I once was asked by one of my Players who was planning on DMing. “How do I know whether I am doing good.” I answered “If by the time of the campaign ending your players enjoyed the game and have made a meaningful impact on the world and story for better or for worse. Then you did good.” I just resonate with your advise in this video
@@nickwilliams8302 right, that is exactly every GMs goal to start with, and it's usually not too hard to tell whether or not your friends had fun. What you need is substantial feedback to listen to. Ask your players SPECIFIC questions about the parts of the session/campaign you thought they were having less fun during and take note of their responses to help you improve the game moving forward. That way you can be sure you are doing well.
If the players keep showing up for the game, they're getting what they want out of it. When they start making excuses and not showing up, then they're not.
@@stephenclements6158 Perhaps a bit too strong. TTRPGs are kinda like pizza: so inherently awesome that they have to be _really_ bad before people go, "Nah". If your players keep showing up, that just means you're not completely incompetent. There's always room to investigate the different things your players want out of the game and work on delivering them better.
When players play agent 007 rogues i cringe. It's when players aid the party instead of asking for their turn to shine that I can agree with. Rogues should be treasure hunters, helping others. Not tracking their damage and basing their fun on how much sneak attack damage they did. Why do rogues at the table never count the bonuses they are giving to their allies?
I'm not an expert in the older D&D systems, but I've always found it interesting how the role of the DM has changed since the early days and conception of the game. I own a copy of the AD&D DM's guide, and just thumbing through certain sections (don't want to read all those dense columns lol), it's obvious that there has been a shift in who the DM is: from having absolute authority and God-status, to now, in the more modern sense, just another collaborator. Anyway, as a fledgling DM, I say thank you for a great video
I had a player show up to the first session drunk and passed out. I spoke with the player and he said it would not happen again, but I still gave his character a penalty: His character was now an alcoholic and would have to consume an alcoholic beverage everyday or suffer withdrawals.
So glad you mentioned about testing your own limits and fudging if you over/under-shoot. I'm new and I have had a shaky sense of what is a decent encounter. Even after using Kobold Fight Club, etc. So, what I JUST started doing, was simulating the battle the night before and, presto, I'm learning SO much about my players characters, about the fight, about the bosses I've designed.. everything. It gives me the perfect preview and, while my players will make different choices than I made - including not fighting at all - at least I know a little bit about what we might get into.
So I had an issue the other week when I ran a game for a bunch of newbies, and was in a horrible mood due to something that happened to me a hour before game. I was pissed, and frustrated over an argument that happened. However after about 30 minutes of DMing I was dying laughing, and back to having fun and being in a good. Mood.
*takes deep breath* Nerfing player abilities is wrong and that is a hill I will happily die on. Not every game/ table needs to be a meatgrinder where players are naked and afraid with 2hps. If that's your game style, more power to you. But I have not once as a DM felt threatened by powerful players. Quite the contrary, it levels the playing field. I can throw harder monsters, puzzles, or traps at them because they have the tools to face them. I have more fun not having to pull punches just to keep my players alive. This fear of players, spells, abilities being "too good" has always come across to me as lazy DMing. If you're only a good DM because your players are weak and helpless, you're not a good DM. *steps off soapbox*
Long time DM and I've only done it once, on the Ancestral Guardian Barbarian from XGTE. I made the range of their primary ability 30 feet, given that the ability is unlimited use and has no save associated with it, it's still insanely powerful. I don't think the designers intended someone to multiclass rogue, shoot an enemy, and the hide when they designed it (and the player knew *exactly* what he was doing). The test shouldn't be "is this character too strong and I'm upset they're killing my monsters too easily". That's a bad shitty idea. The test should be "is this ability making combat less fun for the other players". In this case, it was. Edit: Mid campaign, obviously, I have a few standing nerfs that exist that players know about before the campaign starts. For example, Hexblade doesn't give Hex Warrior, Pact of the Blade does. Even my warlock players have enjoyed this one because it lets them be a fey Bladelock and not be bad
I actually do spend some time nerfing abilities when it comes to Unearthed Arcana. As a player, I'm actually a very strong power-gamer when it comes to building up a character. As such, I feel comfortable talking with my players and seeing how they would feel if I removed X ability. I've even felt comfortable enough with straight-up banning the Star Druid because I felt the subclass completely overshadowed the base class, which I feel isn't right unless the base class happens to be Ranger (of which I have opinions).
My friends and I have decided to discontinue our CoS campaign as COVID-19 forces us into quarantine....Thank you so much for your awesome content! This is what gets us RPG maniacs through this! Thank you again, for providing such valuable information and inspiration for CoS! Greetings from Germany! PS: Did you already have the chance to check out Matt Mercers Explorers guide to Wildemount?
@@LunchBreakHeroes Roll20, I believe I have seen that being used in one of Adam Koebel's sessions. I will definitely look into it. Thanks for the heads up!
@@vadecoriffs2327 My friends and I just do a call over Discord and put the map and miniatures on a shared Google Slide where we can move our characters around. We have been able to have longer sessions and more often! I love this quarantine
I am playing it on roll20, it only cost 20$, if you divide the cost between 5 players, is 4$ each, pretty cheap for a lot of content, the only one worth it in my opinion, and I am a cheap stake, I live in a 3rd world country, so I am thigh with money, so I don't expend a single penny unless I know is worth, and I don't recommend it unless I think it was worth. But I might be biased because my American players paid for it, I don't earn in American dollars 😂
Great video! Solid content that is well presented and well thought out. Being a bit garrulous or verbose is something that I am working on as a DM. I have a few flaws as a DM that I need your help on. First, I can be too subtle in presenting hints, clues and hooks. I am starting a new campaign and being too subtle needs to stop. Second, I have too much information to share which compounds the first flaw. I want to be able to present the situation clearly with the fewest words while not overstating or giving away too much information. What are the best methods for portraying the world, adventure, situation, scene to evoke player engagement and PC agency? And then, when to shut up? (footnote: Good DM's are great listeners.)
TTRPGs are "collaborative storytelling" only in the sense that a story is the result of play. TTRPGs are about GMs presenting situations, players making decisions and then everyone having to live with the consequences of those decisions. So yeah, the _result_ of that is a story. But that story emerges from the game. It emerges in wonderful and unexpected ways, which is one of the coolest things about the hobby. Trying to force the story of the game into some predetermined form kills the story dead, whether it's a GM trying to railroad their players or a player making decisions based on criteria other than, "What does it make sense for my character to do here?"
