only matters on attack rolls, nat 20 is an auto hit and double dice, nat 1 is an auto miss even if you can't roll below 10 *cough cough rogues cough cough*. Skill checks don't matter, you can still succeed with a 1 and you can still fail with a 20. Basically the way I thought of it is "You can take advantage of an enemy's weakness or the enemy sees you coming and parries" vs "Your skill is all it is, even the master lock pick can still find locks he can't pick."
The best character I ever ran was a goddam level 20 High Elf Chronurgy Wizard, who by the end of the campaign had the Staff of the Magi, the Robe of the Archmagi, Winged Boots, an Arcane Grimoire (+3), and a Ring of Spell Storing. Simply put, we went on a lot of side quests and some main ones. The first and second items I acquired from my party defeating a Green Dragon and her mentally controlled henchmen and a lich who pulled a funny boner respectively. The others were gained through less painful methods. I managed to pull some major shenanigans with him and I can say I am proud of myself for the chicanery I was involved in. That said, I am now playing a level 14 Changeling College of Eloquence Bard/Archfey Patron Warlock in a custom campaign, a level 14 ancient High Elf Enchantment Wizard in a campaign where I'm a few levels higher than everyone else in my party (me and the DM balanced it), and a level 10 Orzhov Syndicate Vampire Enchantment Wizard in a Ravnica campaign.
Also, about not getting to the end of a campaign, I know how that feels. I'm just glad I finally got a friend group that actually stays excited about a game and doesn't lose interest after seven sessions.
@@Darasilverdragon Yes, however the DM allowed us to remove attunement from items at a potential cost to ourselves. We would roll a D20 and on a failure we got to roll a table and a temporary or permanent problem that would require attention depending on how badly we rolled.
Best story I have from DnD was my first ever encounter. By a series of circumstances I was the only one playing that session, and our group was playing with initiative cards. I encountered a lone giant spider, so naturally DM askes me to roll for initiative. I rolled terribly. Then my DM hands me the initiative card... it has a 3 on it... I'M IN DANGER!
Technically the equation should be floor((stat-10)/2). That covers the range thing. 11-10=1, 1/2 = 0.5, floor(0.5) = 0. floor() is a function which just rounds numbers down. There's also a ceiling function, which rounds up. So, for instance, proficiency bonus is 2+ceil(level/4) So the spells + heavy armor thing works like this: You can cast spells as normal, if you are proficient in the armor you are using. So a forge domain cleric could cast spells in full plate, but a wizard probably couldn't
The crit success roll rule only applies to attack rolls and saving throws. It does not apply to skill checks (or ability checks). That is why you end up hearing both ways, lots of people think the crit success rule applies to all d20 rolls when it just doesn't.
Yep. Roll 4d6 drop the lowest Homebrew rule for us was if you managed all four dice as sixes, rather than 3 getting you to 18, 4 will get you to 20. It rarely happened, but I had a very hot dice day once and rolled a 20 three times for my stats. That character was pretty baller. As for the math, it's actually score minus ten, divided by two, rounded down. So 20 is a +5 because 20-10/2=5. But 21 is also a +5 because 21-10/2=5.5, rounded down to 5. Also also the minute you said the word grapple I physically twitched. I am an old head, been playing since AD&D. Grappling and THAC0 are pet peeves of mine. They have always sucked, they will always suck, but I understand what they are supposed to do, and why. They are just implemented like crap.
Oh yeah 5th edition was quite oversimplified from every iteration before it; I don't miss thac0 though, but I miss the expansive customization from 3rd edition. An overlooked problem I'd say about the 'too many convoluted statistics' thing, is that wisdom & charisma are weirdly interchangeable with regards to 'willpower' rolls while intelligence doesn't factor into them at all. The autofail/success thing depends on the dm, though my current group splits it by impact; if it's combat related then we use the auto rule for 1s & 20s, but if it's skills or out of combat then we don't. Pretty easy way to keep the stakes up regardless if we're fighting for out lives or just messing around. The conversion from ability score to modifier has thankfully been unchanged for decades; subtract ten from your score then divide by two rounding down, and you got your modifier. There's nothing more amusingly concerning than the dm suddenly asking for an unrelated roll out of nowhere lol. Grappling is one of the few improvements I'd say 5th edition did, but it's still easy to break it thanks to how overloaded feats became. Zee Bashew covered a few varieties of proficiency bonus handling, it's surprising how many different ways it's handled in some groups. Spell failure was entirely removed for 5th edition, except for homebrew, and it's part of why mages are absurdly powerful with a slight multiclass. In an old group I played with back in 3.5, had a guy that'd put his entire character on a single 3x5 note card, dude had half the phb memorized it was crazy.
There are so many different ways to roll stats that at this point I just use what called the munchkin method. Basically you roll 4d6 for each stat and drop the lowest of the four, however you roll all those dice at once and drop the lowest 6 rolls. After you’ve got that sorted out you put those dice into groups of 3 in whatever order you fancy and those are your stats. It’s kind of a mix of point buy and the 4d6 method. Please forgive the block of text, dnd is one of my favorite hobbies
In THAC0 era you started at 10 and armor, dex and magic lowered it into the negative numbers. Intelligence is knowing tomatoes and peppers are fruits, wisdom is knowing they don't go in a fruit salads. Asking for random rolls, or the DM tossing the dice behind the screen and writing down a note have the same energy.
@@KipReacts Of all the systems I think 3.5 is my favorite. But I wish DnD would get away from the class/level system and do more like Shadowrun, where it is more freeform and based on skills. Under DnD 5.0 every charter class can fight as well as every other one. All things being equal a wizard is just as likely to hit an opponent as a similar level fighter. You roll the same d20 add your prof modifier. which is level dependent not class dependent, and add your str or dex, which all things being equal, would be the same for both characters. Only the Archery fighting style gives you an edge in the base attack role, for ranged attacks only with an additional +2. The only real edge a fighter gets is in his "Martial Archetypes" options and other than a few Maneuvers which give you an attack roll with advantage, there is no adding to the initial attack roll. Basically the fighter and wizard are just as skilled as the other with weapons a wizard can be proficient in. Madness.
