The extra feat variant humans get makes them a common choice for those interested in particular builds, but if you don’t use that variant or feats, then their bonuses to all scores does feel lackluster
The fun part is whenever there is darkness, the human has to make sure to have a light source. A steady detail that also makes for a great target for opponents
The only alrighty-ish thing about normal human is when you go for wierd-ass multiclass when you want 3-4 stats as high as possible. Which is eh at best
@@mauriceanderson5413 I feel you. I was born in 2e but raised in 3.5 and consequently have a hard time ditching feats, so unlike Prof. DM, I embrace the variant human.
@@Mannahnin that could be interesting, or at least give fewer races dark vision - it was more special in previous editions, but for the sake of simplifying 3.5, 5e folded low-light vision into dark vision - they could have just taken out low-light vision - I think this attempt at simplification had sweeping & unintended consequences - just hypothesizing, but giving elves proficiency with perception, maybe that was enough to mechanically portray their keen eyesight without a new vision type
Over the course of time, and 5 editions, D&D adventuring groups have gradually transformed from a wary and fearful party of exited adventures as in LOTR, into a group of comic-book style bad-ass poser action heroes flying through the air and chopping through the monsters then landing in a tripod stance with a cocky look on their faces. This has been reflected in the cover art too.
true, but you canhomebrew some stuff. i tend to give everyone 1 less death saving throw and they do not reset when brought back up until a long rest, preventing downing, revive, downing, revive, etc. also, e6, only getting to 6th level unless something amazing happens, has a good feel to it. and instead focusing on feat progression.
We play 5E by the letter, and nothing at all has changed about how our games play out from when we were on 2nd edition 22 years ago. It's the audience, not the game.
It shouldnt be a Supers game :) biggest error of the modern game, they have got confused about the genre or its just feature creep thats got outta hand
@@godsamongmen8003 Somewhat, I've been scaling up almost everything. But the CR balance post level 5 is all over the map. I like my adventures to be dangerous, but the intention is not to kill my PC's.
Never had a problem with lethality in 5e. Case in point - 5e Rsvenloft campaign lasted for 2 years. By end of campaign, 9 character deaths. Mainly down to PCs not knowing when to retreat. Or use the Meat Grinder option from Tomb of Apocalypse.
@@thereluctanthireling Little hint here...I know it sucks BUT do NOT give your characters magical items. All of the monsters and their CR ratings are designed without Magical Weapons in mind...yes that is a stupid as it sounds. But the moment they get magical weapons monster balanced around having immunties to certain damage types lose a lot of value on their CR (Iron Golems LOOK tough but...yeah...with magical weapons that immunity to non-magical blunt/slashing/piercing might as well not be there at CR13 because by that point everyone usually has at least a +1 if not +2 magical weapon). The other thing to do is to remove the 'non-magical' part of the text but then that punishes martials and they're already being outshone by spellcasters at that point so...yeah..it's catch-22 because you can bet the Spellcasters wont do the right thing and cast Magic weapon on their weapons because that doesn't give them the 'big numbers'. Unless you give them a limited use item like blade oils or some such to buff the weapon and turn it into another damage type..which would actually make good quest rewards now that I think about it, a Blue Dragon Blade Salve, bonus action changes your weapons damage type to Lightning damage, same could be done for all the elenents...and yes I am shamelessly stealing this idea from the Soulsborne games. Fighters use to carry a myriad of weapons before they got a magical weapon. Normally you'd have your standard weapon, a silvered weapon (Lycanthropes), a blunt weapon (usually just a club, they were free in 2e AD&D) and a Cold forged Iron Weapon (for Fey). At the very least you'd carry two weapons of a different damage type, Slashing/Blunt, one for Zombies, one for Skeletons. I mean a Club did 1D6 damage compared to a swords 1D6+1 so it was a viable alternative in a pinch
*Things I like:* - Starting packages to help give your character backstory and speed up character creation. - Advantage/Disadvantage is very simple and a great replacement for circumstance bonuses. - Most classes start to differentiate at 3rd level, meaning you have to commit to really get the most out of your chosen path. - Many skills that covered similar areas have been merged into a single skill, making it more efficient for the players to become good at something. - Fighters are more competitive with spellcasters now when it comes to combat. - All classes now have sub-classes, which is really nice for giving additional options and creating varied characters, although some classes are better at this than others. Tied to this, magic actually affects wizards in tangible ways. - Secondary poison and disease effects are more varied. *Things I don't like:* - The characters seem more coddled due to many small things in different places, some of them detailed below. - The races' math is weird and convoluted. Loosing ability score penalties means that the races are no longer internally balanced. Instead, they are average at everything and a bit better at 1 or 2 things. However, adding the Default Human on top makes it even sillier, since a gain of +1 in everything means that they effectively move the average. Now everyone is a bit worse than average in everything, except for one thing that they are a bit better than average at. Not to mention a +1 bonus to an attribute doesn't make a difference half the time. In effect, this is scamming the players and making the races feel more samey. - Specialist wizards no longer pay the cost of having a forbidden school. This, again, makes them average at everything and better at one thing. Furthermore, it makes creating a magical polymath meaningless. - In general, there never seems to be a disadvantage to taking an option, other than loosing out on a bonus of another option. - No skill points means that everything is tied to my level by a single number. I could just as well simply add my level to all rolls I make, there is very little customization there. I can't focus on a few things and dabble in a few others, I am always equally good or terrible at everything. - The disengage action, while seemingly useful, only works when the players/DM allows it to work. Since there is no bonus to movement when using disengage, and because of quantum time, the opponent can simply use their move to step back into range and keep attacking. Had that happen multiple times with my players when enemies tried to run away. Note, I might have misinterpreted the rules. - Poison no longer lowers your attributes, but instead is just another damage type. This makes it mostly useless at higher levels. It's become a nuisance rather than something that is potentially life-threatening. Even with the nastier ones, it's easier to just wait for the character to keel over and then revive them. This makes high-level PCs even more powerful. - Tying disease symptoms to long rest rather than any specific time period makes possible this weird situation where players can prevent a disease from worsening by essentially power-napping. - Many spells are quite useless due to how they have been re-written for the new system. True Strike being the prime example. - Many spells are way to powerful for their level, especially compared to others. Fireball! - Rules and guidelines that described how to balance your homebrew are no longer there. - Death has become even cheaper with Revivify and a lot more ways of healing, which also lengthens combat. - Many options that were there in earlier editions, like half the cleric domains, are simply missing, and the whole system seems to be geared more toward epic heroic good parties rather than giving options for all alignments and styles of play.
The disengage can be useful to taunt your opponent into following you and hence exiting the threatened spaces of previously adjacent colleagues, thus provoking attacks of opportunity. If you want a speed bonus for getting out of combat then use the Dash action instead (nb. at the cost of not preventing AoO like Disengage would). [All IIRC, IANARL] Additionally, real military forces do a staggered withdrawal. Bravo squad is positioned behind Charlie squad, then pulls back just far enough to support Charlie squad pulling back, then repeat. Leapfrog style.
In regards to martial classes in 5e, especially the fighter, I feel like they've been weakened significantly when compared to prior editions and similar systems. Firstly, parallel XP requirements for both casters and fighters have worsened the "Linear Fighter, Exponential Wizard" issue significantly. While other systems and editions include asymmetrical requirements and an increased breadth of options and powers for martial classes, 5e has neglected this issue entirely. The opportunity cost of choosing a fighter versus a wizard increases massively around levels 6-8, with the variety and utility of spells available being far more useful than a consistent increase in damage. There is a reason why many DMs load players of these classes with magic items and weapons in order to bring them up to the same viability as their caster counterparts. On top of these issues, 5e's HP bloat further exacerbates this power disparity, decreasing martial viability even further.
@@imperialwatch1966 I've seen some pretty insane stuff done by a fighter at higher level (6-7). Check out Chain of Acheron stream, where their fighter has the highest alpha strike damage potential of all characters. And yes, all players have magical items. Still, it might be this is a specific build for this style of play. I agree with you on HP bloat being an issue.
I can't speak to the default human being bad, because I've never seen a default human in a game. The variant human, however, is both the most flexible and the most popular choice I've encountered.
They are extremely good choices for classes / builds that that need 3 high stats to be effective. Such as monk, barbarian, or warlocks that want to use a blade pact without picking hexblade.
totally agree. don't really understand what he means when he says they have no good ability mods, when humans can literally have whatever ability mods they want!
Yeah, I was a little taken aback by this. Human variant fighter is basically a powergamer meme in 5e Adventurers league because you get a free feat and 2 plus 1s, making it arguably the best choice for martial builds, and especially if you want multifeat combos like pole arm master/sentinel
@@erinkelley845 notice... you had to add "variant" to the human. No one plays the "non-variant" human... for simple reason that they get no advantage... at all.
@@MaleusMaleficarum 1. That doesn't disprove my point that lot's of people make human characters for the bonuses specific to humans 2. Base humans can have some rare instances where they are an optimal choice, ie if you want to make a skill monkey Bard or a particularly MAD multiclass and aim for all odd base stats, you can get a bunch of +1 bonuses you wouldn't get otherwise which can make them more viable.
@@benvoliothefirst my main problem with the 5e DMG is that it's terribly laid out. CTRL+F is basically a required to navigate the book. So much so that I actually think that the physical version is pretty much worthless just from how hard it is to find anything in there
I recently played 5th and I couldn't believe how complicated they'd made the game. No wonder old school is a thing. I'm glad I held onto my old 2e books.
Complicated how? Choose a race, class, and background. Roll stats, point buy, or standard array. Your class and background tell you what gear, abilities, and spells you get. Everything else is a matter of reading the PHB and enjoying the game.
I must admit, as an old 1e and 2e player, I found 5e almost incomprehensible when I first got into it. It took me quite a while to wrap my head around it, but now I love it! I do agree with a lot of PDM's opinions, and I have made quite a few homebrew tweaks, but now I have it to the point where I really love it.
8:46, I feel the "Not lethal enough" Is a very common thing, but it's really easy to "fix": monsters, if they can, almost always attack downed characters, at least once, to give the single Death Save. With this almost every fight feels dangerous. As for the "reason" for this, I present you the following: -Intelligent/humanoid enemies are completely aware that healing magic/abilities exist, so they might even double tap, if necessary. -Really dumb beasts always bite down on "the prey" trying to pull it away. -The only Monsters I might not use in this dangerous way are INT 6 to 9 creatures, who can't distinguish between unconcious and dead.
I was playing a sorcerer who was taken down by these flying stalactite critters that stayed attached to drain blood, their preferred food. The rest of the party was fighting the rest of the swarm while the cleric kept casting Spare the Dying on my sorcerer until the fighter or bard could get over to me and peel the nibblers off. I hit the two death fail point three times before the fight was over. I was laughing the whole time because the entire fight was due to my sorcerer exploring ahead while the party did a short rest.
IMHO, Making monsters attack downed characters feels like metagaming. From the point of view of the monster any attack that reduces a character to 0 hit points is a mortal wound. Only the DM knows the character can make saving throws. Also, combat situations are fast and furious. We can't expect combatants to waste time making sure each and every opponent are dead before attacking the next one. PCs don't do that, why would monsters?
Everyone complains about no dark vision for humans, but light is a cantrip and torches cost a penny. “But it gives you away!” they say. The plated dwarf’s crummy stealth roll does that too. “There are work arounds for that!” they say. There are work arounds for everything, including darkvision, which is a second level spell.