Funny, I just prepped a random encounter for my players who are beginning Chapter 4 of The Hoard of the Dragon Queen (trust me, the chapter needed it), and I had to pull punches because halfway through running it I realized that I could have easily tpk'd them if I had used the monster's full stat block. It left me with mixed feelings at the end of the session because I felt like it was too much XP reward for a monster that wasn't much of a threat because I pulled back.
I mean my players decided to backstab their allied Lich NPC, Which they happened to befriend due to some insane rolls. So I decided to change the encounter, First a chase scene which they happened to fail, Then the Lich just started dealing big amounts of damage, Never missing a single attack. And then used illusion magic to get away safely. This way I could pull my punches somewhat, Without taking away the tense battle that the PC's were hoping for. Granted I would've actually killed one of their characters, If it wasn't the first session of the campaign. I had given them reasons not to betray him, So I wouldn't feel bad at all making one PC an undead minion. A good thing to keep in mind, I had in game reasons and back-up plans, So whenever I defeat players I have an in universe explanation Showing them that this is not the end just yet. Because every character deserves a chance to be saved, But that doesn't mean it'll be easy or flawless.
I'll probably going to be more likely to fudge at first and second level in the player's advantage and especially during session 0. Once you get past the second level most of the fudging is going to go away for me unless I feel that I am completely screwed up in the DM
This is fair point, levels 1, 2 and even 3 can be really swingy in terms of combat but especially those first 2 levels. I had an encounter of 5 bandits, that's a 'medium' encounter for a level 1 party but it dropped 1 party member and nearly dropped a second. Meanwhile 2 goblins listed as a hard encounter they breezed right through.
My big problem with DMs fudging is that once they get a taste of the ability to just ignore the dice and go with their preferred outcome, they do it more often, and then you know you're just up against what they want to happen, and then it becomes really obvious when you're getting your ass completely kicked in combat by a group of monsters who seem to miss all the lesser important hits but just "squeak by" and succeed on the big hits.... you watch it dawn on your DM that they've gone too far, they've fudged successes for their monsters to the point you're about to TPK/retreat with deaths because of their decision, and all of sudden you watch that whole decision completely reverse. Now the monsters don't EVER hit, they stumble around drunk, and they only hit for minimum damage. The enemies begin making decisions advantageous for the party, and the last 33% of the fight is a total cakewalk just so the group comes out of the fight alive. So at no point was the fudging to improve anything. It started killing the party, and then it prevented the party from dying. There was no reason for anyone to roll dice. You can tell this happens at your table when the AC 19 character keeps getting hit "just barely" by those attacks coming their way, but somehow the AC 16 character whose in melee range just as much seems to see a more natural amount of hits/misses. It's the same reason I completely avoid all spells that involve a monster saving throw, because I know what I'm actually up against is whether the DM wants that to succeed or not. /rant.
Only time I have hidden enemies is just in case my players are steamrolling the encounter. No player wants to just barrel through the game without a challenge, and sometimes having some things stashed that you can toss out if the fight is going too much in their favor to provide that challenge they want/need is good. If I don't have to use it, I won't. I don't hate Rogues, I hate players that play them a certain way to stack every possibly advantage from every book they own. I'm glad you memorized the rules, and that you have them stacked up so well that you've made a build that's absolutely broken, but... I'm the DM, my job is provide you with a suitable challenge, and making a character that subverts that makes my job more difficult and less fun. I'm here to have fun too, and if I have to WORK for that, then I don't want to even DM. Flexing my ultimate power would seem unfair, but following the rules doesn't always do the job either, because... whatever clowns made this game apparently didn't notice how all of this synergized and didn't plan for it. So then what is a DM to do? I either stack things so much against them that I seem abusive, I restrict their options which seems limiting, or I just don't DM because I don't wanna put up with that much work just to try and fix this situation the rules didn't plan for. Power fantasy is great, but you can play Skyrim any time for that. Here, it's supposed to be a game, and a game needs risk, it needs stakes, and it needs a possibility of failure, and the people running it shouldn't feel like they're constantly fighting their players.
Glad I scrolled down and watched this one. I think the only time in-game mechanics for out-of-game actions works is when it's a positive reward. Eg if you bring a case of beer to share you get one reroll during the session, or even "players who are at the table by 6pm start with inspiration". Rewarding players helps them see the game as a way to feel validated. Punishing them makes it feel the real world -- that same real world they were specifically trying to take a break from for a few hours.
I personnel give plot armor only on the secondary fight like random encounter and let my character die during the main fight/boss fight because if my player will die I want it to be meaningful
50 pages of lore for your world is a great resource if the DM took the time to create it, but it should be optional reading for player who have the time and inclination for it I think.
Man telling he was homebrewing so much, that he needed to fudge rolls to save PCs. But the main topic is fudging rolls. Maybe the problem was in homebrewing in the first place?
This is fascinating. I think fudging is mostly useful when you, as a DM, fuck up. Especially as a new DM. I have done it to favour the players, however. If the player wants to do something really cool that will make them shine, like jumping on the dragon's back or grabbing the mouth of the t-rex in a clutch moment and it requires an opposed roll, I might fudge to give them that moment. I will be more likely to do this if the fight isn't going their way and it has, in the past, created very memorable moments that my players talk about to this day. Sure they don't know that I fudged, but that fudge has created a long lasting memory.
Would love some feedback for my possible DM flaws. Last night's CoS session was the first appearance of Strahd at the Winery after the "wintersplinter attacks" event. Half the party(7pc's level 5 + Kasimir) are needing a long rest. 2 Barbs wild soul/zealot, life cleric, twilight druid, Swashbuckler rogue, 3warlock/2paladin, College of Eloquence Bard, Strahd breaks invisibility behind the party and begins to congratulate them on bringing more despair to the land. 2 Barbarian's attack without any conversation. Strahd claws a barbarian and climbs the wall of winer and warns the party. On his turn he casts fireball on 6 PC's knocking 1 Barb unconscious (I roll death saves behind the screen and conceal the results to maintain urgency of healing). Kasimir casts mage armor and begins running away warning the party. Life Cleric attempts 'disguise self' as Tatyana having never seen her, which fails so Strahd attempts to claw/grapple and threaten her. Kasimir begins flying away and shouting warnings. Strahd animates the Barb's axe and grins at the party as it begins to slowly descend to his neck like a guillotine. Pally heals Barbarian, and Strahd uses the remainder of his legendary actions floating backwards and away and teasing the party. He casts fog cloud on himself and I give the party one last turn to ask what they're doing, but only the downed and healed Barb chases him into the fog fruitlessly. On his next turn he mounts Beucephalus, and escapes. Mostly I don't feel the party feared Strahd. I ensured every round to describe his demeanor as calm and playful until the cleric attempted to trick him. I described how most of the damage they were dealing was having little effect. Using his legendary actions I tried to show off how he was able to deal a lot of damage to a raging Barbarian and then move out of reach. Using fireball I tried to show that this was no normal Vampire that some of the party might have read about in the monster manual. Of course barbarians will do what they do, but at no point did anyone heed Kasimir's warnings, and even sneered at him after combat for not helping. Everyone seemed to enjoy the fight, but I think moving forward I will have to find a way to break their spirit.