@pauljanetzke I hear a lot of people love 3.5, and subsequently Pathfinder. I don't see D&D moving back towards 3.5 or adopting other systems like Shadowrun has, unfortunately. To be fair, at least a lot of groups still play 3.5.
@@KipReacts They came really close with the Player's Options books at the tail end of 2nd Ed. You could make your own custom classes using a point buy system for the typical class abilities. I was hoping 3rd would continue with that, but nope. Back to the default class/level archetype system. I've played every edition of DnD from the first Basic and Expert boxed sets in the late 70s and early 80s all the way through 5th Ed. My favorites are 3.5, 3.0 (not much difference between the two, though I would always default to wanting to play 3.5 because the rules are cleaner) and 2nd. 4th is a dumpster fire.
Spellcasters don't have failure chance anymore, now if they're wearing armor they aren't proficient with they simply can't cast spells. In-lore, it's because it prevents them from using their somatic components correctly as they aren't used to moving with the armor on.
in the old days, you could get boned on your hit points if your DM was a sadist. most however would give max hp for first level, some i played with in the past would actually do double max hp at 1st level, but some of them were a different type of sadist that intended to run you through the gauntlet.
Armor doesn't cause percentage chance for spell failure anymore, but wearing armor that you aren't proficient with prevents you from casting altogether and gives disadvantages on all ability checks for Strength and Dexterity. Wearing armor that you don't meet Strength reqs for will also reduce your speed by 10ft.. That's why Clerics in 5e are so strong. Not only do they get access to some of the most reliable spells in the game, but most of the Cleric subclasses also gain Heavy Armor proficiency. Wizards are very powerful, as they have the greatest versatility of any spell caster, but it's kind of a meme that their HP and defensive abilities are paper thin. It's funny, even if it's been disproven. Somebody wrote like a who thing on the myth of the "squishy spellcaster". But, regardless, they don't have ANY armor proficiencies. Which is fine. Mage Armor and Shield is more than enough.
18:40 Wait- did you say SCA!? It’s been years since I’ve been! I’ve never actually participated, I was far too young, but it was awesome! Also, I think I’ve only ever seen sword and shields, so hearing about SCA spears was double surprising
A character can wear just about any armor. But if they are not proficient in wearing it they will receive a disadvantage on their saving throws, can't sneak, and can't cast spells
Rules as written, 1s and 20s are only automatic fails and crit successes on attack roles specifically. Every other instance of a nat 20 affecting something is purely DM-based and not an actual rule. Death Saves are the exception but they have their own separate rules written.
In 5e spell failure is a 100% chance, You cannot use spellcasting in armor you aren't proficient with. That being said multiclassing allows all spellcasters to get proficiency with all armor.
a very good way to explain wis vs int for me is Jake the dog from Adventure Time (granted you need to have watched AT) as he have very high wisdom but extremely low intelligence
I honestly didn't know spell failure chance was a thing before this vid, but no, that's not a thing in 5e. You just can't cast spells if you're wearing armour you aren't proficient in
most spell casters can't actually just walts up in heavy armor and cast a spell. only the paladin. the reason being only the paladin is proficient in heavy armor. and you can't cast a spell if you are wearing armor you are not proficient in.
When it comes to modifiers, I'm not a math person, and charts are a pain to keep track of, so general rule to figuring them out is simple: Modifiers go up by 1 every 2 attribute points, starting at 10. So 10 is 0. 12 is 1, 14 is 2, etc. So basically: Odd numbers don't count. a 10 and 11 are the same. a 12 and 13 are the same. Any stat that's an odd number, just pretend it's one point lower than it actually is. That's about it.
Rules as Written, to my recollection, state that you can’t cast spells if you are wearing armor that you’re not proficient with, which makes sense seeing as Clerics and Paladins can sling spells in their heavy armor just as easily as the Bard in their light armor. To summarize: to be able to cast, you need to have the training to move in that class of armor.
"... and probably AD&D as well." As someone that survived AD&D... yes. This is simplified. AD&D, you needed a doctorate in some for of advanced mathematics just to figure out your THAC0. And let's not even get into saving throws. 😵💫
A way that I've come to look at it when calculating Positive modifiers is "Any multiple of 2 beyond the number 10 = +/-1 modifier." Edit: I also HATE how the weapons in 5E work. Like at the beginning they're alright and do okay damage when you're playing a specific class and don't have access to Inflict Wounds, but after you get to like level 8-10 they're practically useless as their damage is absurdly outclassed by your later spell slots and chances are if you have enough people in your party you'll never run OUT of spell slots unless there's multiple encounters in a single session and you're forced to use them all or you just suck ass like I do and always miss your shots by 1 on the AC (Yes I'm being serious.) I think there should be some kind of better weapon balancing system to make them stronger as you level up, or like, give the weapons themselves a level system like 1-5, kinda like their rarity but different. Whereas rarity increases base damage or effect of a weapon, level could increase the amount of dice you roll to determine damage. Like a level 1 Sword does 1d6 but a level 2 does 3d6 and you probably won't get a level 2 sword until you're around level 5 or 6. The way I see it is if you really wanted to you could divide up the weapon levels evenly throughout the player levels. Since there's 5 weapon levels and 20 player levels, you could restrict weapon levels to once every 4 player levels, with the maximum level of a weapon only being available at level 20 or earlier if you get it enchanted. Enchanting, if done correctly, could not only provide you with the special effect of whatever you chose to have it enchanted with, but also level it up by 1 level before the normal level increase, making it even MORE powerful later down the road. Bonus points if you get "Cutting Edge" which maxes out your hit dice and makes any attack immediately max damage, alongside the bonus of rolling a crit and rolling your hit dice for EXTRA bonus damage on top of your crit damage already, plus the chance to sever a targets limb if they fail their DEX save. Example of Cutting Edge vs Normal: Normal: 2d6+2 > Crit > 4d6+2 (or 2d6+2 x 2) CE: 2d6+2 > 14 > Crit > 28 > +2d6 > Roll Dex save > If failed: Sever Limb. > If success: Do nothing.