That's if your GM allows feats, and also if they don't houserule or outright ban certain feats. I make CBE and PAM unavailable before 8th level, and SS and GWM are brought more in line with power attack from previous editions, being -prof. to hit, double prof. to damage so as to not break damage balance. This makes them still fantastic options at 1st level, but not game-breakingly so. Not only that, but should you not choose one of the few feats that's actually worth a damn mechanically like the four mentioned already or a handful of others and opt instead for something more flavorful like Dungeon Delver or the new Chef feat, it really feels as though you have hampered yourself and are missing out on some exceptionally strong abilities like the tiefling's fire resistance.
Watching Gandalf and the Fellowship running away Is a very powerful image, a wizard along with some of the greatest warriors of their time fleeing for fear of being overwhelmed . There needs to be more art depicting characters fleeing. I once had to tell my dying players who had already recovered the mcguffin artifact that they should run, they were like “oh! We can do that? We run!” So many players have been conditioned to slaugh it out in sealed rooms that they forget that this is an option
I like the high survivability of 5e characters. It means as the DM I can really smack them around. Throw the kitchen sink at them. It also means less time is spent rolling up new characters after they die. Knock the wholenparty unconscious and let them wake up naked and in prison, or on some giant’s barbeque. Makes for a great escape adventure. Any good torturer will tell you, you can’t torture someone who is dead. I am also okay with the high hit points. I make my players take the average as per the Player’s Handbook. This way the HP aren’t too high. They can take a few shots but they won’t stand up forever. It also assures that classes that should have high hit points like fighters, barbarians, etc, have the hit points they need to survive on the front lines. Many of the monsters do lots of damage so the HP aren’t an issue for me. The Professor’s take on Attacks of Opportunity gave me pause. Perhaps I shouldn’t penalize my players for trying to escape from a bad situation. I might discuss it with the group. Also PDM’s initiative system is looking better and better.
My largest issue with 5E is the same problems I ended up having in 3.5 they simply begin to release more and more classes/subclasses with variants and often not fully considered rules. It leaves some of classes further and further behind while some get absurd combo abilities that shouldn't work together as they give up nothing to get everything.
Exactly, its a bottomless Pit. It reminds me of collectibles, or the Sims and its expansions, rather than a comprehensive, solid and self sustained set of rules.
Ryan Szesny : A DM I played with actually intergrated the Aleena, Bargle, storyline into the campaign. Our groups cleric said his clerical order was related to Aleena's, he vowed to avenge her and we all promised to help bring Bargle down. But the DM pushed the campaign into... a very different direction. Despite our intent and efforts we never ever got the chance to even battle Bargle.
@@ronn-ammon8975 that's too bad. I had started planning it out recently myself. The Mentzer Basic set gives you that first group dungeon and gives you tips and stuff to build extra levels onto it, with the expectation you will eventually defeat Bargle, and a dragon he's allied himself with.
I agree that in making D&D more appealing to newer players, they saw the need to make the Characters Heroes from the start. My term is little godlings.
Since I still always use my old books I hadn't realized that 5E doesn't show PCs as victims but wow you're right. That's actually a significant "problem" and explains some expectation disconnects. Edit: There is one exception ; the excellent Condition/Effects arts at the back of the player manual. Which are fantastic.
Maybe that's just marketers recognizing human nature. Most people want to think of themselves as heroes, and the more optimistic "you always win" pitch for D&D probably sells better than the more grimdark pitch.
PCs weren't really "victims" in the older versions. They were brave mortals who faced down terrific odds despite their mortality and with full knowledge that their exploits would likely lead them to an eventual grisly fate but, in the meantime, gold and glory awaited and life was sweet.
Wow did you guys miss the point or don't know what we're talking about. Nobody is saying that the art ONLY depicted PCs as victims. There was a LOT of cool heroic art or epic struggle (almost all of the big, full color splash art was). Just that there was ALSO a ton of artwork in the margins depicting comedic failure (those were great and reminds you it's a game), pcs doing relatable dumb pc things, traps working as intended, monsters sometimes winning and a LOT of pc dying or getting maimed. Edit: LotFP does have plenty of full color splash art of beautiful PCs getting utterly wrecked though, but that's kind of that specific OSR game signature style.
Taking away Darkvision* from everyone, including monsters, means that everyone is now wandering around with torches and light spells, or relying on the "natural phosphorescence" of the rocks. This will certainly change the atmosphere of the game. *Things like the Darkvision Spell and Eldritch Sight become really exceptional.
This is exactly what I did in my game. I also nerf all the treasure in the dungeon if they somehow circumvent torch use. Gold just doesn't sparkle in a dungeon without torchlight.
@@ImperialValues Wow! You've found a pair of Goggles of Darksight. Unfortunately, they are 1st Gen, so you can't see into areas of total darkness, you can see okay, but grainy in half-light, and you are totally blind looking into full light.
I personally disagree with most of the stuff the dungeon prof here says, but this is something I agree with, as I limited the abilities of darkvision in my games, and it only works as base darkvision for underdark natives. For everyone else I have a "Lesser Darkvision" which basically is only good enough to notice a cliff edge 5 feet away if you aren't running, or to see something that's literally at your feet. I want it to encourage the use of lighting and torches. In the case of monsters, I give them different abilities like (Blindsight: Smell) where they get a general direction of something smellable until the get right next to it.
My top five totally subjective sins in D&D: -everybody is a hero and deserve a medal: no risk no thrill. -there's a rule for everything: killing imagination -hyper customization: dissolving any sense of coherence, everything becomes bland -Zoo park characters: yeah right -Regimented combat: awkward, long, unimaginative, tiring
In my setting, their memetic property of being able to produce viable half-breed offspring gave them social advantage with longer-lived races that had poor birthrates, such as elves and dragons, to the point that in the main civilization your choices of race are "Pick two of Standard Human, Variant Human, Half-Dragon, Half-Elf, Half-Ogre, Half-Dwarf, Half-Pixie, and Half-Halfling." So to be a "pure" human, you're both a Standard and Variant Human.
Warlock vs Crossbow fighter: Pros: Force magic damage vs weapon damage Cons: EB has less to hit bonuses, no ammo variety while anyone using ranged weapons can get +1 bolts for their +2 gun equaling a +3 flat magic bonus to hit and to damage, or arrows of slaying, or who knows that the DM might make.
Also fits with humans' real-world physiological bonus of great stamina; humans hunted most animals historically by scaring or injuring it and just following it without letting it rest until it died of exhaustion. Basically the only wild animals with enough endurance to keep up with us were wolves (same tactics but twice the running speed), which is why wolves became our dogs.
Prof. DM. really appreciate your extended history and knowledge of D & D! I only started playing when 5e was introduced, and fell in love with the game. However, after some 5 years playing, I agree with your points about combat dragging and the game being "too lenient" concerning danger! I watched a lot of Runehammer, and a lot of your vids, which has been a big help to streamline some of the rougher edges of the 5e system. Thanks!
They're moving away from races (aka species) to generic lineages (aka templates). With no more fixed racial ASI and customize your own race, everyone will just be generic blobs.
@@LordJaroh Same. With the custom lineage that is literally just a +2 ability score, feat, and skill proficiency or darkvision, I would rarely if ever use it to make some amorphous, ambiguous mystery race. If I wanted to play the flavor of a tabaxi or elf or dwarf, but still benefit from a starting feat, I would take that custom lineage. For whatever reason, they don’t have the other racial features and developed their feat instead.
@@LordJaroh Yes, this will (in the best case) an individual character. But it also can (will) lead to min-maxing and to some exchangeable adventurer person with an arbitrary backstory.
@@wolfstettler3183 I have been playing 5th for a while now, and none of my characters were generic. Any editions characters are only as generic as the players make them.
THAC0 and ascending AC systems are practically the same thing, just with numbers shuffled around. It's just subtracting difficulty to hit (AC) from attacker skill (THAC0) versus subtracting the attacker's skill (proficiency bonus) from the difficulty to hit (AC) -- yes, I know people usually add the bonus to the die, but subtracting to find the target is the exact same thing. I'm happy to use either system and don't see any practical difference. I don't understand why people think THAC0 is hard -- OK, I sort of do, the explanations were typically terrible -- but the two systems are essentially identical when it comes to actually using them.
Why there are still human kingdoms left is easily explained by the old chestnut, that humans simply outbreed fantasy races, like in most settings. The better question would be, why are there any master craftsmen that are human? Even the best human smith would be outclassed by moderately successful dwarves of elves, because they can hone their craft for that much longer.
time isn't a replacement for talent. You could play guitar forever and still never be stevie ray or hendrix. I think humans are more talented than the demihumans.
@@Dragonette666 I´m 100% certain I could beat Hendrix if I played the guitar for a 100 years of prime physical and mental capability. And I have no musical talent whatsoever. There is something to be said for certain physical requirements. I guess no matter how much I train, I won´t ever beat Usain Bolt at sprinting because he has almost perfect physical features that I can´t learn to have.
@@mittelz5976 probably not. If you have the talent for it you'll be putting together decent songs and jamming almost as soon as you start playing. I've been playing like 30 years, I can go into guitar center and the staff starts handing me guitars to try out lol I have a friend who got me started playing. He can still pretty much only play a half ass version of cat scratch fever.
Re: Inspiration (and tokens), one tactic I have for tracking Inspiration is to have 4-5 extra (bright red) d20s with my other DMing dice. This way I can give each player the actual die they'll be rolling/awarding for their Inspiration rather than a forgettable tick on a character sheet. When not in use, I can use those extra d20s to roll attacks/checks for multiple enemies.
"I swear this by my pretty bows and ringlets, by my button nose and freckles, and by my massive and burly family of farmworkers with their pitchforks, flails, and billhooks! You're goin' down!"
I _love_ attacks of opportunity. (Note that both 3.5 and PF1 have a disengage action, Withdraw, that works well enough, including that it's harder to disengage when you're surrounded.) They increase the tactical complexity of the game in a way that works very well for the kind of game I want to play in and run. But then that tactical complexity and its associated puzzle solving is one of the major things I want from an RPG. YMMV.
In your medieval combat example, the "feint" is the disengage action. Player: "I feint an attack and when he steps back I run away." DM: So you take the disengage action. . .
I agree with the lethality point. Imagine a Barbarian, 20th level, with a high Con and the Tough Feat. We're talking well over 100 HP. Now imagine him being shot by Goblins. It would take 50 arrows to even have a chance of bringing him down. So at level 1 a single arrow is a threat and a handful can be fatal but a year later 1 arrow is ignored and a handful might get his attention?
I'd really like to hear from anyone who's tested out the "No Opportunity Attacks" rule. I think its very interesting and wonder how many classes get hurt by this. Rogue's Cunning Action, Sentinel feat, etc.
honestly, in pathfinder, the classes/monsters who have opportunity attacks is so small, its negligible. In my opinion, this makes combat WAY more dynamic, as they now no longer fear disngaging, and moving around the battlefield. In 5e, it's almost always just melle fighter magnetizing themselves to an enemy and hitting each other back and forth until combat ends. super lame.
@@nickromanthefencer Thats kind of exactly how I have experienced melee combat. I feel like if opportunity attacks werent a thing, the battle would be more dynamic like when Will Turner fights Captain Jack Sparrow in the first Pirates movie. Seems more fun imo.