Honestly, I think you did just great by the sound of it. Although my own party was scared of Strahd before they ever met him, it's definitely not going to be like that with every party. But now you the type of headstrong and cocky adventurers you're dealing with, and a clear goal. Break their spirit and grind them down (while keeping it fun, of course)!
One of the things I do sometimes with my encounters is run them as waves, with more enemies constantly coming every few rounds. I try to overdo it a little and make it extra hard, then just tweak or stop the waves once I think the challenge is where I wanted it to be
I have terrible dice rolls quite often, and so when I DM I normally triple a monsters hit points or at least make them maximum, just so that my monsters could get in a hit or two. It was so bad my brother took over being the DM :( lol
Enjoyed this new 'discussion' format! I'll say I agreed with just about every point, so I personally didn't find the discussion very challenging. Would be very interested to see 'discussion' videos on more subjective topics, such as how you draw players in to the game or how you prepare for a session. I'll check out DC and i've subbed to ya patreon! On the bit about bad moods, I've def learned to listen to my mood leading up to a game (minus the inevitable anxiety) I now have a good idea on what will put me in a slump before a game (being under-prepped, not happy with group dynamics etc...) and how to deal with those things before game time.
Thank you so much for your support, Cody! More discussion videos would definitely be interesting, although the viewership statistics leave a bit to be desired. I think we did pretty well for a first outing, though. And it was a lot of fun to make!
9:45 I felt like I had to retune death house in curse of strahd on the fly for players, I think it was ok a little less health there a little weaker hits here, they're all new players and still had players go down, still had tension nail biting moments, but Idk if I took it a little far Idk about a character being actually killed in 1 hit especially for a new player, still have a lot to learn about dming
I strongly disagree about pulling punches. I had to do that Sunday to avoid a TPK in the coffin maker's house in Vallaki because the players split the party up in the house and 2 were upstairs, both getting downed first round, the players coming up the stairs making a pretty serious tactical blunder by splitting damage among multiple regenerating vampires. They WOULD have tpk'd and only beaten 2 of the creatures. Just saying "welp, game's over everyone, guess sunday is free now" isn't fun for literally anyone. I saw an opening: the wizard Thunderwaved a vampire knocking it into some wood debris, the vampire had 5hp left. I just had the spawn get impaled by a splinter of wood through her chest, and shriek with pain and terror as she died. The other vampires, their scheme already completely thwarted (as the bones had been sent back to the church), and not wanting to fight Tatyana for fear of hurting or killing her anyway, fled to seek easier meals in the town before abandoning it. The players came to the conclusion that if they get a vampire spawn hurt enough, they can just stake it right the and there for an instant kill and you know what? That's going in the notes. From now on the rogue will be carrying stakes on a belt. I love it. I don't feel like the players got cheated out of anything. Strictly speaking, I don't think a DM should be trying to "win" anyway. If I played D&D like a game of X-Com, my players wouldn't have a chance. I do things like the above all the time, but I always make sure the enemies have a *reason* to not quickly and efficiently kill their players. The exception to this is whenever I do a campaign-ending battle, in which case, the gloves come off. I remind my players of each of their consumables, rarely used special powers, etc at the start of such sessions, and since they aren't all particularly great at the crunchy, combat aspects of D&D, I feel this is helpful. Maybe we have different tables, but my players put a lot of effort and care into their characters. They spend what little money they have on character art. Losing the whole party because they all roll under 5 on dex saves and you roll near max damage on a fireball in the first round of combat just... I couldn't disagree with you more that leads to anything satisfying for anyone. I always try to include consequences for failure but going straight to the TPK, which is how the game is written, just does not feel fun in random fights that lack significance
Really depends what players do you have. Most of them are not prepared for collaboration and are waiting for the DM to make a story. I play with my friends for some time and I see that they really like when they don't have to think too much about the plot and the hook must be clear and strong. Giving them a free hand so they will roam randomly poking stuff trying to find the plot. Then what I see is that if you have a simple players not Matt Mercer kind of players but casuals and beginers then do a proper session 0 to get their needs and then "write the story". They will play what they want and get story about them. Ocassionaly your players might find something interesting thats off the story and that's still okay. I encourage new DMs to stop overthinking your sessions and just have fun.
.... i will fudge for level 1 and 2 because a simple fight with a couple giant rats can turn into a tpk real quick after you one shot with some crits. I have seen multiple wipes or near wipes as both a dm and a player at low level. It isnt fun for anyone to spend hours making a character or prepping a campaign and having a wipe less than an hour into session one. After that the kid gloves are off.
"Are you fudging it for their story or are you fudging it for YOUR story?" It's the same story. Fudging too much is the problem, not fudging every once on awhile. As far as DM cheating, DMs can cheat as much as they want because that is one of the tools available to them. Cheating to be selfish is the problem, not cheating to keep it exciting.
I prefer to think of it as "competitive storytelling using math, dice and imagination." I know the idea of DM vs. players is usually bad, but if you try to make the villain actually win, within the confines of the game rules, the challenge to the players is real. You don't pull punches in a competition. As far as player vs. player, I leave it up to the players themselves. If two of them are willing to go head to head and can handle the outcome, why not let them?
Nice video, felt more like watching two videos at different times than watching two DM's talking though. I would recommend making it more of a conversation next time. "Collaborative video making" you might say. :P
I'm actually using an offbrand set of bluetooth earbuds that I got for Christmas, which are connected to my phone. Then DC and I called each other. We're talking over the phone, and recording cleaner audio on our own cameras.
Whenever I have a book as a handout, I make it 50-60 pages long or more, but i try to make sure only part of that is lore, i might put ilustrations there, depending on what kind of book it is, there might be a bestiary, spells, crafting formulas, stuff like that.