!["A Crap Guide to D&D [5th Edition] - Dungeon Master" | Kip Reacts to JoCat](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DHaXNtjtW5w/mqdefault.jpg)
!["A Crap Guide to D&D [5th Edition] - Dungeon Master" | Kip Reacts to JoCat](/img/tr.png)
!["A Crap Guide to D&D [5th Edition] - Races" | Kip Reacts to JoCat](/img/n.gif)
The best explanation of the stats is the tomato meme ironically:
Strength - Being able to crush a tomato
Dexterity - Being able to dodge a tomato
Constitution - Being able to eat a bad tomato
Intelligence - Knowing a tomato is a fruit
Wisdom - Knowing to not put a tomato in a fruit based salad
Charisma - Being able to sell a tomato based fruit salad
*Note* If anyone states a tomato based fruit salad is salsa, they are a bard
A tomato based fruit is salsa
@@엘제-k9u and i found the artificer
I bet I could use crushed tomato with lemon juice to really brighten up a normal fruit salad and prevent it from going all brown
@@엘제-k9u You rolled a 1
@@엘제-k9uBard Sighted!
The example I use to describe Intelligence and Wisdom: Intelligence is knowing a tomato is a fruit, Wisdom is knowing not to use it in a fruit salad.
Intelligence is knowing that Fireball solves all problems. Wisdom is knowing to have a backup spell for when Fireball fails to solve the problem.
I once saw an image on reddit about that; str was how well you can crush a tomato, dex was how well you can throw a tomato, con was how well you can handle eating a rotten tomato, int was knowing that a tomato is a fruit, wis is knowing not to use a tomato in a fruit salad, and cha was being able to sell a tomato based fruit salad
@@yohaseotanagakiwhich, as a bard, I know a tomato based fruit salad is salsa
This is exactly what my DM said, during session zero for my first campaign that lasted more than one session
Intelligence is knowing “Frankenstein” is the Doctor not the Creature. Wisdom is understanding that the Doctor is the REAL Monster, not the Creature.
21:29 so, in 5e if you are running Rules as Written. Spell failure chance for wearing armor you are not trained in, (ie wizard in full plate) is 100%. As per the Casting in Armor note (PHB 201) "Because of the mental focus and precise gestures required for spellcasting, you must be proficient with the armor you are wearing to cast a spell. You are otherwise too distracted and physically hampered by your armor for spellcasting."
As a DM I can confirm that sometimes I'll ask a player for a perception check, mostly because I am the IRL embodiment of Lawful Evil and also because traveling long distance can be boring for my players (and yet they refuse to do time skips). Here's what I'll do to make it interesting.
Nat 1: Player in question trips or falls of their mode of transport and takes 1d6 falling damage if they fail a DC 10 dex save
2-9: "Hehe, okay cool. So anyways...
10-17: "hm interesting. Carry on."
18-19: Player notices a group of guys that appear in some way to work for the BBEG -OR- they notice something appears out of place in a room (could be as minor as loose papers covering a desk or could be an enemy that was hiding in a corner)
Nat 20: Player notices a cute animal and gets a nice side quest of returning it to the owner in the next village. (this once resulted in the party completely ignoring the BBEG for several sessions and helping an NPC open an animal shelter to help these cute animals because this party assumed after three nat 20's on random perception checks that there are TONS of lost pets in that world.)
Nothing quite like dice rolls doing lore building (world or character)
There was a supplementary book for D&D 3.0 that had a class theoretically able to get a 50 in an ability score. It led to a conversation about what that actually looks like in-game, which led to the exchange:
"What happens if you get 50 INT?"
"I think you just become the DM."
You activated my PTSD with that DM asking for a random roll at 11:10 Kip.. had a DM that did that and my group ended up calling that DM "The Walking Roll Devil"
Int is book smarts while Wis is street smarts.
They way I explain them is like:
Wisdom is better understanding of pre-existing "common" knowledge.
Intelligence is the capacity of discovering, creating, and interpretation of specific knowledge.
I like Int is knowledge and logic, Wis is accuracy of instinct (and conection to nature/spirituality)
Int is knowing a tomato is a fruit
Wis is knowing jot to put it in a fruit salad
In the TSR editions (OG D&D, 1e AD&D, 2e, and the Basic Editions) the stats were used directly, not just the modifiers. Both because the modifiers weren’t really explicitly given, they were built into tables in the books that were indexed by the actual stats, and more directly as a substitute for skill checks. Certain classes would get specific skill-like abilities that used specific dice (thief skills like lockpicking or picking pockets used percentile dice, rolling under a %success chance, as an example), and everyone got saves against certain classes of bad things (petrify/polymorph, death effects, general spells and charms, etc), but if you didn’t have a more specific skill and the DM wanted to a check for something, they’d have you roll a d20, with the goal being to roll UNDER the stat on your sheet by the number given (the most basic checks would by just < or = the stat). Wisdom checks for what we’d now use the perception or investigation skills were the most common by far, but they’d all come up sometimes.
at ll:41 that's the type of DM I am. I just ask for rolls while the party is chilling in the tavern and go "So you got a nat 20, your legendary sword feels the stomp of hundreds of footsteps approaching the village"
Grod the orc with an intimidation score so high he could 1, scare enemies into not seeing him. 2, scare materials into whatever he wants.
That sounds like a WH40K ork
The Gigilo Orc!
There is no spell failure chance in 5e, it is however replaced with the fact that if a caster is not proficient with an armor type, they physically cannot cast spells while wearing that armor.
RAW (Rules as Written) and RAI (Rules as Intended), natural 20s are only automatic successes in 5e for attack rolls.