I highjacked mork borg's 4 stats and made it so casters get an oopsie allowance, rolling 1d4+presence each day. If they fail to cast a spell (DR10+spell level) it costs an oopsie, the next cast is with disadvantage and they roll on a magical mishap chart. The title for casting in my universe is "Spells: As terrible as they are powerful!". Firebolt could turn into fireball or false life could turn into negative health and a pact with Orcus. It has add a tremendous depth to our games. Thanks for the inspiration.
8:27 Most spells already require an attack roll of saving throw, you are just adding an extra tax on casters that you wouldn't need if you allowed feats. You have made other choices that a crippling martial characters.
I think that’s a valid perspective - maybe he could amend his homebrew to add the roll only to spells that do not already have a chance for failure baked in - e.g., roll when casting levitate to see if you flub, but don’t roll when casting eldritch blast, since there’s already a chance to fumble.
As a player of casters going back to a 1st edition cleric, I agree. My 5th edition druid has a finite resource (spell slots). I don’t want a healing spell I cast to misfire and blow somebody up or fizzle.
Rolling for magic = no spell slots manager simulator. You just pick spells as normal and then cast them as many times you want with a drawback of a potential 1.
Given the rest of PDM’s content, I’m pretty sure the idea is to get rid of the saving throw (and spell slots) and *just* use what is essentially an “attack roll” for all spells with a chance for failure and consequence strewn evenly across the board. Cast any spell you want unlimited times, but just know that Nat 1 is lurking around every corner.
" 2 out of 5 characters died " Black Dougal the Thief by poison needle trap. Fredrik thev Dwarf by Hobgoblin. While Sister Rebecca, 'Iron 'Morgan and Silverleaf live on
The best thing about the Black Dougal death is the reaction of the other characters. DM: "Black Dougal gasps 'Poison!' and falls to the floor. He looks dead." Fredrik: "I'm grabbing his pack to carry treasure in."
I agree totally with the sentiment of this game is soft and not nearly lethal enough. My game is different. My players know I don’t WANT to kill them, but they also know the floors of dungeons and caves are littered with the corpses of level 1 adventurers. If the adventuring life was easy, everyone would do it. There would be no taverns, no shops, no farmers. Everyone would be picking up a club and delving into a goblin lair or something similar. My table is not DM vs. Players. But it is not a safe space for your nine page pre-made back story either. My players don’t even name a character till level 2. And I think we’re all better players for it.
In my game I don’t use attacks of opportunity or disengage. If someone wants to leave combat, they just move their character away. If their opponent wishes to continue the fight, they just use their movement to follow and keep attacking (getting a bonus to their attack if the runner is not using their action to defend themselves). I run without initiative so everything happens at once. If you are both moving at the same time and at the end of your movement are no longer in range, then you are considered “disengaged”. So if you really want to get away, you use your action to sprint and get as much distance between you and your opponent as possible. Actions are declared at the beginning of the round and can’t be changed after declaration, so if the opponent declares that they are attacking you and you declare a sprint, it can’t change to sprint to keep after you. It steps forward and swings it’s sword to find that you’ve dropped your guard and used all your energy to get as far away as possible. So far, this has worked great.
I've been playing D&D for over 30 years and compared to 3.5, 5E is a beginners version of D&D. Roll the dice to find out if you live or roll up a new character. I've personally known too many exceptional people to limit attributes to 20 without magical assistance. Rogues or splash rogues were the only ones who could pick locks, but now anyone can take proficiency-lock picks. Anyone can heal now too, because that makes everything easier. The last big game I was in, I played a Drow rogue/druid/wizard/assassin 1/1/3/7 with one magic item, with the 4 level racial penalty. 5E won't come up with a build like this. He ended up taking over a city with a paladin under his thumb.
I'm with you but from the other end of the spectrum as a power gamer. I pick and choose rules from multiple games that add to the setting or story I am creating. Most of these are D20 games so they are relatively easy to translate from one to the other. As for the specifics you addressed: Advantage/Disadvantage: This is the best game mechanic improvement that 5e has to offer. No more looking up bonuses on the Screen and trying to determine which bonuses stack. It's elegant, adds +1 fun to the game, and adds more randomness than a static bonus. Inspiration: My baseline game is Pathfinder 1ed so we use Hero Points instead of Inspiration. Hero Points function differently in different settings (This is always discussed what used to be the first session that has now been bumped to zero). In Uerth, we use the Conan D20 rules, in Middle Earth, Hero Points can be used to make one reroll, stabilize a dying character (no resurrection in ME), or add +20 to a roll, in D20 Modern games Hero Points are replaced by the more plentiful but less powerful Action Points. Spellcasters: I like my magic users to be OP. Its Magic, overpowered is in the definition. In my Middle Earth, Uerth, and D20 Rifts/Dark Tower campaigns there are only one or two full spellcasting classes. All of them use Spell Points the way Psionics use their Power Points. You get the best of both the Sorcerer and Wizard class. But, in Middle Earth your spell selection is limited, and on Uerth, Sorcerer also get an Obsession Rating, as Sorcery is highly addictive, as well as many, many more chances to loose Sanity Points. Sorcerers are generally feared and hated as so many of them are incredibly powerful and utterly addicted and insane. In the Rifts setting, there are no spells yet. The Cataclysm has just occurred and the Earth is super-saturated with magic. So, if you have the ability, you just have to wing it for the time being. I use a modified version of the Epic Spell creation tables and the characters get to add +2 to their Spellcraft checks per spell point expended. The player tells me what they want to happen, I figure out a DC and away we roll. Good times. Too much magic? Well, that works both ways. Initiative: We use one group initiative roll and then add initiative modifiers. One player is designated the Initiative Tracker and everyone gets a turn to roll initiative against the DM. In this way the PC's know the initiative order of their group and can plan accordingly. Hit Points: This is where AD&D comes in handy. You roll hit die up to 10th level. After level 10, everybody gets +1hp +Con bonus per level. My monsters don't get Con bonuses unless they have Class levels. Instead they get a number of hit points per die equal to 70% of their maximum, and bosses and dragons have max HP (Yes, all dragons). Humans Suck: I know (looking at you and your Cauldron, Tasha). My humans start out with more feats. They get regional or class related feats to offset the racial bonuses of other species. This makes Adaptability the main advantage to being human. Danger: Totally agree. This is why I am sticking with Pathfinder as my base. Assassins actually assassinate. High level characters can kill with a single blow. I don't use instant death saves often but they have not been removed as an option. My games are also as game balanced as real life. Which is to say, not at all. In the game I ran for my nephew, the 4th level graduates of the Great School of Magic in Glantri encountered an Old Green Dragon in their fist adventure as adepts rather than students. They were wise enough not to engage in combat and ended up making a mutually beneficial deal with the dragon. If they had chose violence then they would have gotten the gas and ended up as chlorine bleached corpses with dry cleaned lungs. Instead they earned half of the XP for slaying the dragon. In my Middle Earth campaign, if you wander into Dol Guldor, don't expect to walk back out. There is a demigod in there. Be prepared to face multiple dragons if you choose to linger in the Withered Heath on a dare. I also use the critical tables for MERP in my Middle Earth game. They are snarky and add an element of random danger to the game.
I agree, I dont like making my players feel like spoiled brats aka chosen ones. I want them to feel like desperate adventurers at the bottom of the food chain, hired to complete a job. They arent Aragorn or Legolas, they are the extras trying to survive and complete the mission.
You can make the characters feel powerful and have lots of options, while having them fight hard enemies instead of sewer rats or something right from the start. I personally let my players start at level 3 so that they aren't so generalized within one class.
@@markmurex6559 They always fight hard enemies. But they arent strong enough to kill those enemies, without hiring mercenaries, making traps, using poisons. Because they are so weak. They cant video game kill a manticore. They need to kill it as if its real life. Thinking "if manticores existed, how would you kill one"
The current system I employ for initiative is my own version of group initiative. The monsters have a set alert level that is between the minimum and maximum number of players in the party. Each player rolls for initiative as normal, and if they roll more than the DC (usually 12) that counts as a success. They must equal or beat the monsters alert number in successes to go first, otherwise the monsters go first. Also the player who rolls the highest is the leader of the party for that battle and decides who goes when, to try and encourage team work. It seems to work well and my players are enjoying it so far, because each player contributes to the initiative roll rather than one player rolling for the group. Also this allows me to focus on the monsters and not worry about which players turn it is.
One DM does Inspiration points in a way I love. Not only can your character use them but you can opt to spend that inspiration on someone else. Last session people spent THREE inspiration points (each from a different player) on getting the Cavalier's mount to survive an AoE since it needed to max a dex check, it allows the party to bond and be like "nah dude, take it, I'm not letting you fail this". However for each point we spend, the DM gets it back for HIM to spend when he feels like it and he has amassed quite a bit so now we're just waiting for when he busts them out to have his BBEG reroll failed saves, reroll attacks, force us to reroll at disadvantage that sort of thing. So it's give and take because you know you're saving yourself now for more punishment later...
I respectfully disagree with the Human point. They get a plus one to everything, which is good, but mainly I think the variant human option is REALLY GOOD.
When it comes to combat, the 5e Hardcore Mode sounds really good to me. Maybe it's because I'm a huge fan of Dark Souls, or the fact that I love struggling to survive, making success all the sweeter, I wish 5e was more lethal. I have been DMing for nearly 6 years now, and only 3 of my players' characters have died under my watch. Maybe I'm bloodthirsty, but I love the idea of drama and tragedy in a party. Combat should be swift and brutal. And I want it to be an actual threat rather than an inconvenience or a mindless slugfest.
Part of this is knowing your players. I like combat to be the slow-mo blood spray '300' type dark shit. But some players are just Maroon 5 type people. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I sincerely recommend trying out an older edition like the 1980 Basic/Expert set or even the original "OD&D", if only for a one-shot or two. Gives you a good perspective on D&D as a whole, and you might find things to carry over back to 5E... hell, you might not even go back at all :)
Some good points Agreed humans suck Agreed on the spell casting for everyone too I disagree on not deadly enough it depends on the DM and the party and of course the dice
We use Death Markers/tokens. Each time a player reaches 0hp, they receive a death marker, three death markers mean the player has died (needs resurrection, and with each resurrection, they gain a permenant death token (3 means gone forever). A player can receive more than one death token when at zero hp (a monster is able to apply a second death blow, or more, the damage exceeds half of total hp (in the negative. If a player receives total hp (negative) they are instantly dead). Sounds complicated but it is easy once in play. I also give monsters the ability to use “individual monster abilities” like a poison dart that this mob has learned to hide in his pocket for that last throw before death taking someone with them...or a goblin that has learned the ability of magic and casts magic Missile, etc...improving the damage they do and scaring the players into believing creatures have lives and are not all cookie cut copies. When monsters reach zero hp, I roll a save throw against the damage done after zero hp. Meaning most of the time, players will finish the job
I wish they had variant rule sets, I’ve added them into my home brewed edition based on 5th, everything from more gritty and deadly rules, to this is easy mode rules, monster templates, and more to moderate different individual aspects of the games difficulty
If you don't use the con modifier then players would make characters with a low Con. What you could do is have death saves be a DC 15, but add con modifies this roll. :)
Also old timer. Started with AD&D, then Runequest. Now running 5E as DM, have needed to change rest healing to make any level.of threat, and added exhaustion level and possible serious wounds to make 0 HP a thing to avoid. Wish RQ3 was improved... Real danger in combat there.