As a "Story teller" who some time DMs I have to say this was both excellent and hard to hear. Particularly the part about the story that you so badly want to tell. Because as Much as I want to work through a collaborative story.... I find that generally the art of the role play is lost on many players. I invest a lot of time in making a believable world that makes sense. I don't want exhaustive narration - but I want players that are going to appreciate the game on more levels than combat only.... Appreciate the drowning them in your own pit trap. SO I am flagging you to go the other way here - rather than talking about DM mistakes … ...what I'd like you to do is focus on steps for DM to facilitate better RP. By saying "show - don't tell" you need to further develop examples. Carrots on a stick... There are players that would prefer to not engage with NPCs - have no clue on how to extract clues... and will wander trying to figure it out for themselves and missing out on richly developed material... Even material that isn't added to a module. I appreciate some of the voices for example that you have shown for COS... but when players don't want to engage for fear of being suckered into a trap or that it just gets in the way of the next fight. I DM and play for the story escape. As a player I work with the DM to get a better story.... but I need more on teaching (in some cases adolescent players) how to role play and investigate the NPCs - and how to find clues. How many modules have I played - as far back as AD&D first edition where so much of the story doesn't actually come out. It feels like such a waste that there is so much excellent material that is lost because players aren't equipped. I personally am going to downplay the story - in hopes that characters will tell their story... but this is a huge issue. And unless DMs are equipped at fostering a desire for Roleplay they are going to miss out on multiple and rich aspects of the game.
I run into the same issues quite a bit. I tend to go pretty deep into a character and most of the other players have a hard time keeping up. Most of them are new players and I've been playing for a couple decades. Some don't want to invest that much effort, others don't understand how to yet, the rest just don't have the practice or real-world experience to roleplay the character they want to. I find the best way to engage new/younger players is a good mixture of "Go ahead," and "That'll teach you." The best tool when dealing with youth is patience. Being the DM allows for some interesting dynamics. Let them make mistakes, ignore NPCs, or meander around a while. When they ask why it happened the way you play it out, tell them. Don't be harsh, be frank and consistent. Recommend videos about the subject, there are plenty of videos about becoming a better roleplayer.
Nerfing PCs?! Why? Why would any GM do this? There's absolutely no need to do this. Ever. IMNSHO. As the GM you can create any challenge 'level' needed. So if a PC's ability basically sidestepped an encounter you planned...? Well, that's on you. :-) You need to have a reasonable working knowledge of what your PCs can and can't do. I find it part of the fun as a GM if I forget or just did't know an ability as well as I thought, as it lets me play the monsters/NPCs more accurately. The Drow party didn't know about such and such a power, so they stayed in a nice line* for you to demolish them. The player will be talking about: 'Remember that time I took out the Drow scouts with the...!'' Let the player have 'the win'. And then step up your game to keep up the challenges in the future. * But intelligent opponents *always* getting into optimal position to thwart the PCs ability is dodgy too. ;-)
loved this vid! but i do have a question. how do you guys handle drinking (alcohol) because in my sesions (average of 6 to 8 hours game play) we drink a lot and at the end everyone (including me,the dm) is kinda drunk. its always a lot of fun but the last 2 hours is a a mess.... because i write down what they do i know the whole session but even whem i give them a recap they sometimes say "oooh shit i cant remember this part' hopefully you have a better answer them "dont drink that much" because we wont
See, there we go straight out of the gate. Collaborative storytelling...Being an old DM, I can tell you that the old school games did have a backstory there if your players were interested enough to hook the hints together and discover it. The more modern handling of this is to have way, waay too much-set storytelling with instructions on how to play the baddies and more background than anybody in their right mind really wants.
I do fudging since the beginning and my players know that I do it. but they never know when I do it. and they ever try to exploit it, I will kill them.
You are welcome to be wrong in thinking Paladins are not OP. :) Having played a paladin and seen others play paladins, there is not a single class a base model paladin can't steal the spotlight from, and often do their Special Thing better. Especially egregious is when multi-classing comes up and the paladin takes Warlock, I have found myself wondering why the rest of the party is even bothering when this unhittable, self-healing, smiting, spell casting, supernatural tracking, disease-proof, eldritch blasting chosen of and invested by at least 1 maybe 2 supernatural powers can handle all the problems themselves. That was how I felt as a player, and other players have told me the same thing. You may feel differently, and that's fine, but there is another side to the discussion of "nerfing" character classes. The appeal to authority of "the designers knew what they were doing" I don't buy, because designers make mistakes, publish errata, and made 4th edition. I didn't hear you two say this explicitly, but the gist of your discussion and some of the comments I read warn against "railroading" your players, and I disagree with that. Some players are bumps on logs and won't do anything interesting when left to their own devices, they get bored, I get bored, I know, I've had them. If anything was going to happen, it was because I had an NPC come along, take them by the hand, clearly present them options, and dumb it down for them. Some players like to be taken along for a tale ready to be told. Some want the freedom to carve their own ways, and that's fine, too. I enjoyed y'all's banter, but there's more to some of the issues raised that's worth thinking about.
Without multiclassing, paladins are terrible at doing ranged damage, and no paladin outshines anyone at area of effect damage or control. I put a solid change to warlock by putting Hex Warrior as a bonus to pact of the blade instead of Hexblade and I feel like it's not really an issue. The stat demands of paladins are ridiculous and I always do point buy
I had a BLAST making this video with you man! If our people like it enough, we’ll have to do it again!!
Absolutely! And I'll be sure to stay center frame!
I once was asked by one of my Players who was planning on DMing. “How do I know whether I am doing good.” I answered “If by the time of the campaign ending your players enjoyed the game and have made a meaningful impact on the world and story for better or for worse. Then you did good.”
I just resonate with your advise in this video
I think that's an excellent measure of running a good game. Fun is key!
@@LunchBreakHeroes Well, yeah. That's definitely true. But it's not like anyone sane DMs a game with the intention of making it _not_ fun.
@@nickwilliams8302 right, that is exactly every GMs goal to start with, and it's usually not too hard to tell whether or not your friends had fun. What you need is substantial feedback to listen to. Ask your players SPECIFIC questions about the parts of the session/campaign you thought they were having less fun during and take note of their responses to help you improve the game moving forward. That way you can be sure you are doing well.
If the players keep showing up for the game, they're getting what they want out of it.
When they start making excuses and not showing up, then they're not.
@@stephenclements6158 Perhaps a bit too strong. TTRPGs are kinda like pizza: so inherently awesome that they have to be _really_ bad before people go, "Nah".
If your players keep showing up, that just means you're not completely incompetent. There's always room to investigate the different things your players want out of the game and work on delivering them better.