But rule #1 of DnD is what the DM says, goes, and “nat 20 = automatic success in ALL contexts” is an extremely popular and common house rule, leading to generally more imaginative, fast, and fun games-though the absurdity of succeeding at things that really ought to be too silly to work or physically impossible can strain the willing suspension of disbelief, hence why it’s NOT part of RAW; outside of combat the DM reserving the right to say “no” when an action’s success would break the believability of the world or cause other problems for the game is generally a good thing, especially for inexperienced DMs who have trouble riding the line between facilitating one player’s fun and preserving the fantasy for everyone else at the table.
I generally like games a little zany, so use that houserule pretty often, but it’s all about making sure everyone is on the same page and the rules fit the tone of the game you and your players WANT to play.
On the topic of point buy vs rolling I think point buy is better because it gives everyone the same opportunities, vs rolling where 1 person at the table ends up with godly stats compared to everyone else's average or bad
If DnD humor is your thing, I would HIGHLY recommend "DM of the Rings" and "Darths and Droids" - long-running series of comics that turns the Lord of the Rings movies and Star Wars movies into DnD campaigns with some brilliant moments.
My opinion on THAC0, being raised on AD&D: it’s mathematically identical to the modern attack bonus system, and the attack bonus system is easier to understand. You can legitimately argue that the specific way they BALANCED Armor classes in 1e and 2e were better than modern editions, or that THAC0 wasn’t AS confusing as people make it out to be (since in practice, most folks just copied over a lookup table from the book that did the math FOR them and never had to do the calculations themselves), but anyone who thinks the THAC0 system itself was BETTER than the attack bonus system is either deluding themselves with nostalgia or actually wants to use THAC0 to gatekeep “casuals” from the hobby and haze those dedicated enough to learn it. It was a clunkier way to do the same thing attack bonus does, that they only ever thought was a good idea because RPGs were a brand new thing. Let it die.
Intelligence is knowing that Frankenstein wasn't the _monster._ Wisdom is knowing that Frankenstein _was_ the monster.
THAC0 was actually very easy. Simply subtract the target's AC from your THAC0, and that's the target number you need to meet or beat to hit them. So if you're a Level 1 character with a THAC0 of 20, and your target has an AC of 8, you need to roll a 12 or higher to hit. Base Attack Bonus is the exact same equation but flipped. Simply put, the THAC0 equation is "your THAC0 minus the target's AC equals the number you need to roll to hit", while the BAB equation is "the number you rolled plus your BAB needs to be equal or greater than the target's AC".
Armor Class in pre-3rd Edition starts at 10, and decreases as your defenses get better. Leather gives you an AC of 8, chain mail and a shield has an AC of 4, full plate and a shield gives you the coveted AC 0, full plate +1 with a +2 shield and a Ring of Protection +1 grants you and AC of -4, and so on. Lower is better, because it's subtracted from THAC0.
I was in a 3.5 campaign once with someone who played a Monk that almost exclusively grappled. The Grapple rules have actually never been as complex as they've been memed to be.
When I used to DM, it was 4d6, reroll 1s. Which was funny when a guy landed with three rolls totalling 6 in his array.
I usually do 4d6, drop the lowest
you *may* choose to reroll your lowest score, but you have to keep the result even if it's worse
if your total bonuses across all 6 scores equal +3 or less, you can reroll the entire set precisely once, including a new grace roll
@@Darasilverdragon I personally like the "Everyone rolls 2 die" approach (if you're 3+ players) then each player submits one roll, and the rest are chosen by the group from the remaining rolls (if applicable). Once you have 6 numbers, everyone uses those numbers.
Of course you can alter it for larger/smaller groups or because of preference.
8:53 There are exactly two instances I can think of where the ability score itself is a necessity onstead of the modifier:
1. Heavy Armor often has a Strength requirement (minimum 13, maximum 15) in order to wear it properly and not have it hamper your movement.
2. Multiclassing by the rules as written requires you to have at least a 13 in both your class's primary stat and the primary stat or stats of the class you wish to multiclass into.
Also, 20 being an automatic success (and by extension 1 being an automatic failure) is only applicable to attack rolls and death saving throws. For ability checks and other saves, rules as written, 1s and 20s are just numbers.
21:24 No. In 5e, the interaction between armor and spellcasting has been supremely simplified. If you are proficient with an armor type, you can cast any spells you know while wearing it. If you are not proficient with an armor, even your cantrips will disappear and you'll be unable to cast them. You will also suffer a movement penalty.
You don't have to calculate THAC0. Any day you don't have to calculate THAC0 is a good day.
So on the topic of spellcasting in armor it’s not usually an issue. However if you are wearing armor (or using a shield) with which you are not proficient, you can’t cast spells as you have to put all your attention to not falling over. (On an unrelated note I’m really enjoying your recent dnd and dnd adjacent content. You’re content is helping me stay positive in the face of the hell that is college and I wanted to say thank you. Stay awesome my guy)
Intelligence is knowing that Frankenstein wasn't the name of the monster.
Wisdom is understanding that Frankenstein *was* the name of the monster.
Personally, I am in the camp of "Big number goes in the big box" when it comes to ability scores. I know the modifier is more important, but that's just how my brain works...
Also that last "FUCK" is chef's kiss in both animation and pronunciation.
This is objectively correct. Anyone who says otherwise are psychopaths.
The fact that this isn't the default on DnDBeyond bothers me to no end. I have to manually toggle it with every new character 😡
@@TheSylveonSurfer its not the default because its stupid and stinky, you literally never touch your ability score unless you just levelled up and get to take an ASI, so it makes more sense to have the number you use for every single roll to be more visable
@tyjames3339 No! It makes more sense to have the bigger number is the bigger box, and the smaller number in the smaller box.
This is like the meme where the dude puts all the shapes into the square hole... just because they fit, doesn't mean that's where they go.