I recently listened to the Bard from Bardic Broadcasts ("The BEST thing about Heroquest!") interviewed on Questing Beast. He made a great case for death at zero hp, and now I'm converted. Give it a listen.
Why are rats everywhere when a bear is clearly stronger? Humans can adapt to any environment and breed quickly compared to most other races, if elves have four kids on average and so do humans, then by the time one generation of elves has passed turning two elves into four, about ten generations of humans have passed turning two humans into 1024 humans. In the time it takes a small group of elves to expand into a town, that same group of humans could've taken over a continent. And that's why humans are everywhere in massive numbers.
Unless you count orcs, goblins or kobolds, which breed way faster than humans and have better abilities and traits. Besides, the argument here is "How would humans have kingdoms or positions of overall power, if most other species are superior in some way?", which taking your analogy that is why rats don't "rule" over bears, cats or dogs. In the normal rulings, on average every other species has at least +1 bonus on a single ability plus any racial features that go from dark vision to casting spells. Humans have 0 bonuses and no extraordinary racial features. There is the variant humans but it is clearly a meta rule for min-max purposes, lore wise it makes little sense. And seeing how the variants for all other races now make them even more versatile, leaving humans with a cool feat in the dust. Stat penalties were the actual thing that made humans more attractive in previous editions, yes you don't get cool racial traits but you don't have a clear weak point compared to everyone else, and you also got an extra feat. With every race being cool, versatile and pure "pluses", we got the short end of the stick on 5e. Mechanic wise, variant human is good, world-building wise not quite.
I actually think varient human works better lore wise. Humans typically specialise into different things, we can be blacksmiths like dwarves, doctors like asimar, experts of the natural world like wood elves, hardened warriors like orcs, etc etc. The idea that humans can pick a particular thing and get really, really good at it fits us in the real world, so being able to pick any specific feat as opposed to other races which are all similar in their natural abilities makes sense.
Love the channel and all the great information and tips that you provide. In this video when the numbers come up of your five best and five worst the sound level spikes, it's also loud I think when the opening theme song comes up so if there's a way to equalize that or bring that volume down that would be great for future videos
But... Variant Human with that feat though... Plenty of feats could help to put-off those advantages of the other races. Plus, Dragonborn don't get darkvision as a couple of other races don't. There's also Tasha's Custom Lineage, with that you get the option for Darkvision but you can still call yourself human.
i think the real problem isn't that humans *don't* have darkvision, it's that basically all the other race options *do* have darkvision. honestly only drow and maybe deep gnomes should actually get darkvision imo. it's so common that it makes it feel lame if you *don't* have it.
@@nickromanthefencer Well, Dragonborn don't have darkvision. Plus, in darkness all of those races including the Drow are still at disadvantage to notice anything. So, they're all carrying torches anyway. The only schmuck that doesn't need a torch is the Warlock, and that's if they choose to take Devil's Sight as an invocation.
Looks like you hit 60K subscribers! Congratulations! You produce high quality content on a consistent basis. I don’t play 5E often but enjoy watching your videos on how to improve it.
This video has inspired with an idea I am going to throw at my players (PF 2e) within a particular dungeon, because I'd love to see it tested out. You can cast every spell you have, as much as you want, but you roll a d20, you add 1 less than half your proficiency roll to the result (expert +1 to legendary +3, or in 5e, your prof bonus -3, minimum 0, this is my idea that you've mastered the basic spells, because you don't roll if you can't fail, no nat 1's), if the result is equal or lower than the spell level, it goes wrong. Roll a spell attack, vs your own spell save DC, success means nothing happens, failure... I get to have some fun with you. (I realize you could just roll a 50/50 check on a d20, but I like the feel of wrestling your own spell under your control)
variant human gets a bonus feat and skill proficiency , and a feat at level 1 can be quite powerful if its like sentinel or lucky or something.... also, the method to the madness behind lots of hit points was research...they learned that players like to hit so monsters have lower AC and more hit points, but easy way to make monsters harder to hit is to make them find cover
Rolling to cast, with associated penalties for failure, is great. The 'Low Fantasy Gaming' RPG has one for it's DnD related system which ramps up the risk the more often a player casts. Although I tend to prefer WFRP style casting, notably later editions, because no Vancian magic limitations.
Five best things about D&D 5E? These are ideas I've incorporated into my 4E campaign: 1️⃣ Combat advantage/disadvantage roll twice taking better/worst of the two rolls. 2️⃣ Combat disadvantage as separate from combat advantage ~ immobilized & weakened enemies also suffer combat disadvantage. 3️⃣ Feats are much stronger now, the way I envisioned them being back in 3E. 4️⃣ Resistances are half damage, rather than decreasing damage by a flat amount ~ I use both kinds, just to mix things up. 5️⃣ Every class has two strong saving throws ~ in my game, every class gains one of either FORT, REF or WILL that enemies attack with disadvantage.
One thing you said that I think about constantly as a DM is that leveling up is an illusion in terms of power, that the monsters are always going to be as powerful as the players. True, however, in regards to spell casters, its fun to level up and use new spells, some of the spells in 5E are really fun to explore. As a DM I find it fun (and challenging) to trip up my characters with artifacts that thwart their spells, or allow them to use new spells in interesting ways.
One stunt I did was to have an army of ~300 Goblins be on their way to a village, and the lvl 1 characters have 5-6 days to get the village ready to receive the army. At about level 7, I sent them against an identical army of 300 Goblins. The players were able to use hit and run tactics to destroy the goblins, even though they didn't have the days of preparation or the rest of the small village to help out. That showed them the difference in power they now had
I just want to say THANK YOU for making a top 10 list style video that isn't a half-hour long. I mean, I get why someone would want to take time to explain their PoV and all (cough youtube algorithm and monetization, cough), but sometimes I'm just looking to kill a few minutes, not watch people rant on about nothing just to fill time. So, yeah, good vid, keep up the quality content =)
Here are my Top 5 Best and Worst things about 5th Edition. Top 5 Best: 1. Proficiency (Bonus) System: Elegantly creates staggered tiers of play and handles advancement nicely. 2. Backgrounds: Good way to customize a character with proficiencies outside their class or race. 3. Saving Throws: I like how they’re tied to ability scores. It makes all the ability scores more useful. 4. Advantage/Disadvantage: Speeds play and dispenses with a ton of floating modifiers. 5. Conditions: These feel like good common sense rulings with easy application for frequent situations. Top 5 Worst: 1. Too Much Magic: I dislike how nearly all classes have a pathway to magic. I dislike how a Wizard using a Firebolt cantrip is the equal of a Fighter with a bow in combat. I don’t think Wizards should be as involved in combat as much as martial classes. I don’t like the idea of casters throwing spells as bonus actions like a hipshot in the middle of melee. I realize I’m in the minority. Mechanically it’s fine. It’s just a flavor thing I don’t like. 2. Too Many Non-Humans: The 5E human is fine. I just think other races are overpowered. And corny. I don’t want to play Thundercats (Tabaxi), TMNT (Tortles), or Go-Bots (Warforged). Again, a lot of this is my personal distaste for something I see as silly, not inherently bad. 3. Too Much Healing: Short rests, long rests, multiple death saves, tons of healing magic (Healing Word) makes it too hard to die - as much as the hit point bloat. 4. Too Many Player-Side Dice Rolls: I prefer referee-side reaction rolls, morale rolls, and surprise rolls (vs Passive Perception). To me, the spirit of the game is the back-and-forth question and answer interaction between the DM and the players. Player-side rolls like Investigation or Insight can short-cut this kind of exchange. 5. Class Features and Feats: I think they complicate the action economy with a bunch of conditional circumstances and special circumstances that prolongs combat and make the PCs feel like superheroes.
I don't have a problem with humans being mistaken for being weak and boring. More races having Darkvision is boring. Races not having penalties is less interesting.
Dirk lost me a LOT of quarters back in the day. It got to the point I would give quarters to a better player to just be able to watch the game get past the first barrel ride.
I agree! As a DM balance has been thrown out the window! Encounter building is a razor edge to see if my players can pull off a win as they frequently are facing encounters that should kill them. But they like it so I don't complain much. But to see them be a little more cautious at times is nice.
@@svenabel2987 The rest of the races don't fare much better. It's a wild prison planet inspired by the deathgate cycle. Nearly no civilization and swarming with deadly monsters.
Would love to see a video about how you would spice up the magic system. If you're not using spell slots then how would you qualify a spell as a success? On a ranged attack it's easy because you simply have to roll to hit, but what about when you're doing an area attack? Roll your spell save DC to see if it works? Increase the DC by the level of the spell? By how much?
How is the human not a good race? It gets larger stat buffs than every other race, they can put those stat buffs wherever they want, and they can start out with a feat. No other race can do that. They're the perfect race for min-maxers and that's why they're still the dominant species. Like the polearm master paladin with the tunnel fighter fighting style for infinite attacks of opportunity at level 2. Stacked with smite on every hit since smite is not an action and is not limited to once per turn.
I’m waiting for the people who act like 5e is some holy grail that can never be spat upon to come swarming into the comments. Edit: I’m pleasantly surprised to not see any.
@@ImperialValues Oh yeah, that would definitely make sense. My friends and I always used 3.5 for lighter RP, so I could see how someone could take that one step further.
It's actually MORE common to see that 5e, whilst a good game, has faults being discussed. The balancing of classes with short rest vs long rest was, personally, a piss poor choice and I much prefered the way 4e did it with everyone essentially being a short rest character. I know 4e gets a LOT of flak and it did do some things bloody terribly (monsters had waaaaay to much HP which made fights a slog, the constant need to add up all different bonuses for every little thing) but every character having an At will, per encounter and per day powers meant everyone was pretty damn well balanced and you didn't end up with Spellcasters vastly outstripping the martials come high level. The prof mentions he enjoys Wizards being powerful BUT the whole 'you got 1 spell and like 2 hit points' was basically to balance out the fact a high level your were damn near god-like. With 5e Wizards are a touch more survivable now at low level whilst ALSO being god-like at high level. The trade off was IF you could survive to level 5 you'd start to see large gains (the whole Linear Fighters/Quadratic Wizards issue). What should have happened is spell casters should have been buffed at the lower end and reigned in at the upper end instead of just buffed in the lower end. The 'Adventuring Day' the whole game is designed around doesn't work because large amounts of players don't do 7-8 encounters per adventuring day unless it's limited to purely dungeon delving campaign. Meaning Short rest classes tend to get the short end of the stick because they shine in being consistent throughout encounters whilst long rest classes had to save resources for the big final boss of the dungeon. CR is a shitshow, the balance is all over the place, monsters were balanced around a party not having magical items and the Action economy for big solo monsters without legendary actions and legendary resistances is out of whack. An Iron Golem is not a CR13 creature, it's more a CR10-9 creature because a large part of its CR seems to have been attributed to its immunity to non-magical weapon damage.
Can someone explain why disengage is good. You forfeit all your attacks to not being hit (once) when you move out of combat. Then on the enemy’s turn they follow you, move back in combat and hit you, now with multiple attacks (if they have that)
It's official! I'm a friend of the Professor!