LBH: I'm looking at you DMs who hate rouges.
Dungeon Coah (under his breath): *and paladins.*
When players play agent 007 rogues i cringe. It's when players aid the party instead of asking for their turn to shine that I can agree with. Rogues should be treasure hunters, helping others. Not tracking their damage and basing their fun on how much sneak attack damage they did. Why do rogues at the table never count the bonuses they are giving to their allies?
I'm not an expert in the older D&D systems, but I've always found it interesting how the role of the DM has changed since the early days and conception of the game. I own a copy of the AD&D DM's guide, and just thumbing through certain sections (don't want to read all those dense columns lol), it's obvious that there has been a shift in who the DM is: from having absolute authority and God-status, to now, in the more modern sense, just another collaborator. Anyway, as a fledgling DM, I say thank you for a great video
I had a player show up to the first session drunk and passed out. I spoke with the player and he said it would not happen again, but I still gave his character a penalty: His character was now an alcoholic and would have to consume an alcoholic beverage everyday or suffer withdrawals.
He showed up passed out?
So glad you mentioned about testing your own limits and fudging if you over/under-shoot. I'm new and I have had a shaky sense of what is a decent encounter. Even after using Kobold Fight Club, etc. So, what I JUST started doing, was simulating the battle the night before and, presto, I'm learning SO much about my players characters, about the fight, about the bosses I've designed.. everything. It gives me the perfect preview and, while my players will make different choices than I made - including not fighting at all - at least I know a little bit about what we might get into.
That sounds like a great idea for new DMs! I might mention that in the future if it comes up again.
So I had an issue the other week when I ran a game for a bunch of newbies, and was in a horrible mood due to something that happened to me a hour before game. I was pissed, and frustrated over an argument that happened. However after about 30 minutes of DMing I was dying laughing, and back to having fun and being in a good. Mood.
Oooh Yes. I’m just happy to have something to do during this Quarantine
Mix yourself up a quarantini, sit back, and enjoy the show!
Lunch Break Heroes, Sir yes Sir!
Skyout Dova Wanderer I know right! It’s Prime Time for UA-cam these days!
The Dungeon Coach too true
*takes deep breath* Nerfing player abilities is wrong and that is a hill I will happily die on. Not every game/ table needs to be a meatgrinder where players are naked and afraid with 2hps. If that's your game style, more power to you. But I have not once as a DM felt threatened by powerful players. Quite the contrary, it levels the playing field. I can throw harder monsters, puzzles, or traps at them because they have the tools to face them. I have more fun not having to pull punches just to keep my players alive. This fear of players, spells, abilities being "too good" has always come across to me as lazy DMing. If you're only a good DM because your players are weak and helpless, you're not a good DM. *steps off soapbox*
A more noble hill to die on, I have yet to see
@@LunchBreakHeroes You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.
Long time DM and I've only done it once, on the Ancestral Guardian Barbarian from XGTE. I made the range of their primary ability 30 feet, given that the ability is unlimited use and has no save associated with it, it's still insanely powerful. I don't think the designers intended someone to multiclass rogue, shoot an enemy, and the hide when they designed it (and the player knew *exactly* what he was doing). The test shouldn't be "is this character too strong and I'm upset they're killing my monsters too easily". That's a bad shitty idea. The test should be "is this ability making combat less fun for the other players". In this case, it was.
Edit: Mid campaign, obviously, I have a few standing nerfs that exist that players know about before the campaign starts. For example, Hexblade doesn't give Hex Warrior, Pact of the Blade does. Even my warlock players have enjoyed this one because it lets them be a fey Bladelock and not be bad
I actually do spend some time nerfing abilities when it comes to Unearthed Arcana. As a player, I'm actually a very strong power-gamer when it comes to building up a character. As such, I feel comfortable talking with my players and seeing how they would feel if I removed X ability. I've even felt comfortable enough with straight-up banning the Star Druid because I felt the subclass completely overshadowed the base class, which I feel isn't right unless the base class happens to be Ranger (of which I have opinions).
That was the best intro line from a host I have EVER heard, seen or know about ❤
My friends and I have decided to discontinue our CoS campaign as COVID-19 forces us into quarantine....Thank you so much for your awesome content! This is what gets us RPG maniacs through this! Thank you again, for providing such valuable information and inspiration for CoS! Greetings from Germany! PS: Did you already have the chance to check out Matt Mercers Explorers guide to Wildemount?
That is so unfortunate! Have you looked into moving the game online to Roll20 or a similar platform?
And no, I have not yet looked at Wildemount.
@@LunchBreakHeroes Roll20, I believe I have seen that being used in one of Adam Koebel's sessions. I will definitely look into it. Thanks for the heads up!
@@vadecoriffs2327 My friends and I just do a call over Discord and put the map and miniatures on a shared Google Slide where we can move our characters around. We have been able to have longer sessions and more often! I love this quarantine
I am playing it on roll20, it only cost 20$, if you divide the cost between 5 players, is 4$ each, pretty cheap for a lot of content, the only one worth it in my opinion, and I am a cheap stake, I live in a 3rd world country, so I am thigh with money, so I don't expend a single penny unless I know is worth, and I don't recommend it unless I think it was worth.
But I might be biased because my American players paid for it, I don't earn in American dollars 😂
Great video! Solid content that is well presented and well thought out. Being a bit garrulous or verbose is something that I am working on as a DM. I have a few flaws as a DM that I need your help on. First, I can be too subtle in presenting hints, clues and hooks. I am starting a new campaign and being too subtle needs to stop. Second, I have too much information to share which compounds the first flaw. I want to be able to present the situation clearly with the fewest words while not overstating or giving away too much information. What are the best methods for portraying the world, adventure, situation, scene to evoke player engagement and PC agency? And then, when to shut up? (footnote: Good DM's are great listeners.)
TTRPGs are "collaborative storytelling" only in the sense that a story is the result of play. TTRPGs are about GMs presenting situations, players making decisions and then everyone having to live with the consequences of those decisions.
So yeah, the _result_ of that is a story. But that story emerges from the game. It emerges in wonderful and unexpected ways, which is one of the coolest things about the hobby. Trying to force the story of the game into some predetermined form kills the story dead, whether it's a GM trying to railroad their players or a player making decisions based on criteria other than, "What does it make sense for my character to do here?"