C'mon! This is basic rocket science we're dealing with here xD. It's not like I'm asking telling people to track their currency weight.
I always use the roll dice method for stats. I like to leave it to chance and then arrange it best I can.
Got lucky with a tiefling character; rolled three 6s and with the racial trait (+2 charisma) got a base charisma of 20
For stats my dm had the whole party roll stats and then we could all choose any stat block that someone rolled. With 5-6 players we got some good stats blocks and if there is a stat block that has some ok rolls but also some bad ones he would give the option that if you choose that one then you get inspiration at the start of every session. It can lead to everyone having the same stat block but in the last campaign i took the Faustian bargain it helped out and lead to my character being fun to ad lib for when his negative charisma fucked me over.
Kip should do the Lythero Raid videos. Shits a gold mine of content and comedy
With methods for determining ability score numbers we did the "4D6 drop the lowest" for the first time I ever played and I got an 18 and never rolled below 11 while the most experienced player there could hardly roll a double digit to save his life xP
During my first game of D&D, we were in a candy land like campaign and our warlock an us called Eldritch blast ‘Baja Blast’
Rules as written regarding Nat 20's is the only two special things Nat 20 do RAW is:
1. Critical hit on attack rolls
2. 3 saves + back to 1hp on death saves
Nat 20 being an auto-succeed on skill checks is a VERY common house rule, and is typically balanced by Nat 1 being an auto-fail (which is what BG3 uses). I've heard arguments both ways, and it largely depends on how the table as a group wants to do it. The Nat 20 success and Nat 1 fail does lead to very exciting "against all odds..." moments, but it could also be argued that there shouldn't be a 5% chance for a level 1 player to convince the king of a country to abdicate their throne to the players just because they got lucky.
My general stance as a DM is "I'll allow it. But if I do, this also applies to your enemies." So if the players want the Nat 20 Success rule to pull off "against all odds" moments, EVERYTHING else they encounter (every haggling merchant, goblin ambush, BBEG, street urchin pickpocket, etc.) also has the chance to Nat 20 ruin their day.
discussions like this always reminds me of the book's(which book? dunno, one of the d&d ones) definition; 'intelligence tells you it's raining, wisdom tells you to get home so as not to get sick'. :)
Please react to the rest of Jocats crap guides to D&D
Also, in 5e wearing armor you're not proficient in as a spellcaster just makes you not able to cast at all; which is why my sorcerer (who I got trained in long swords) has a strength score of 20; just so when I'm out of spell slots I can put on some plate armor and start cutting people in half
9:02 As far as I know, the overall stat number (12 in this case) is only used by itself when multiclassing i.e. to multiclass into a given class, you have to have a stat high enough (determined by the class you want to multiclass into).
I had a character with a wis score of 3 once, we found a captive gelatinous cube he intentionally touched it... twice.
11:39 "Haha, I'm in danger."
My dm does 20=max damg x2 and 1=auto fail (it sounds fun and cool until you realize this applies to enemies aswell)
Old school DM here. THAC0 (to hit armor class 0) was the new and improved way of doing to hit back in the day. Before that we used attack matrices. THAC0 simplified it. AC started at 10 and your armor would reduce it. Dexterity bonuses could reduce it further as well as magical items. an AC of 3 to 5 was usually normal at start. Base THAC0 was 20. you would then subtract STR or DEX bonuses as well as any + your magical weapon might possess. So a 17 str and a +4 sword you would have a THAC0 of 15. If your opponent had an AC of -1, you would need to roll a 16 to hit them. TLDR: The 5e way of doing it is a bit simplified but much easier to understand and use.
My DM brought up the idea of playing blackjack against him, where he uses casino rules (Hit until 17+, then stand), then he curves the stats down by a number depending on how powerful he wants our characters to be. If we busted, we defaulted to like 8 or 6, and he curved the numbers of the entire party depending on how powerful he wanted us to be. We only did this once but it was a really fun way of deciding stats.
Every other time though, we did 4d6, reroll 1s (and 2s if he's having a good day), then drop the lowest.
if you're using a paper sheet, spare your sheet and use items to tell how many spellslots you got left. colored for level.
Roll !! always Roll and "ROLL" with whatever you get because that ALWAYS makes for more interesting characters
21:13 Regarding Spell Failure:
Yes, it was mostly for game balance. A few popular "fanon" lore rationalizations include:
* armor might make the somatic gestures difficult for casters
* metal inhibits the flow of magical energy through the caster
5e removed the rule, leaning more toward "armor proficiency will generally deter casters from wearing heavy armor". If the character _wants_ to use feats to train their proficiency in heavier armor, they can.
21:10 They simplified that rule. In 5e if you are proficient with the armor you are wearing, you can cast spells with no issue, if you are not proficient with the armor, you can't cast spells at all.
Kip: throw it into a spreadsheet, whistles in dnd beyond
Spears are 1d6 piercing 1d8 if two handed and also have the thrown option
Glad that you're reacting to this.
Oh hey, A Crap Guide to DnD! I know the videos are typically short, but that's a series that I'd like to see your reactions on
Bread, cheese, Mayo, bread: no
Bread, cheese, meat, Mayo, bread: yes
Never played dnd but I feel like a combination of point buy and roll would be fun. You get a standard point pool size but are forced to roll your stats and can use any points not used by the rolls.
If I need to I can do math in my head up to 4 digit multiplication im just lazy and if I got a calculator nearby ill just use that for triple and up
My general rule for rolling hit points at higher levels: if you take the tough feat you roll and take average or lower, if not taking tough feat you roll and take average or higher. It keeps it fairer for those who aren't taking that feat
I'd eat a burger with mayo if they wouldn't overload the sauces. Don't like drippy burger. thin spread of mayo with light squeeze of katsup and mustard. Grapple mechanics was covered in the early series of Darths and Droids. The millennials won't get it but a phonebook so thick it can crack the table just for the grapple mechanic.