Congrats to you both
You’re a friend to all of us dammit!!!
Two of my favorite youtubers
Love you, beige
I love your channel too. You should join the madness in PDM’s FB group
3:55 Disengage
Iningo: Hello, my name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father prepare to die.
Count Rugen: DISENGAGE
And even more possible when you have a six-fingered hand!
Which is what the Count did several times, until he was backed against a wall with no logical means of escape.
Iningo: Move. Engage again, and free attack. Unless Rugen has more movement than Iningo.
That's the action my dad did when he found out about me.
@@youcantbeatk7006 😢
"I wouldn't mind a game that's a little more Motorhead and a little less Maroon-5"
🤣🤣🤣🤣
I agree, but I prefer Wu-Tang style.
Adam Levine is at a pay phone trying to call the professor right now.
WHOA!!! That's a BIG difference! I agree of course!
Does not knowing who Maroon 5 is make me too old school?
@@_sphere_9654
No, it just means that you have been blessed beyond measure.
The extra feat variant humans get makes them a common choice for those interested in particular builds, but if you don’t use that variant or feats, then their bonuses to all scores does feel lackluster
The fun part is whenever there is darkness, the human has to make sure to have a light source. A steady detail that also makes for a great target for opponents
The only alrighty-ish thing about normal human is when you go for wierd-ass multiclass when you want 3-4 stats as high as possible. Which is eh at best
@@mauriceanderson5413 I feel you. I was born in 2e but raised in 3.5 and consequently have a hard time ditching feats, so unlike Prof. DM, I embrace the variant human.
Just ditch darkvision like Five Torches Deep. That definitely helps.
@@Mannahnin that could be interesting, or at least give fewer races dark vision - it was more special in previous editions, but for the sake of simplifying 3.5, 5e folded low-light vision into dark vision - they could have just taken out low-light vision - I think this attempt at simplification had sweeping & unintended consequences - just hypothesizing, but giving elves proficiency with perception, maybe that was enough to mechanically portray their keen eyesight without a new vision type
Over the course of time, and 5 editions, D&D adventuring groups have gradually transformed from a wary and fearful party of exited adventures as in LOTR, into a group of comic-book style bad-ass poser action heroes flying through the air and chopping through the monsters then landing in a tripod stance with a cocky look on their faces. This has been reflected in the cover art too.
Sad but true. So give the orcs class levels in barbarian and fighter, that oughta make em sweat.
true, but you canhomebrew some stuff. i tend to give everyone 1 less death saving throw and they do not reset when brought back up until a long rest, preventing downing, revive, downing, revive, etc. also, e6, only getting to 6th level unless something amazing happens, has a good feel to it. and instead focusing on feat progression.
We play 5E by the letter, and nothing at all has changed about how our games play out from when we were on 2nd edition 22 years ago. It's the audience, not the game.
Totally agree! Been playing since '77. Thank God for my House Rules lol.
It shouldnt be a Supers game :) biggest error of the modern game, they have got confused about the genre or its just feature creep thats got outta hand
A little less maroon 5 sounds like something we all need
"Ok motherfuckers, this one's called, 'She Will Be Loved' 🤟🤟"
When 5e is the kind of game that shows-off full body temporary tattoos at the Super Bowl half time show
Remember how good 4e was. Ahhh the nickleback of d&d
@@whiskeypixels *Beavis and Butthead horrified look*
what is maroon 5?
*slowly walking toward the algorithm with a bloody steak*
"here you go, boy. I know you're hungry." *Drop steak and runs*
You always have to feed the old algorithm!
Feed me!!!!!! Lol
Great points as always....the lack of lethality in 5E is probably my biggest complaint, plus running human centric campaigns is tougher these days.
Can't that be fixed by just balancing encounters a little on the tougher side?
@@godsamongmen8003 Somewhat, I've been scaling up almost everything. But the CR balance post level 5 is all over the map. I like my adventures to be dangerous, but the intention is not to kill my PC's.
Never had a problem with lethality in 5e. Case in point - 5e Rsvenloft campaign lasted for 2 years. By end of campaign, 9 character deaths. Mainly down to PCs not knowing when to retreat.
Or use the Meat Grinder option from Tomb of Apocalypse.
@@thereluctanthireling Little hint here...I know it sucks BUT do NOT give your characters magical items. All of the monsters and their CR ratings are designed without Magical Weapons in mind...yes that is a stupid as it sounds. But the moment they get magical weapons monster balanced around having immunties to certain damage types lose a lot of value on their CR (Iron Golems LOOK tough but...yeah...with magical weapons that immunity to non-magical blunt/slashing/piercing might as well not be there at CR13 because by that point everyone usually has at least a +1 if not +2 magical weapon). The other thing to do is to remove the 'non-magical' part of the text but then that punishes martials and they're already being outshone by spellcasters at that point so...yeah..it's catch-22 because you can bet the Spellcasters wont do the right thing and cast Magic weapon on their weapons because that doesn't give them the 'big numbers'.
Unless you give them a limited use item like blade oils or some such to buff the weapon and turn it into another damage type..which would actually make good quest rewards now that I think about it, a Blue Dragon Blade Salve, bonus action changes your weapons damage type to Lightning damage, same could be done for all the elenents...and yes I am shamelessly stealing this idea from the Soulsborne games.
Fighters use to carry a myriad of weapons before they got a magical weapon. Normally you'd have your standard weapon, a silvered weapon (Lycanthropes), a blunt weapon (usually just a club, they were free in 2e AD&D) and a Cold forged Iron Weapon (for Fey). At the very least you'd carry two weapons of a different damage type, Slashing/Blunt, one for Zombies, one for Skeletons. I mean a Club did 1D6 damage compared to a swords 1D6+1 so it was a viable alternative in a pinch
*Things I like:*
- Starting packages to help give your character backstory and speed up character creation.
- Advantage/Disadvantage is very simple and a great replacement for circumstance bonuses.
- Most classes start to differentiate at 3rd level, meaning you have to commit to really get the most out of your chosen path.
- Many skills that covered similar areas have been merged into a single skill, making it more efficient for the players to become good at something.
- Fighters are more competitive with spellcasters now when it comes to combat.
- All classes now have sub-classes, which is really nice for giving additional options and creating varied characters, although some classes are better at this than others. Tied to this, magic actually affects wizards in tangible ways.
- Secondary poison and disease effects are more varied.
*Things I don't like:*
- The characters seem more coddled due to many small things in different places, some of them detailed below.
- The races' math is weird and convoluted. Loosing ability score penalties means that the races are no longer internally balanced. Instead, they are average at everything and a bit better at 1 or 2 things. However, adding the Default Human on top makes it even sillier, since a gain of +1 in everything means that they effectively move the average. Now everyone is a bit worse than average in everything, except for one thing that they are a bit better than average at. Not to mention a +1 bonus to an attribute doesn't make a difference half the time. In effect, this is scamming the players and making the races feel more samey.
- Specialist wizards no longer pay the cost of having a forbidden school. This, again, makes them average at everything and better at one thing. Furthermore, it makes creating a magical polymath meaningless.
- In general, there never seems to be a disadvantage to taking an option, other than loosing out on a bonus of another option.
- No skill points means that everything is tied to my level by a single number. I could just as well simply add my level to all rolls I make, there is very little customization there. I can't focus on a few things and dabble in a few others, I am always equally good or terrible at everything.
- The disengage action, while seemingly useful, only works when the players/DM allows it to work. Since there is no bonus to movement when using disengage, and because of quantum time, the opponent can simply use their move to step back into range and keep attacking. Had that happen multiple times with my players when enemies tried to run away. Note, I might have misinterpreted the rules.
- Poison no longer lowers your attributes, but instead is just another damage type. This makes it mostly useless at higher levels. It's become a nuisance rather than something that is potentially life-threatening. Even with the nastier ones, it's easier to just wait for the character to keel over and then revive them. This makes high-level PCs even more powerful.
- Tying disease symptoms to long rest rather than any specific time period makes possible this weird situation where players can prevent a disease from worsening by essentially power-napping.
- Many spells are quite useless due to how they have been re-written for the new system. True Strike being the prime example.
- Many spells are way to powerful for their level, especially compared to others. Fireball!
- Rules and guidelines that described how to balance your homebrew are no longer there.
- Death has become even cheaper with Revivify and a lot more ways of healing, which also lengthens combat.
- Many options that were there in earlier editions, like half the cleric domains, are simply missing, and the whole system seems to be geared more toward epic heroic good parties rather than giving options for all alignments and styles of play.
The disengage can be useful to taunt your opponent into following you and hence exiting the threatened spaces of previously adjacent colleagues, thus provoking attacks of opportunity. If you want a speed bonus for getting out of combat then use the Dash action instead (nb. at the cost of not preventing AoO like Disengage would). [All IIRC, IANARL]
Additionally, real military forces do a staggered withdrawal. Bravo squad is positioned behind Charlie squad, then pulls back just far enough to support Charlie squad pulling back, then repeat. Leapfrog style.
3.5 has starting packages...
In regards to martial classes in 5e, especially the fighter, I feel like they've been weakened significantly when compared to prior editions and similar systems. Firstly, parallel XP requirements for both casters and fighters have worsened the "Linear Fighter, Exponential Wizard" issue significantly. While other systems and editions include asymmetrical requirements and an increased breadth of options and powers for martial classes, 5e has neglected this issue entirely. The opportunity cost of choosing a fighter versus a wizard increases massively around levels 6-8, with the variety and utility of spells available being far more useful than a consistent increase in damage. There is a reason why many DMs load players of these classes with magic items and weapons in order to bring them up to the same viability as their caster counterparts. On top of these issues, 5e's HP bloat further exacerbates this power disparity, decreasing martial viability even further.
@@imperialwatch1966 I've seen some pretty insane stuff done by a fighter at higher level (6-7). Check out Chain of Acheron stream, where their fighter has the highest alpha strike damage potential of all characters. And yes, all players have magical items. Still, it might be this is a specific build for this style of play. I agree with you on HP bloat being an issue.
Whenever I play 5e, if I can’t think of a good reason my character concept needs to be a different race, I make a human.
Agreed.
@@harmonicaman79 Truly the vanilla of the Forgotten Realms, itself the vanilla of realms.
I think a video analyzing the changes in art style over the years and how it reflected the culture of the time would be very interesting.
I can't speak to the default human being bad, because I've never seen a default human in a game. The variant human, however, is both the most flexible and the most popular choice I've encountered.
They are extremely good choices for classes / builds that that need 3 high stats to be effective. Such as monk, barbarian, or warlocks that want to use a blade pact without picking hexblade.
totally agree. don't really understand what he means when he says they have no good ability mods, when humans can literally have whatever ability mods they want!
Yeah, I was a little taken aback by this. Human variant fighter is basically a powergamer meme in 5e Adventurers league because you get a free feat and 2 plus 1s, making it arguably the best choice for martial builds, and especially if you want multifeat combos like pole arm master/sentinel
@@erinkelley845 notice... you had to add "variant" to the human. No one plays the "non-variant" human... for simple reason that they get no advantage... at all.
@@MaleusMaleficarum 1. That doesn't disprove my point that lot's of people make human characters for the bonuses specific to humans 2. Base humans can have some rare instances where they are an optimal choice, ie if you want to make a skill monkey Bard or a particularly MAD multiclass and aim for all odd base stats, you can get a bunch of +1 bonuses you wouldn't get otherwise which can make them more viable.
the 5e DMG has optional rules for initiative. one of which is "side initiative" aka group initiative
People who say the DMG is optional are bad people.