Funny, I just prepped a random encounter for my players who are beginning Chapter 4 of The Hoard of the Dragon Queen (trust me, the chapter needed it), and I had to pull punches because halfway through running it I realized that I could have easily tpk'd them if I had used the monster's full stat block. It left me with mixed feelings at the end of the session because I felt like it was too much XP reward for a monster that wasn't much of a threat because I pulled back.
I mean my players decided to backstab their allied Lich NPC,
Which they happened to befriend due to some insane rolls.
So I decided to change the encounter,
First a chase scene which they happened to fail,
Then the Lich just started dealing big amounts of damage,
Never missing a single attack.
And then used illusion magic to get away safely.
This way I could pull my punches somewhat,
Without taking away the tense battle that the PC's were hoping for.
Granted I would've actually killed one of their characters,
If it wasn't the first session of the campaign.
I had given them reasons not to betray him,
So I wouldn't feel bad at all making one PC an undead minion.
A good thing to keep in mind, I had in game reasons and back-up plans,
So whenever I defeat players I have an in universe explanation
Showing them that this is not the end just yet.
Because every character deserves a chance to be saved,
But that doesn't mean it'll be easy or flawless.
I'll probably going to be more likely to fudge at first and second level in the player's advantage and especially during session 0. Once you get past the second level most of the fudging is going to go away for me unless I feel that I am completely screwed up in the DM
This is fair point, levels 1, 2 and even 3 can be really swingy in terms of combat but especially those first 2 levels. I had an encounter of 5 bandits, that's a 'medium' encounter for a level 1 party but it dropped 1 party member and nearly dropped a second. Meanwhile 2 goblins listed as a hard encounter they breezed right through.
My big problem with DMs fudging is that once they get a taste of the ability to just ignore the dice and go with their preferred outcome, they do it more often, and then you know you're just up against what they want to happen, and then it becomes really obvious when you're getting your ass completely kicked in combat by a group of monsters who seem to miss all the lesser important hits but just "squeak by" and succeed on the big hits.... you watch it dawn on your DM that they've gone too far, they've fudged successes for their monsters to the point you're about to TPK/retreat with deaths because of their decision, and all of sudden you watch that whole decision completely reverse. Now the monsters don't EVER hit, they stumble around drunk, and they only hit for minimum damage. The enemies begin making decisions advantageous for the party, and the last 33% of the fight is a total cakewalk just so the group comes out of the fight alive.
So at no point was the fudging to improve anything. It started killing the party, and then it prevented the party from dying. There was no reason for anyone to roll dice.
You can tell this happens at your table when the AC 19 character keeps getting hit "just barely" by those attacks coming their way, but somehow the AC 16 character whose in melee range just as much seems to see a more natural amount of hits/misses. It's the same reason I completely avoid all spells that involve a monster saving throw, because I know what I'm actually up against is whether the DM wants that to succeed or not.
/rant.
Only time I have hidden enemies is just in case my players are steamrolling the encounter. No player wants to just barrel through the game without a challenge, and sometimes having some things stashed that you can toss out if the fight is going too much in their favor to provide that challenge they want/need is good. If I don't have to use it, I won't.
I don't hate Rogues, I hate players that play them a certain way to stack every possibly advantage from every book they own. I'm glad you memorized the rules, and that you have them stacked up so well that you've made a build that's absolutely broken, but... I'm the DM, my job is provide you with a suitable challenge, and making a character that subverts that makes my job more difficult and less fun. I'm here to have fun too, and if I have to WORK for that, then I don't want to even DM. Flexing my ultimate power would seem unfair, but following the rules doesn't always do the job either, because... whatever clowns made this game apparently didn't notice how all of this synergized and didn't plan for it.
So then what is a DM to do? I either stack things so much against them that I seem abusive, I restrict their options which seems limiting, or I just don't DM because I don't wanna put up with that much work just to try and fix this situation the rules didn't plan for. Power fantasy is great, but you can play Skyrim any time for that. Here, it's supposed to be a game, and a game needs risk, it needs stakes, and it needs a possibility of failure, and the people running it shouldn't feel like they're constantly fighting their players.
Glad I scrolled down and watched this one. I think the only time in-game mechanics for out-of-game actions works is when it's a positive reward. Eg if you bring a case of beer to share you get one reroll during the session, or even "players who are at the table by 6pm start with inspiration".
Rewarding players helps them see the game as a way to feel validated. Punishing them makes it feel the real world -- that same real world they were specifically trying to take a break from for a few hours.
I totally agree!
I personnel give plot armor only on the secondary fight like random encounter and let my character die during the main fight/boss fight because if my player will die I want it to be meaningful
50 pages of lore for your world is a great resource if the DM took the time to create it, but it should be optional reading for player who have the time and inclination for it I think.
Man telling he was homebrewing so much, that he needed to fudge rolls to save PCs.
But the main topic is fudging rolls. Maybe the problem was in homebrewing in the first place?
This is fascinating. I think fudging is mostly useful when you, as a DM, fuck up. Especially as a new DM. I have done it to favour the players, however. If the player wants to do something really cool that will make them shine, like jumping on the dragon's back or grabbing the mouth of the t-rex in a clutch moment and it requires an opposed roll, I might fudge to give them that moment. I will be more likely to do this if the fight isn't going their way and it has, in the past, created very memorable moments that my players talk about to this day. Sure they don't know that I fudged, but that fudge has created a long lasting memory.
Would love some feedback for my possible DM flaws. Last night's CoS session was the first appearance of Strahd at the Winery after the "wintersplinter attacks" event. Half the party(7pc's level 5 + Kasimir) are needing a long rest. 2 Barbs wild soul/zealot, life cleric, twilight druid, Swashbuckler rogue, 3warlock/2paladin, College of Eloquence Bard,
Strahd breaks invisibility behind the party and begins to congratulate them on bringing more despair to the land. 2 Barbarian's attack without any conversation. Strahd claws a barbarian and climbs the wall of winer and warns the party. On his turn he casts fireball on 6 PC's knocking 1 Barb unconscious (I roll death saves behind the screen and conceal the results to maintain urgency of healing). Kasimir casts mage armor and begins running away warning the party. Life Cleric attempts 'disguise self' as Tatyana having never seen her, which fails so Strahd attempts to claw/grapple and threaten her. Kasimir begins flying away and shouting warnings. Strahd animates the Barb's axe and grins at the party as it begins to slowly descend to his neck like a guillotine. Pally heals Barbarian, and Strahd uses the remainder of his legendary actions floating backwards and away and teasing the party. He casts fog cloud on himself and I give the party one last turn to ask what they're doing, but only the downed and healed Barb chases him into the fog fruitlessly. On his next turn he mounts Beucephalus, and escapes.