Fun fact about D&D spell mechanic, it was modified to fit 8bit programing and then slotted into the original Final Fantasy for the NES. Didn't matter how much MP you had you had a finite number of spells per lvl then you had to find an or use a tent or better. you had to rise your lvl to open more slots or higher tier slots then buy spells. If you have a black mage in your party after he uses up all his slots get him the highest accuracy weapon so he can hit.
Cheeseburger with Mayo and Old Bay seasoning is top tier. It's not my standard burger, but I will 100% eat that.
I think the number of people who've gotten to sit through a whole PROPER Capital C Campaign has always been low among the herd of D&D players. and probably been lowered since 2k. I'd be surprised if the majority of players today have managed a complete ADVENTURE.
Somatic components are the hand motions that a caster does to cast the spell that use it. 'Still spell' feat lets you remove this. so a dwarf mage in full plate and a tower shield (95% spell fail) will cast sill spells or non somatic spells at 0% spell fail. my favourite was 'true strike' as it had no somatic component and 'Mordenkainen's Disjunction' or 'Mage's Disjunction' to debuff foes as it also is a non somatic spell. all somatic spells had to use a slot 1 level higher, this was in 3.5e... fun times
My preferred rolling method is 4d6, reroll 1s, drop the lowest.
Carry weight is 10 X your strength score, not modifier, so the score does matter
When i played one of my first games, i ended up with a kobold Sorcerer with a 3 in strength.
The lemon tree is a semi-obscure Tumblr meme,
It also is said to be the origin of the word 'Lemons' on AO3,
Tho it's very much a "if you know you know" kinda deal.
Speaking of limiting stats to 3, there’s actually a TTRPG called Perfect Draw, which mimics duelist kingdom era Yugioh. It has 3 stats for rolling: Passion, Skill, and Friendship.
NGL...I've only played one campaign of D&D 5e and it was a bog standard campaign that my local tabletop store rolls out to teach the newbies who've NEVER played 5e before, it's literally the same campaign every time to make it easier on rotating DMs who teach the game if someone can't make it. I was a Tiefling Rogue ...cause I wanted to play a Rogue for my first game and Tiefling just happened to be the pre-made character model the store was using. My group called me "Hellboy"...because I was the sane, rational member of the group trying to keep the pyro wizard from BURNING DOWN AN ORPHANAGE to intimidate someone. It was a month long campaign...bonus: it's a free campaign, you don't have to pay the store anything or buy any products...just gas and food but it ends around...like 9pm. I had a lot of fun though...but can't get my own friends to play...mostly cause 3 of them have NEVER played a full D&D styled TTRPG and only me and my one other friend have and he's the only one who's ever been a DM/GM...and he doesn't wanna be a "forever DM" so yeah...guy who's NEVER run a game like that before in his life has to man up and do it if I wanna get my group together and play a TTRPG. Though my friend has agreed if we ever get anything going we'll rotate in and out so we each get a chance to be a PC and not just a forever DM.
The Shadowrun class that maxes out CHA is called a Shaman.
22:00 you just can’t cast spells while wearing certain types of armor that you aren’t proficient in
You seem to be the kind of guy that would love D&D! 😊.
I would say knowing if you can limbo under a table or just tank it to the face is more important to the roleplay aspect of D&D then the mechanical. And it makes problem solving more interesting if you can't just stop the boulder from rolling in one room then easily and deftly dodge arrows in the next because its the same stat.
It comes down to whether you care more about roleplay or more about the fighting. If you only care about combat, then sure simplifying the system benefits combat encounters and makes them flow easier. But then you tend to lose out on options on how to challenge players in puzzle rooms and social encounters.
Life isn't simple, and D&D is about the life and struggles of a party of misfits running around slaying dragons and laying tavern keeps.
EDIT: Nat twenty and one only matters on attack rolls, nat 20 is an auto hit and double dice, nat 1 is an auto miss even if you can't roll below 10 *cough cough rogues cough cough*.
Skill checks don't matter, you can still succeed with a 1 and you can still fail with a 20. Basically the way I thought of it is "You can take advantage of an enemy's weakness or the enemy sees you coming and parries" vs "Your skill is all it is, even the master lock pick can still find locks he can't pick."
If you're using Wild Magic rules you do have to do a Constitution saving Throw to determine if you contol it and then roll for what happens
The best character I ever ran was a goddam level 20 High Elf Chronurgy Wizard, who by the end of the campaign had the Staff of the Magi, the Robe of the Archmagi, Winged Boots, an Arcane Grimoire (+3), and a Ring of Spell Storing. Simply put, we went on a lot of side quests and some main ones. The first and second items I acquired from my party defeating a Green Dragon and her mentally controlled henchmen and a lich who pulled a funny boner respectively. The others were gained through less painful methods. I managed to pull some major shenanigans with him and I can say I am proud of myself for the chicanery I was involved in. That said, I am now playing a level 14 Changeling College of Eloquence Bard/Archfey Patron Warlock in a custom campaign, a level 14 ancient High Elf Enchantment Wizard in a campaign where I'm a few levels higher than everyone else in my party (me and the DM balanced it), and a level 10 Orzhov Syndicate Vampire Enchantment Wizard in a Ravnica campaign.
Also, about not getting to the end of a campaign, I know how that feels. I'm just glad I finally got a friend group that actually stays excited about a game and doesn't lose interest after seven sessions.
...isn't that more than three attunement-requiring items?
@@Darasilverdragon Yes, however the DM allowed us to remove attunement from items at a potential cost to ourselves. We would roll a D20 and on a failure we got to roll a table and a temporary or permanent problem that would require attention depending on how badly we rolled.
@@Darasilverdragon And, depending on how much I needed an item . . . I was willing to risk it for the biscuit.
Best story I have from DnD was my first ever encounter. By a series of circumstances I was the only one playing that session, and our group was playing with initiative cards. I encountered a lone giant spider, so naturally DM askes me to roll for initiative. I rolled terribly. Then my DM hands me the initiative card... it has a 3 on it... I'M IN DANGER!