@@benvoliothefirst I didn't say that though the DMG literally calls it optional rules
@@deirakos Wasn't talking to you!
@@benvoliothefirst my main problem with the 5e DMG is that it's terribly laid out. CTRL+F is basically a required to navigate the book. So much so that I actually think that the physical version is pretty much worthless just from how hard it is to find anything in there
@@testeteste7274 ...Good thing there's a 3-page-long index? If you compare it to Pathfinder's rulebooks, it's a godsend.
I recently played 5th and I couldn't believe how complicated they'd made the game. No wonder old school is a thing. I'm glad I held onto my old 2e books.
Complicated how? Choose a race, class, and background. Roll stats, point buy, or standard array. Your class and background tell you what gear, abilities, and spells you get. Everything else is a matter of reading the PHB and enjoying the game.
3.5 is the best overall.
I must admit, as an old 1e and 2e player, I found 5e almost incomprehensible when I first got into it. It took me quite a while to wrap my head around it, but now I love it! I do agree with a lot of PDM's opinions, and I have made quite a few homebrew tweaks, but now I have it to the point where I really love it.
8:46, I feel the "Not lethal enough" Is a very common thing, but it's really easy to "fix": monsters, if they can, almost always attack downed characters, at least once, to give the single Death Save. With this almost every fight feels dangerous. As for the "reason" for this, I present you the following: -Intelligent/humanoid enemies are completely aware that healing magic/abilities exist, so they might even double tap, if necessary. -Really dumb beasts always bite down on "the prey" trying to pull it away. -The only Monsters I might not use in this dangerous way are INT 6 to 9 creatures, who can't distinguish between unconcious and dead.
I really like this...........a lot!
@@AgranakStudios Thank's!!! 💪
I was playing a sorcerer who was taken down by these flying stalactite critters that stayed attached to drain blood, their preferred food. The rest of the party was fighting the rest of the swarm while the cleric kept casting Spare the Dying on my sorcerer until the fighter or bard could get over to me and peel the nibblers off.
I hit the two death fail point three times before the fight was over. I was laughing the whole time because the entire fight was due to my sorcerer exploring ahead while the party did a short rest.
IMHO, Making monsters attack downed characters feels like metagaming. From the point of view of the monster any attack that reduces a character to 0 hit points is a mortal wound. Only the DM knows the character can make saving throws. Also, combat situations are fast and furious. We can't expect combatants to waste time making sure each and every opponent are dead before attacking the next one. PCs don't do that, why would monsters?
@@daviddamasceno6063 Well, I explained my reasoning, but if you don't agree, that's okay too ;)
Also I don't know if a DM can really "metagame" 🤔🙈
"Humans sucks"
Variant humans laughing with the best thing in the game, feats
If your DM uses that optional rule. Even then, being able to see your target takes precedence over being able to swing a two-hander harder.
Everyone complains about no dark vision for humans, but light is a cantrip and torches cost a penny. “But it gives you away!” they say. The plated dwarf’s crummy stealth roll does that too. “There are work arounds for that!” they say. There are work arounds for everything, including darkvision, which is a second level spell.
That's if your GM allows feats, and also if they don't houserule or outright ban certain feats. I make CBE and PAM unavailable before 8th level, and SS and GWM are brought more in line with power attack from previous editions, being -prof. to hit, double prof. to damage so as to not break damage balance. This makes them still fantastic options at 1st level, but not game-breakingly so. Not only that, but should you not choose one of the few feats that's actually worth a damn mechanically like the four mentioned already or a handful of others and opt instead for something more flavorful like Dungeon Delver or the new Chef feat, it really feels as though you have hampered yourself and are missing out on some exceptionally strong abilities like the tiefling's fire resistance.
@@gmscott9319 This!
Or if your DM let's you use Tasha's custom creation rules which makes them pointless
That humans suck rant filled my soul like Christmas morning as a kid.
Watching Gandalf and the Fellowship running away Is a very powerful image, a wizard along with some of the greatest warriors of their time fleeing for fear of being overwhelmed . There needs to be more art depicting characters fleeing. I once had to tell my dying players who had already recovered the mcguffin artifact that they should run, they were like “oh! We can do that? We run!” So many players have been conditioned to slaugh it out in sealed rooms that they forget that this is an option
"We are Deathbringer and we play rock n roll!"
"Gooooood evening, Waterdeep!"
I like the high survivability of 5e characters. It means as the DM I can really smack them around. Throw the kitchen sink at them. It also means less time is spent rolling up new characters after they die. Knock the wholenparty unconscious and let them wake up naked and in prison, or on some giant’s barbeque. Makes for a great escape adventure.
Any good torturer will tell you, you can’t torture someone who is dead.
I am also okay with the high hit points. I make my players take the average as per the Player’s Handbook. This way the HP aren’t too high. They can take a few shots but they won’t stand up forever. It also assures that classes that should have high hit points like fighters, barbarians, etc, have the hit points they need to survive on the front lines. Many of the monsters do lots of damage so the HP aren’t an issue for me.
The Professor’s take on Attacks of Opportunity gave me pause. Perhaps I shouldn’t penalize my players for trying to escape from a bad situation. I might discuss it with the group.
Also PDM’s initiative system is looking better and better.
I agree with everything you said.
My largest issue with 5E is the same problems I ended up having in 3.5 they simply begin to release more and more classes/subclasses with variants and often not fully considered rules. It leaves some of classes further and further behind while some get absurd combo abilities that shouldn't work together as they give up nothing to get everything.
Exactly. I don't allow Tasha's in my game because of power creep.
Exactly, its a bottomless Pit. It reminds me of collectibles, or the Sims and its expansions, rather than a comprehensive, solid and self sustained set of rules.
Compared to 2nd edition AD&D, with the copious number of splatbooks, 5E feels tame.
“When Deathbringer met Bargle” has to be a future video!
Bargle must be brought to justice.
Justice for Aleena.
Dungeon #150 - Kill Bargle
do the deed
Ryan Szesny : A DM I played with actually intergrated the Aleena, Bargle, storyline into the campaign. Our groups cleric said his clerical order was related to Aleena's, he vowed to avenge her and we all promised to help bring Bargle down. But the DM pushed the campaign into... a very different direction. Despite our intent and efforts we never ever got the chance to even battle Bargle.
@@ronn-ammon8975 that's too bad. I had started planning it out recently myself. The Mentzer Basic set gives you that first group dungeon and gives you tips and stuff to build extra levels onto it, with the expectation you will eventually defeat Bargle, and a dragon he's allied himself with.
nrais76 : Yeah, hope you and your crew enjoy it. Sounds like a lot more fun than what we got.
I agree that in making D&D more appealing to newer players, they saw the need to make the Characters Heroes from the start. My term is little godlings.
Superheroes
Since I still always use my old books I hadn't realized that 5E doesn't show PCs as victims but wow you're right. That's actually a significant "problem" and explains some expectation disconnects. Edit: There is one exception ; the excellent Condition/Effects arts at the back of the player manual. Which are fantastic.
Maybe that's just marketers recognizing human nature. Most people want to think of themselves as heroes, and the more optimistic "you always win" pitch for D&D probably sells better than the more grimdark pitch.
PCs weren't really "victims" in the older versions. They were brave mortals who faced down terrific odds despite their mortality and with full knowledge that their exploits would likely lead them to an eventual grisly fate but, in the meantime, gold and glory awaited and life was sweet.
Wow did you guys miss the point or don't know what we're talking about. Nobody is saying that the art ONLY depicted PCs as victims. There was a LOT of cool heroic art or epic struggle (almost all of the big, full color splash art was). Just that there was ALSO a ton of artwork in the margins depicting comedic failure (those were great and reminds you it's a game), pcs doing relatable dumb pc things, traps working as intended, monsters sometimes winning and a LOT of pc dying or getting maimed.
Edit: LotFP does have plenty of full color splash art of beautiful PCs getting utterly wrecked though, but that's kind of that specific OSR game signature style.
@@FrostSpike And THAT, good sir, is why I will always love the old editions more. ;-)
Right? It's like no one wants to start off killing some big rats in a basement anymore. And whatever happened to a lone orc guarding a treasure chest?
Taking away Darkvision* from everyone, including monsters, means that everyone is now wandering around with torches and light spells, or relying on the "natural phosphorescence" of the rocks. This will certainly change the atmosphere of the game.
*Things like the Darkvision Spell and Eldritch Sight become really exceptional.
This is exactly what I did in my game. I also nerf all the treasure in the dungeon if they somehow circumvent torch use. Gold just doesn't sparkle in a dungeon without torchlight.
@@ImperialValues Wow! You've found a pair of Goggles of Darksight. Unfortunately, they are 1st Gen, so you can't see into areas of total darkness, you can see okay, but grainy in half-light, and you are totally blind looking into full light.
I personally disagree with most of the stuff the dungeon prof here says, but this is something I agree with, as I limited the abilities of darkvision in my games, and it only works as base darkvision for underdark natives. For everyone else I have a "Lesser Darkvision" which basically is only good enough to notice a cliff edge 5 feet away if you aren't running, or to see something that's literally at your feet. I want it to encourage the use of lighting and torches. In the case of monsters, I give them different abilities like (Blindsight: Smell) where they get a general direction of something smellable until the get right next to it.
My top five totally subjective sins in D&D:
-everybody is a hero and deserve a medal: no risk no thrill.
-there's a rule for everything: killing imagination
-hyper customization: dissolving any sense of coherence, everything becomes bland
-Zoo park characters: yeah right
-Regimented combat: awkward, long, unimaginative, tiring
"Rolling more dice is more fun." *looks at Shadowrun book.
Hold my beer.
Excellent point. I tried playing SR and quickly became irritated with all the dice rolls.
You know you made a great NPC when even Death Bringer misses her :)
i love that you mention Bargle and Aleena.
Bargle forever even if he did kill my first cruah.
Humans have the collective feat "Breed like rabbits".
Humans have deities on their side
@@PUNishment777 In my game, humans have gumption--they get more skills points than any other race and learn things faster.
They also get +6 to their stats, unlike the other races +3. ;)
In my setting, their memetic property of being able to produce viable half-breed offspring gave them social advantage with longer-lived races that had poor birthrates, such as elves and dragons, to the point that in the main civilization your choices of race are "Pick two of Standard Human, Variant Human, Half-Dragon, Half-Elf, Half-Ogre, Half-Dwarf, Half-Pixie, and Half-Halfling."
So to be a "pure" human, you're both a Standard and Variant Human.
As an early 2ed player and DM, I truely appreciate this channel
"A little more Motorhead and a little less Maroon 5!" HAHAHAHAHA!
I heard Motorhead.
@@patrickbuckley7259 You right. Edited. Quick comment typo.
Warlock vs Crossbow fighter:
Pros: Force magic damage vs weapon damage
Cons: EB has less to hit bonuses, no ammo variety while anyone using ranged weapons can get +1 bolts for their +2 gun equaling a +3 flat magic bonus to hit and to damage, or arrows of slaying, or who knows that the DM might make.
I gave my Humans 1 healing surge per long rest. Its supposed be like Boromir standing back up to fight for a couple more rounds.