Mostly I don't feel the party feared Strahd. I ensured every round to describe his demeanor as calm and playful until the cleric attempted to trick him. I described how most of the damage they were dealing was having little effect. Using his legendary actions I tried to show off how he was able to deal a lot of damage to a raging Barbarian and then move out of reach. Using fireball I tried to show that this was no normal Vampire that some of the party might have read about in the monster manual. Of course barbarians will do what they do, but at no point did anyone heed Kasimir's warnings, and even sneered at him after combat for not helping. Everyone seemed to enjoy the fight, but I think moving forward I will have to find a way to break their spirit.
Honestly, I think you did just great by the sound of it. Although my own party was scared of Strahd before they ever met him, it's definitely not going to be like that with every party. But now you the type of headstrong and cocky adventurers you're dealing with, and a clear goal. Break their spirit and grind them down (while keeping it fun, of course)!
I may be a year late, but one more from the Coach!
One of the things I do sometimes with my encounters is run them as waves, with more enemies constantly coming every few rounds. I try to overdo it a little and make it extra hard, then just tweak or stop the waves once I think the challenge is where I wanted it to be
I have terrible dice rolls quite often, and so when I DM I normally triple a monsters hit points or at least make them maximum, just so that my monsters could get in a hit or two. It was so bad my brother took over being the DM :( lol
Enjoyed this new 'discussion' format! I'll say I agreed with just about every point, so I personally didn't find the discussion very challenging. Would be very interested to see 'discussion' videos on more subjective topics, such as how you draw players in to the game or how you prepare for a session. I'll check out DC and i've subbed to ya patreon! On the bit about bad moods, I've def learned to listen to my mood leading up to a game (minus the inevitable anxiety) I now have a good idea on what will put me in a slump before a game (being under-prepped, not happy with group dynamics etc...) and how to deal with those things before game time.
Thank you so much for your support, Cody!
More discussion videos would definitely be interesting, although the viewership statistics leave a bit to be desired. I think we did pretty well for a first outing, though. And it was a lot of fun to make!
@@LunchBreakHeroes hmm. Maybe these sorts of things work better when both channels are bigger? Look forward to more content anyways
9:45 I felt like I had to retune death house in curse of strahd on the fly for players, I think it was ok a little less health there a little weaker hits here, they're all new players and still had players go down, still had tension nail biting moments, but Idk if I took it a little far Idk about a character being actually killed in 1 hit especially for a new player, still have a lot to learn about dming
I strongly disagree about pulling punches. I had to do that Sunday to avoid a TPK in the coffin maker's house in Vallaki because the players split the party up in the house and 2 were upstairs, both getting downed first round, the players coming up the stairs making a pretty serious tactical blunder by splitting damage among multiple regenerating vampires. They WOULD have tpk'd and only beaten 2 of the creatures.
Just saying "welp, game's over everyone, guess sunday is free now" isn't fun for literally anyone. I saw an opening: the wizard Thunderwaved a vampire knocking it into some wood debris, the vampire had 5hp left. I just had the spawn get impaled by a splinter of wood through her chest, and shriek with pain and terror as she died. The other vampires, their scheme already completely thwarted (as the bones had been sent back to the church), and not wanting to fight Tatyana for fear of hurting or killing her anyway, fled to seek easier meals in the town before abandoning it. The players came to the conclusion that if they get a vampire spawn hurt enough, they can just stake it right the and there for an instant kill and you know what? That's going in the notes. From now on the rogue will be carrying stakes on a belt. I love it.
I don't feel like the players got cheated out of anything. Strictly speaking, I don't think a DM should be trying to "win" anyway. If I played D&D like a game of X-Com, my players wouldn't have a chance. I do things like the above all the time, but I always make sure the enemies have a *reason* to not quickly and efficiently kill their players. The exception to this is whenever I do a campaign-ending battle, in which case, the gloves come off. I remind my players of each of their consumables, rarely used special powers, etc at the start of such sessions, and since they aren't all particularly great at the crunchy, combat aspects of D&D, I feel this is helpful.
Maybe we have different tables, but my players put a lot of effort and care into their characters. They spend what little money they have on character art. Losing the whole party because they all roll under 5 on dex saves and you roll near max damage on a fireball in the first round of combat just... I couldn't disagree with you more that leads to anything satisfying for anyone. I always try to include consequences for failure but going straight to the TPK, which is how the game is written, just does not feel fun in random fights that lack significance
Good stuff. Thanks
No problem!
Really great advice!
Glad you think so!
Balanced and then we see Rangers and DMs yelling that no Tasha is allowed
Really depends what players do you have. Most of them are not prepared for collaboration and are waiting for the DM to make a story. I play with my friends for some time and I see that they really like when they don't have to think too much about the plot and the hook must be clear and strong. Giving them a free hand so they will roam randomly poking stuff trying to find the plot. Then what I see is that if you have a simple players not Matt Mercer kind of players but casuals and beginers then do a proper session 0 to get their needs and then "write the story". They will play what they want and get story about them. Ocassionaly your players might find something interesting thats off the story and that's still okay. I encourage new DMs to stop overthinking your sessions and just have fun.
.... i will fudge for level 1 and 2 because a simple fight with a couple giant rats can turn into a tpk real quick after you one shot with some crits. I have seen multiple wipes or near wipes as both a dm and a player at low level. It isnt fun for anyone to spend hours making a character or prepping a campaign and having a wipe less than an hour into session one. After that the kid gloves are off.
Using Fantasy Grounds, I can not fudge rolls. The dice lay where they lay.
You can hide DM rolls
"Are you fudging it for their story or are you fudging it for YOUR story?"
It's the same story. Fudging too much is the problem, not fudging every once on awhile. As far as DM cheating, DMs can cheat as much as they want because that is one of the tools available to them. Cheating to be selfish is the problem, not cheating to keep it exciting.
I prefer to think of it as "competitive storytelling using math, dice and imagination."
I know the idea of DM vs. players is usually bad, but if you try to make the villain actually win, within the confines of the game rules, the challenge to the players is real. You don't pull punches in a competition.
As far as player vs. player, I leave it up to the players themselves. If two of them are willing to go head to head and can handle the outcome, why not let them?
Do more collaborations!
> Core rules are well balanced, don't change them
> Dude's channel is about homebrew, and he homebrew everything.
Nice video, felt more like watching two videos at different times than watching two DM's talking though. I would recommend making it more of a conversation next time. "Collaborative video making" you might say. :P
How did you get your pixel bud mic to work on your computer? I can't find mine. Only the audio.