Technically the equation should be floor((stat-10)/2). That covers the range thing. 11-10=1, 1/2 = 0.5, floor(0.5) = 0.
floor() is a function which just rounds numbers down. There's also a ceiling function, which rounds up. So, for instance, proficiency bonus is 2+ceil(level/4)
So the spells + heavy armor thing works like this: You can cast spells as normal, if you are proficient in the armor you are using. So a forge domain cleric could cast spells in full plate, but a wizard probably couldn't
The crit success roll rule only applies to attack rolls and saving throws. It does not apply to skill checks (or ability checks). That is why you end up hearing both ways, lots of people think the crit success rule applies to all d20 rolls when it just doesn't.
Yep. Roll 4d6 drop the lowest
Homebrew rule for us was if you managed all four dice as sixes, rather than 3 getting you to 18, 4 will get you to 20. It rarely happened, but I had a very hot dice day once and rolled a 20 three times for my stats. That character was pretty baller.
As for the math, it's actually score minus ten, divided by two, rounded down. So 20 is a +5 because 20-10/2=5. But 21 is also a +5 because 21-10/2=5.5, rounded down to 5.
Also also the minute you said the word grapple I physically twitched. I am an old head, been playing since AD&D. Grappling and THAC0 are pet peeves of mine. They have always sucked, they will always suck, but I understand what they are supposed to do, and why. They are just implemented like crap.
Oh yeah 5th edition was quite oversimplified from every iteration before it; I don't miss thac0 though, but I miss the expansive customization from 3rd edition.
An overlooked problem I'd say about the 'too many convoluted statistics' thing, is that wisdom & charisma are weirdly interchangeable with regards to 'willpower' rolls while intelligence doesn't factor into them at all.
The autofail/success thing depends on the dm, though my current group splits it by impact; if it's combat related then we use the auto rule for 1s & 20s, but if it's skills or out of combat then we don't. Pretty easy way to keep the stakes up regardless if we're fighting for out lives or just messing around.
The conversion from ability score to modifier has thankfully been unchanged for decades; subtract ten from your score then divide by two rounding down, and you got your modifier.
There's nothing more amusingly concerning than the dm suddenly asking for an unrelated roll out of nowhere lol.
Grappling is one of the few improvements I'd say 5th edition did, but it's still easy to break it thanks to how overloaded feats became.
Zee Bashew covered a few varieties of proficiency bonus handling, it's surprising how many different ways it's handled in some groups.
Spell failure was entirely removed for 5th edition, except for homebrew, and it's part of why mages are absurdly powerful with a slight multiclass.
In an old group I played with back in 3.5, had a guy that'd put his entire character on a single 3x5 note card, dude had half the phb memorized it was crazy.
There are so many different ways to roll stats that at this point I just use what called the munchkin method. Basically you roll 4d6 for each stat and drop the lowest of the four, however you roll all those dice at once and drop the lowest 6 rolls. After you’ve got that sorted out you put those dice into groups of 3 in whatever order you fancy and those are your stats. It’s kind of a mix of point buy and the 4d6 method. Please forgive the block of text, dnd is one of my favorite hobbies
In THAC0 era you started at 10 and armor, dex and magic lowered it into the negative numbers. Intelligence is knowing tomatoes and peppers are fruits, wisdom is knowing they don't go in a fruit salads. Asking for random rolls, or the DM tossing the dice behind the screen and writing down a note have the same energy.
It's such an interesting system that I haven't really ever gotten around to toying with.
@@KipReacts Of all the systems I think 3.5 is my favorite. But I wish DnD would get away from the class/level system and do more like Shadowrun, where it is more freeform and based on skills. Under DnD 5.0 every charter class can fight as well as every other one. All things being equal a wizard is just as likely to hit an opponent as a similar level fighter. You roll the same d20 add your prof modifier. which is level dependent not class dependent, and add your str or dex, which all things being equal, would be the same for both characters. Only the Archery fighting style gives you an edge in the base attack role, for ranged attacks only with an additional +2. The only real edge a fighter gets is in his "Martial Archetypes" options and other than a few Maneuvers which give you an attack roll with advantage, there is no adding to the initial attack roll. Basically the fighter and wizard are just as skilled as the other with weapons a wizard can be proficient in. Madness.
@pauljanetzke I hear a lot of people love 3.5, and subsequently Pathfinder. I don't see D&D moving back towards 3.5 or adopting other systems like Shadowrun has, unfortunately. To be fair, at least a lot of groups still play 3.5.
@@KipReacts They came really close with the Player's Options books at the tail end of 2nd Ed. You could make your own custom classes using a point buy system for the typical class abilities. I was hoping 3rd would continue with that, but nope. Back to the default class/level archetype system. I've played every edition of DnD from the first Basic and Expert boxed sets in the late 70s and early 80s all the way through 5th Ed. My favorites are 3.5, 3.0 (not much difference between the two, though I would always default to wanting to play 3.5 because the rules are cleaner) and 2nd. 4th is a dumpster fire.
10:25
Damn I guess Donkey's CHA stat is just cracked. He passed that roll with a -2 because he minmaxed
Spellcasters don't have failure chance anymore, now if they're wearing armor they aren't proficient with they simply can't cast spells. In-lore, it's because it prevents them from using their somatic components correctly as they aren't used to moving with the armor on.
21:45 I believe you can't cast spells if you're wearing armor that you're not proficient with.
Math for Modifier
Stat - 10
Divide result by 2
Round down
There is your Modifier
in the old days, you could get boned on your hit points if your DM was a sadist. most however would give max hp for first level, some i played with in the past would actually do double max hp at 1st level, but some of them were a different type of sadist that intended to run you through the gauntlet.
The formula for modifiers is (stat/2) -5, ignore anything after the decimal point
Armor doesn't cause percentage chance for spell failure anymore, but wearing armor that you aren't proficient with prevents you from casting altogether and gives disadvantages on all ability checks for Strength and Dexterity. Wearing armor that you don't meet Strength reqs for will also reduce your speed by 10ft..