Also fits with humans' real-world physiological bonus of great stamina; humans hunted most animals historically by scaring or injuring it and just following it without letting it rest until it died of exhaustion. Basically the only wild animals with enough endurance to keep up with us were wolves (same tactics but twice the running speed), which is why wolves became our dogs.
Prof. DM. really appreciate your extended history and knowledge of D & D! I only started playing when 5e was introduced, and fell in love with the game. However, after some 5 years playing, I agree with your points about combat dragging and the game being "too lenient" concerning danger! I watched a lot of Runehammer, and a lot of your vids, which has been a big help to streamline some of the rougher edges of the 5e system. Thanks!
Whilst I do like 5e it is sadly moving to become a game where race and some classes mean very little. Everything ends up being a bit bland.
They're moving away from races (aka species) to generic lineages (aka templates). With no more fixed racial ASI and customize your own race, everyone will just be generic blobs.
@@crankysmurf I disagree. Every player can make their character as unique as they want to.
@@LordJaroh Same. With the custom lineage that is literally just a +2 ability score, feat, and skill proficiency or darkvision, I would rarely if ever use it to make some amorphous, ambiguous mystery race. If I wanted to play the flavor of a tabaxi or elf or dwarf, but still benefit from a starting feat, I would take that custom lineage. For whatever reason, they don’t have the other racial features and developed their feat instead.
@@LordJaroh Yes, this will (in the best case) an individual character. But it also can (will) lead to min-maxing and to some exchangeable adventurer person with an arbitrary backstory.
@@wolfstettler3183 I have been playing 5th for a while now, and none of my characters were generic.
Any editions characters are only as generic as the players make them.
THAC0 and ascending AC systems are practically the same thing, just with numbers shuffled around. It's just subtracting difficulty to hit (AC) from attacker skill (THAC0) versus subtracting the attacker's skill (proficiency bonus) from the difficulty to hit (AC) -- yes, I know people usually add the bonus to the die, but subtracting to find the target is the exact same thing. I'm happy to use either system and don't see any practical difference. I don't understand why people think THAC0 is hard -- OK, I sort of do, the explanations were typically terrible -- but the two systems are essentially identical when it comes to actually using them.
Right. The way THAC0 was put out there it seemed like knowledge of advanced math and a slide rule were necessary =P
Why there are still human kingdoms left is easily explained by the old chestnut, that humans simply outbreed fantasy races, like in most settings. The better question would be, why are there any master craftsmen that are human? Even the best human smith would be outclassed by moderately successful dwarves of elves, because they can hone their craft for that much longer.
we are legion \o/
time isn't a replacement for talent. You could play guitar forever and still never be stevie ray or hendrix. I think humans are more talented than the demihumans.
@@Dragonette666 I´m 100% certain I could beat Hendrix if I played the guitar for a 100 years of prime physical and mental capability. And I have no musical talent whatsoever. There is something to be said for certain physical requirements. I guess no matter how much I train, I won´t ever beat Usain Bolt at sprinting because he has almost perfect physical features that I can´t learn to have.
@@mittelz5976 probably not. If you have the talent for it you'll be putting together decent songs and jamming almost as soon as you start playing. I've been playing like 30 years, I can go into guitar center and the staff starts handing me guitars to try out lol I have a friend who got me started playing. He can still pretty much only play a half ass version of cat scratch fever.
Since elves live so long- why can't they outbreed everyone?
Re: Inspiration (and tokens), one tactic I have for tracking Inspiration is to have 4-5 extra (bright red) d20s with my other DMing dice.
This way I can give each player the actual die they'll be rolling/awarding for their Inspiration rather than a forgettable tick on a character sheet. When not in use, I can use those extra d20s to roll attacks/checks for multiple enemies.
Little farm girl who was friends with Alenna: "Bargle, I swear on my pretty pink bonnet I will end you."
"I swear this by my pretty bows and ringlets, by my button nose and freckles, and by my massive and burly family of farmworkers with their pitchforks, flails, and billhooks! You're goin' down!"
@@euansmith3699 The Level Zero mob is coming
I _love_ attacks of opportunity. (Note that both 3.5 and PF1 have a disengage action, Withdraw, that works well enough, including that it's harder to disengage when you're surrounded.) They increase the tactical complexity of the game in a way that works very well for the kind of game I want to play in and run. But then that tactical complexity and its associated puzzle solving is one of the major things I want from an RPG.
YMMV.
In your medieval combat example, the "feint" is the disengage action. Player: "I feint an attack and when he steps back I run away." DM: So you take the disengage action. . .
that's basically what he said, yes. that's why he said he liked the disengage action.
I agree with the lethality point. Imagine a Barbarian, 20th level, with a high Con and the Tough Feat. We're talking well over 100 HP. Now imagine him being shot by Goblins. It would take 50 arrows to even have a chance of bringing him down. So at level 1 a single arrow is a threat and a handful can be fatal but a year later 1 arrow is ignored and a handful might get his attention?
I'd really like to hear from anyone who's tested out the "No Opportunity Attacks" rule. I think its very interesting and wonder how many classes get hurt by this. Rogue's Cunning Action, Sentinel feat, etc.
honestly, in pathfinder, the classes/monsters who have opportunity attacks is so small, its negligible. In my opinion, this makes combat WAY more dynamic, as they now no longer fear disngaging, and moving around the battlefield. In 5e, it's almost always just melle fighter magnetizing themselves to an enemy and hitting each other back and forth until combat ends. super lame.
@@nickromanthefencer Thats kind of exactly how I have experienced melee combat. I feel like if opportunity attacks werent a thing, the battle would be more dynamic like when Will Turner fights Captain Jack Sparrow in the first Pirates movie. Seems more fun imo.
Just take Monile feat.
I highjacked mork borg's 4 stats and made it so casters get an oopsie allowance, rolling 1d4+presence each day. If they fail to cast a spell (DR10+spell level) it costs an oopsie, the next cast is with disadvantage and they roll on a magical mishap chart. The title for casting in my universe is "Spells: As terrible as they are powerful!". Firebolt could turn into fireball or false life could turn into negative health and a pact with Orcus. It has add a tremendous depth to our games. Thanks for the inspiration.
8:27 Most spells already require an attack roll of saving throw, you are just adding an extra tax on casters that you wouldn't need if you allowed feats. You have made other choices that a crippling martial characters.
I think that’s a valid perspective - maybe he could amend his homebrew to add the roll only to spells that do not already have a chance for failure baked in - e.g., roll when casting levitate to see if you flub, but don’t roll when casting eldritch blast, since there’s already a chance to fumble.
As a player of casters going back to a 1st edition cleric, I agree. My 5th edition druid has a finite resource (spell slots). I don’t want a healing spell I cast to misfire and blow somebody up or fizzle.
Rolling for magic = no spell slots manager simulator. You just pick spells as normal and then cast them as many times you want with a drawback of a potential 1.
Given the rest of PDM’s content, I’m pretty sure the idea is to get rid of the saving throw (and spell slots) and *just* use what is essentially an “attack roll” for all spells with a chance for failure and consequence strewn evenly across the board.
Cast any spell you want unlimited times, but just know that Nat 1 is lurking around every corner.
" 2 out of 5 characters died "
Black Dougal the Thief by poison needle trap. Fredrik thev Dwarf by Hobgoblin.
While Sister Rebecca, 'Iron 'Morgan and Silverleaf live on
The best thing about the Black Dougal death is the reaction of the other characters. DM: "Black Dougal gasps 'Poison!' and falls to the floor. He looks dead." Fredrik: "I'm grabbing his pack to carry treasure in."
@@jamesmansson4757 yeah. Not a lot of grieving. Grab the loot and lets go.
I agree totally with the sentiment of this game is soft and not nearly lethal enough. My game is different. My players know I don’t WANT to kill them, but they also know the floors of dungeons and caves are littered with the corpses of level 1 adventurers. If the adventuring life was easy, everyone would do it. There would be no taverns, no shops, no farmers. Everyone would be picking up a club and delving into a goblin lair or something similar. My table is not DM vs. Players. But it is not a safe space for your nine page pre-made back story either. My players don’t even name a character till level 2. And I think we’re all better players for it.
In my game I don’t use attacks of opportunity or disengage. If someone wants to leave combat, they just move their character away. If their opponent wishes to continue the fight, they just use their movement to follow and keep attacking (getting a bonus to their attack if the runner is not using their action to defend themselves).
I run without initiative so everything happens at once. If you are both moving at the same time and at the end of your movement are no longer in range, then you are considered “disengaged”. So if you really want to get away, you use your action to sprint and get as much distance between you and your opponent as possible.
Actions are declared at the beginning of the round and can’t be changed after declaration, so if the opponent declares that they are attacking you and you declare a sprint, it can’t change to sprint to keep after you.
It steps forward and swings it’s sword to find that you’ve dropped your guard and used all your energy to get as far away as possible.
So far, this has worked great.
In my day D&D was deadly and trauma inducing. And we liked it that way!
I've been playing D&D for over 30 years and compared to 3.5, 5E is a beginners version of D&D. Roll the dice to find out if you live or roll up a new character. I've personally known too many exceptional people to limit attributes to 20 without magical assistance. Rogues or splash rogues were the only ones who could pick locks, but now anyone can take proficiency-lock picks. Anyone can heal now too, because that makes everything easier. The last big game I was in, I played a Drow rogue/druid/wizard/assassin 1/1/3/7 with one magic item, with the 4 level racial penalty. 5E won't come up with a build like this. He ended up taking over a city with a paladin under his thumb.
Thanks for spreading the word of DM Scotty's Luck Dice! Peach and Vanilla Cokes are better...
I'm with you but from the other end of the spectrum as a power gamer. I pick and choose rules from multiple games that add to the setting or story I am creating. Most of these are D20 games so they are relatively easy to translate from one to the other. As for the specifics you addressed:
Advantage/Disadvantage: This is the best game mechanic improvement that 5e has to offer. No more looking up bonuses on the Screen and trying to determine which bonuses stack. It's elegant, adds +1 fun to the game, and adds more randomness than a static bonus.
Inspiration: My baseline game is Pathfinder 1ed so we use Hero Points instead of Inspiration. Hero Points function differently in different settings (This is always discussed what used to be the first session that has now been bumped to zero). In Uerth, we use the Conan D20 rules, in Middle Earth, Hero Points can be used to make one reroll, stabilize a dying character (no resurrection in ME), or add +20 to a roll, in D20 Modern games Hero Points are replaced by the more plentiful but less powerful Action Points.
Spellcasters: I like my magic users to be OP. Its Magic, overpowered is in the definition. In my Middle Earth, Uerth, and D20 Rifts/Dark Tower campaigns there are only one or two full spellcasting classes. All of them use Spell Points the way Psionics use their Power Points. You get the best of both the Sorcerer and Wizard class. But, in Middle Earth your spell selection is limited, and on Uerth, Sorcerer also get an Obsession Rating, as Sorcery is highly addictive, as well as many, many more chances to loose Sanity Points. Sorcerers are generally feared and hated as so many of them are incredibly powerful and utterly addicted and insane. In the Rifts setting, there are no spells yet. The Cataclysm has just occurred and the Earth is super-saturated with magic. So, if you have the ability, you just have to wing it for the time being. I use a modified version of the Epic Spell creation tables and the characters get to add +2 to their Spellcraft checks per spell point expended. The player tells me what they want to happen, I figure out a DC and away we roll. Good times. Too much magic? Well, that works both ways.