I'm actually using an offbrand set of bluetooth earbuds that I got for Christmas, which are connected to my phone. Then DC and I called each other. We're talking over the phone, and recording cleaner audio on our own cameras.
@@LunchBreakHeroes that's pretty ingenuitive.
Hey man love the vid, but you should face forward the whole time! No worries though loved it anyway
Whenever I have a book as a handout, I make it 50-60 pages long or more, but i try to make sure only part of that is lore, i might put ilustrations there, depending on what kind of book it is, there might be a bestiary, spells, crafting formulas, stuff like that.
As a "Story teller" who some time DMs I have to say this was both excellent and hard to hear. Particularly the part about the story that you so badly want to tell. Because as Much as I want to work through a collaborative story.... I find that generally the art of the role play is lost on many players.
I invest a lot of time in making a believable world that makes sense. I don't want exhaustive narration - but I want players that are going to appreciate the game on more levels than combat only.... Appreciate the drowning them in your own pit trap. SO I am flagging you to go the other way here - rather than talking about DM mistakes … ...what I'd like you to do is focus on steps for DM to facilitate better RP. By saying "show - don't tell" you need to further develop examples.
Carrots on a stick...
There are players that would prefer to not engage with NPCs - have no clue on how to extract clues... and will wander trying to figure it out for themselves and missing out on richly developed material... Even material that isn't added to a module.
I appreciate some of the voices for example that you have shown for COS... but when players don't want to engage for fear of being suckered into a trap or that it just gets in the way of the next fight.
I DM and play for the story escape. As a player I work with the DM to get a better story.... but I need more on teaching (in some cases adolescent players) how to role play and investigate the NPCs - and how to find clues.
How many modules have I played - as far back as AD&D first edition where so much of the story doesn't actually come out. It feels like such a waste that there is so much excellent material that is lost because players aren't equipped.
I personally am going to downplay the story - in hopes that characters will tell their story... but this is a huge issue. And unless DMs are equipped at fostering a desire for Roleplay they are going to miss out on multiple and rich aspects of the game.
I run into the same issues quite a bit. I tend to go pretty deep into a character and most of the other players have a hard time keeping up. Most of them are new players and I've been playing for a couple decades. Some don't want to invest that much effort, others don't understand how to yet, the rest just don't have the practice or real-world experience to roleplay the character they want to.
I find the best way to engage new/younger players is a good mixture of "Go ahead," and "That'll teach you." The best tool when dealing with youth is patience. Being the DM allows for some interesting dynamics. Let them make mistakes, ignore NPCs, or meander around a while. When they ask why it happened the way you play it out, tell them. Don't be harsh, be frank and consistent.
Recommend videos about the subject, there are plenty of videos about becoming a better roleplayer.
Nerfing PCs?! Why? Why would any GM do this? There's absolutely no need to do this. Ever. IMNSHO.
As the GM you can create any challenge 'level' needed. So if a PC's ability basically sidestepped an encounter you planned...? Well, that's on you. :-) You need to have a reasonable working knowledge of what your PCs can and can't do. I find it part of the fun as a GM if I forget or just did't know an ability as well as I thought, as it lets me play the monsters/NPCs more accurately. The Drow party didn't know about such and such a power, so they stayed in a nice line* for you to demolish them. The player will be talking about: 'Remember that time I took out the Drow scouts with the...!'' Let the player have 'the win'. And then step up your game to keep up the challenges in the future.
* But intelligent opponents *always* getting into optimal position to thwart the PCs ability is dodgy too. ;-)
Its Druids. All the DMS want to hamstring Druids.
loved this vid! but i do have a question. how do you guys handle drinking (alcohol) because in my sesions (average of 6 to 8 hours game play) we drink a lot and at the end everyone (including me,the dm) is kinda drunk. its always a lot of fun but the last 2 hours is a a mess.... because i write down what they do i know the whole session but even whem i give them a recap they sometimes say "oooh shit i cant remember this part' hopefully you have a better answer them "dont drink that much" because we wont
See, there we go straight out of the gate. Collaborative storytelling...Being an old DM, I can tell you that the old school games did have a backstory there if your players were interested enough to hook the hints together and discover it. The more modern handling of this is to have way, waay too much-set storytelling with instructions on how to play the baddies and more background than anybody in their right mind really wants.
I do fudging since the beginning and my players know that I do it. but they never know when I do it. and they ever try to exploit it, I will kill them.
Killing players is highly discouraged. I believe it's a felony in most places.
@@LunchBreakHeroes but it works. they fear it.
Both cute guy DMs!
We DO exist!
D&D UA-camr swimsuit calendar when?
@@stephenclements6158 whenever your busy schedule clears up dude!
@@LunchBreakHeroes LOL
You are welcome to be wrong in thinking Paladins are not OP. :) Having played a paladin and seen others play paladins, there is not a single class a base model paladin can't steal the spotlight from, and often do their Special Thing better. Especially egregious is when multi-classing comes up and the paladin takes Warlock, I have found myself wondering why the rest of the party is even bothering when this unhittable, self-healing, smiting, spell casting, supernatural tracking, disease-proof, eldritch blasting chosen of and invested by at least 1 maybe 2 supernatural powers can handle all the problems themselves. That was how I felt as a player, and other players have told me the same thing. You may feel differently, and that's fine, but there is another side to the discussion of "nerfing" character classes.
The appeal to authority of "the designers knew what they were doing" I don't buy, because designers make mistakes, publish errata, and made 4th edition.
I didn't hear you two say this explicitly, but the gist of your discussion and some of the comments I read warn against "railroading" your players, and I disagree with that. Some players are bumps on logs and won't do anything interesting when left to their own devices, they get bored, I get bored, I know, I've had them. If anything was going to happen, it was because I had an NPC come along, take them by the hand, clearly present them options, and dumb it down for them. Some players like to be taken along for a tale ready to be told. Some want the freedom to carve their own ways, and that's fine, too.
I enjoyed y'all's banter, but there's more to some of the issues raised that's worth thinking about.
Without multiclassing, paladins are terrible at doing ranged damage, and no paladin outshines anyone at area of effect damage or control.
I put a solid change to warlock by putting Hex Warrior as a bonus to pact of the blade instead of Hexblade and I feel like it's not really an issue. The stat demands of paladins are ridiculous and I always do point buy
I have stopped watching at the point where he is saying that the base classes are balanced. Hahahaha. But i agree that you should’nt nerf your players
Excellent