That's why Clerics in 5e are so strong. Not only do they get access to some of the most reliable spells in the game, but most of the Cleric subclasses also gain Heavy Armor proficiency.
Wizards are very powerful, as they have the greatest versatility of any spell caster, but it's kind of a meme that their HP and defensive abilities are paper thin. It's funny, even if it's been disproven. Somebody wrote like a who thing on the myth of the "squishy spellcaster". But, regardless, they don't have ANY armor proficiencies. Which is fine. Mage Armor and Shield is more than enough.
I like at 8:36 it looked like Kip had a stroke at what was just said XD
Lol, when dming I like to use the phrase 'good to know' drove my players nuts
correction Kip...
"there is no I in TEAM, but there are 6 I's in ' I didn't ask how big the room is, I cast Fireball' "
"DnD has too many stats"
*Laughs in Anima Beyond Fantasy*
The only time a base number for a stat matters at my table is for initiative. If anything ties then the winner is whoever has the highest dex.
i prefer to see stats like this, with a phys/ment split
str/int: how much load you can carry
dex/cha: how deft are you
con/wis: how sturdy are you
18:40 Wait- did you say SCA!? It’s been years since I’ve been! I’ve never actually participated, I was far too young, but it was awesome! Also, I think I’ve only ever seen sword and shields, so hearing about SCA spears was double surprising
A character can wear just about any armor. But if they are not proficient in wearing it they will receive a disadvantage on their saving throws, can't sneak, and can't cast spells
Thank you!
Rules as written, 1s and 20s are only automatic fails and crit successes on attack roles specifically. Every other instance of a nat 20 affecting something is purely DM-based and not an actual rule.
Death Saves are the exception but they have their own separate rules written.
In 5e spell failure is a 100% chance,
You cannot use spellcasting in armor you aren't proficient with.
That being said multiclassing allows all spellcasters to get proficiency with all armor.
7:35 Yeah, one time I rolled a 4 on one of my characters (if memory serves I put that 4 into Wisdom)
a very good way to explain wis vs int for me is Jake the dog from Adventure Time (granted you need to have watched AT) as he have very high wisdom but extremely low intelligence
I honestly didn't know spell failure chance was a thing before this vid, but no, that's not a thing in 5e. You just can't cast spells if you're wearing armour you aren't proficient in
Light Domain Cleric, with access to Fireball at Lvl 5
most spell casters can't actually just walts up in heavy armor and cast a spell. only the paladin. the reason being only the paladin is proficient in heavy armor. and you can't cast a spell if you are wearing armor you are not proficient in.
When it comes to modifiers, I'm not a math person, and charts are a pain to keep track of, so general rule to figuring them out is simple: Modifiers go up by 1 every 2 attribute points, starting at 10.
So 10 is 0. 12 is 1, 14 is 2, etc.
So basically: Odd numbers don't count. a 10 and 11 are the same. a 12 and 13 are the same. Any stat that's an odd number, just pretend it's one point lower than it actually is. That's about it.
Rules as Written, to my recollection, state that you can’t cast spells if you are wearing armor that you’re not proficient with, which makes sense seeing as Clerics and Paladins can sling spells in their heavy armor just as easily as the Bard in their light armor.
To summarize: to be able to cast, you need to have the training to move in that class of armor.
I like to min/max for high straight and con while decent wisdom
"... and probably AD&D as well."
As someone that survived AD&D... yes. This is simplified. AD&D, you needed a doctorate in some for of advanced mathematics just to figure out your THAC0. And let's not even get into saving throws. 😵💫
Way my group did is it is roll 4d6 drop the lowest re-roll ones. its to prevent absurdly low stats.
14:03 Los Tiburon!
Warlock with 18 AC go Brrrrt
A way that I've come to look at it when calculating Positive modifiers is "Any multiple of 2 beyond the number 10 = +/-1 modifier."
Edit: I also HATE how the weapons in 5E work. Like at the beginning they're alright and do okay damage when you're playing a specific class and don't have access to Inflict Wounds, but after you get to like level 8-10 they're practically useless as their damage is absurdly outclassed by your later spell slots and chances are if you have enough people in your party you'll never run OUT of spell slots unless there's multiple encounters in a single session and you're forced to use them all or you just suck ass like I do and always miss your shots by 1 on the AC (Yes I'm being serious.)
I think there should be some kind of better weapon balancing system to make them stronger as you level up, or like, give the weapons themselves a level system like 1-5, kinda like their rarity but different. Whereas rarity increases base damage or effect of a weapon, level could increase the amount of dice you roll to determine damage. Like a level 1 Sword does 1d6 but a level 2 does 3d6 and you probably won't get a level 2 sword until you're around level 5 or 6.
The way I see it is if you really wanted to you could divide up the weapon levels evenly throughout the player levels. Since there's 5 weapon levels and 20 player levels, you could restrict weapon levels to once every 4 player levels, with the maximum level of a weapon only being available at level 20 or earlier if you get it enchanted. Enchanting, if done correctly, could not only provide you with the special effect of whatever you chose to have it enchanted with, but also level it up by 1 level before the normal level increase, making it even MORE powerful later down the road.
Bonus points if you get "Cutting Edge" which maxes out your hit dice and makes any attack immediately max damage, alongside the bonus of rolling a crit and rolling your hit dice for EXTRA bonus damage on top of your crit damage already, plus the chance to sever a targets limb if they fail their DEX save.
Example of Cutting Edge vs Normal:
Normal: 2d6+2 > Crit > 4d6+2 (or 2d6+2 x 2)
CE: 2d6+2 > 14 > Crit > 28 > +2d6 > Roll Dex save > If failed: Sever Limb. > If success: Do nothing.
For me personaly i have fun in 5e but i like skills 3.5e and pathfinder are games i love and enjoy