Initiative: We use one group initiative roll and then add initiative modifiers. One player is designated the Initiative Tracker and everyone gets a turn to roll initiative against the DM. In this way the PC's know the initiative order of their group and can plan accordingly.
Hit Points: This is where AD&D comes in handy. You roll hit die up to 10th level. After level 10, everybody gets +1hp +Con bonus per level. My monsters don't get Con bonuses unless they have Class levels. Instead they get a number of hit points per die equal to 70% of their maximum, and bosses and dragons have max HP (Yes, all dragons).
Humans Suck: I know (looking at you and your Cauldron, Tasha). My humans start out with more feats. They get regional or class related feats to offset the racial bonuses of other species. This makes Adaptability the main advantage to being human.
Danger: Totally agree. This is why I am sticking with Pathfinder as my base. Assassins actually assassinate. High level characters can kill with a single blow. I don't use instant death saves often but they have not been removed as an option. My games are also as game balanced as real life. Which is to say, not at all. In the game I ran for my nephew, the 4th level graduates of the Great School of Magic in Glantri encountered an Old Green Dragon in their fist adventure as adepts rather than students. They were wise enough not to engage in combat and ended up making a mutually beneficial deal with the dragon. If they had chose violence then they would have gotten the gas and ended up as chlorine bleached corpses with dry cleaned lungs. Instead they earned half of the XP for slaying the dragon. In my Middle Earth campaign, if you wander into Dol Guldor, don't expect to walk back out. There is a demigod in there. Be prepared to face multiple dragons if you choose to linger in the Withered Heath on a dare. I also use the critical tables for MERP in my Middle Earth game. They are snarky and add an element of random danger to the game.
I agree, I dont like making my players feel like spoiled brats aka chosen ones.
I want them to feel like desperate adventurers at the bottom of the food chain, hired to complete a job. They arent Aragorn or Legolas, they are the extras trying to survive and complete the mission.
You can make the characters feel powerful and have lots of options, while having them fight hard enemies instead of sewer rats or something right from the start. I personally let my players start at level 3 so that they aren't so generalized within one class.
@@markmurex6559
They always fight hard enemies.
But they arent strong enough to kill those enemies, without hiring mercenaries, making traps, using poisons.
Because they are so weak. They cant video game kill a manticore. They need to kill it as if its real life. Thinking "if manticores existed, how would you kill one"
The current system I employ for initiative is my own version of group initiative. The monsters have a set alert level that is between the minimum and maximum number of players in the party. Each player rolls for initiative as normal, and if they roll more than the DC (usually 12) that counts as a success. They must equal or beat the monsters alert number in successes to go first, otherwise the monsters go first. Also the player who rolls the highest is the leader of the party for that battle and decides who goes when, to try and encourage team work. It seems to work well and my players are enjoying it so far, because each player contributes to the initiative roll rather than one player rolling for the group. Also this allows me to focus on the monsters and not worry about which players turn it is.
Those bullet point "POW!"s are on point.
Also, Motorhead.
One DM does Inspiration points in a way I love. Not only can your character use them but you can opt to spend that inspiration on someone else. Last session people spent THREE inspiration points (each from a different player) on getting the Cavalier's mount to survive an AoE since it needed to max a dex check, it allows the party to bond and be like "nah dude, take it, I'm not letting you fail this". However for each point we spend, the DM gets it back for HIM to spend when he feels like it and he has amassed quite a bit so now we're just waiting for when he busts them out to have his BBEG reroll failed saves, reroll attacks, force us to reroll at disadvantage that sort of thing. So it's give and take because you know you're saving yourself now for more punishment later...
Motorhead should be the official spirit animal of D&D.
"More Motorhead and less Maroon 5." The wife had to ask from the other room what I was laughing at.
I respectfully disagree with the Human point. They get a plus one to everything, which is good, but mainly I think the variant human option is REALLY GOOD.
His point is that they are boring, not that they aren't good. For a powergamer variant human can be great, but for a roleplayer? Not so much.
@@W1ndF4lc0n I think they are great for a role play heavy player. They can add some great flavour
When it comes to combat, the 5e Hardcore Mode sounds really good to me. Maybe it's because I'm a huge fan of Dark Souls, or the fact that I love struggling to survive, making success all the sweeter, I wish 5e was more lethal. I have been DMing for nearly 6 years now, and only 3 of my players' characters have died under my watch. Maybe I'm bloodthirsty, but I love the idea of drama and tragedy in a party. Combat should be swift and brutal. And I want it to be an actual threat rather than an inconvenience or a mindless slugfest.
Part of this is knowing your players. I like combat to be the slow-mo blood spray '300' type dark shit. But some players are just Maroon 5 type people. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I sincerely recommend trying out an older edition like the 1980 Basic/Expert set or even the original "OD&D", if only for a one-shot or two. Gives you a good perspective on D&D as a whole, and you might find things to carry over back to 5E... hell, you might not even go back at all :)
Some good points
Agreed humans suck
Agreed on the spell casting for everyone too
I disagree on not deadly enough it depends on the DM and the party and of course the dice
Deadliness has decreased if you apply a no homebrew DM and math.
A good DM can make anything more deadly.
We use Death Markers/tokens. Each time a player reaches 0hp, they receive a death marker, three death markers mean the player has died (needs resurrection, and with each resurrection, they gain a permenant death token (3 means gone forever). A player can receive more than one death token when at zero hp (a monster is able to apply a second death blow, or more, the damage exceeds half of total hp (in the negative. If a player receives total hp (negative) they are instantly dead). Sounds complicated but it is easy once in play. I also give monsters the ability to use “individual monster abilities” like a poison dart that this mob has learned to hide in his pocket for that last throw before death taking someone with them...or a goblin that has learned the ability of magic and casts magic Missile, etc...improving the damage they do and scaring the players into believing creatures have lives and are not all cookie cut copies. When monsters reach zero hp, I roll a save throw against the damage done after zero hp. Meaning most of the time, players will finish the job
I wish they had variant rule sets, I’ve added them into my home brewed edition based on 5th, everything from more gritty and deadly rules, to this is easy mode rules, monster templates, and more to moderate different individual aspects of the games difficulty
Variant rule sets are called homebrew
@@erikmartin4996 so WOTC Variant rules in the DMG and PHB are called home brew???!
I think you misunderstood me Erik
If you don't use the con modifier then players would make characters with a low Con.
What you could do is have death saves be a DC 15, but add con modifies this roll. :)
Classic D&D: Death Metal
D&D 5e: Power Metal
@@magyar9479 never played that one
Also old timer. Started with AD&D, then Runequest. Now running 5E as DM, have needed to change rest healing to make any level.of threat, and added exhaustion level and possible serious wounds to make 0 HP a thing to avoid. Wish RQ3 was improved... Real danger in combat there.
I recently listened to the Bard from Bardic Broadcasts ("The BEST thing about Heroquest!") interviewed on Questing Beast. He made a great case for death at zero hp, and now I'm converted. Give it a listen.
Why are rats everywhere when a bear is clearly stronger?
Humans can adapt to any environment and breed quickly compared to most other races, if elves have four kids on average and so do humans, then by the time one generation of elves has passed turning two elves into four, about ten generations of humans have passed turning two humans into 1024 humans. In the time it takes a small group of elves to expand into a town, that same group of humans could've taken over a continent.
And that's why humans are everywhere in massive numbers.
Unless you count orcs, goblins or kobolds, which breed way faster than humans and have better abilities and traits.
Besides, the argument here is "How would humans have kingdoms or positions of overall power, if most other species are superior in some way?", which taking your analogy that is why rats don't "rule" over bears, cats or dogs.
In the normal rulings, on average every other species has at least +1 bonus on a single ability plus any racial features that go from dark vision to casting spells. Humans have 0 bonuses and no extraordinary racial features.
There is the variant humans but it is clearly a meta rule for min-max purposes, lore wise it makes little sense. And seeing how the variants for all other races now make them even more versatile, leaving humans with a cool feat in the dust.
Stat penalties were the actual thing that made humans more attractive in previous editions, yes you don't get cool racial traits but you don't have a clear weak point compared to everyone else, and you also got an extra feat. With every race being cool, versatile and pure "pluses", we got the short end of the stick on 5e. Mechanic wise, variant human is good, world-building wise not quite.
Cue a first level adventure for a party of elves where they have to clear all the humans out of the tavern basement.
I actually think varient human works better lore wise. Humans typically specialise into different things, we can be blacksmiths like dwarves, doctors like asimar, experts of the natural world like wood elves, hardened warriors like orcs, etc etc. The idea that humans can pick a particular thing and get really, really good at it fits us in the real world, so being able to pick any specific feat as opposed to other races which are all similar in their natural abilities makes sense.
Love the channel and all the great information and tips that you provide. In this video when the numbers come up of your five best and five worst the sound level spikes, it's also loud I think when the opening theme song comes up so if there's a way to equalize that or bring that volume down that would be great for future videos
But... Variant Human with that feat though... Plenty of feats could help to put-off those advantages of the other races. Plus, Dragonborn don't get darkvision as a couple of other races don't. There's also Tasha's Custom Lineage, with that you get the option for Darkvision but you can still call yourself human.
i think the real problem isn't that humans *don't* have darkvision, it's that basically all the other race options *do* have darkvision. honestly only drow and maybe deep gnomes should actually get darkvision imo. it's so common that it makes it feel lame if you *don't* have it.
@@nickromanthefencer Well, Dragonborn don't have darkvision. Plus, in darkness all of those races including the Drow are still at disadvantage to notice anything. So, they're all carrying torches anyway.
The only schmuck that doesn't need a torch is the Warlock, and that's if they choose to take Devil's Sight as an invocation.
Looks like you hit 60K subscribers! Congratulations! You produce high quality content on a consistent basis. I don’t play 5E often but enjoy watching your videos on how to improve it.
In memory of Alina, we knew her but a moment.
This video has inspired with an idea I am going to throw at my players (PF 2e) within a particular dungeon, because I'd love to see it tested out. You can cast every spell you have, as much as you want, but you roll a d20, you add 1 less than half your proficiency roll to the result (expert +1 to legendary +3, or in 5e, your prof bonus -3, minimum 0, this is my idea that you've mastered the basic spells, because you don't roll if you can't fail, no nat 1's), if the result is equal or lower than the spell level, it goes wrong.
Roll a spell attack, vs your own spell save DC, success means nothing happens, failure... I get to have some fun with you. (I realize you could just roll a 50/50 check on a d20, but I like the feel of wrestling your own spell under your control)
Are you familiar with Castles & Crusades? I think you'd like it.
variant human gets a bonus feat and skill proficiency , and a feat at level 1 can be quite powerful if its like sentinel or lucky or something.... also, the method to the madness behind lots of hit points was research...they learned that players like to hit so monsters have lower AC and more hit points, but easy way to make monsters harder to hit is to make them find cover
Rolling to cast, with associated penalties for failure, is great.
The 'Low Fantasy Gaming' RPG has one for it's DnD related system which ramps up the risk the more often a player casts. Although I tend to prefer WFRP style casting, notably later editions, because no Vancian magic limitations.
Funny you mention Motorhead. I just shared "Killed by Death " in our group because we were accused of being murderhoboes.
Maroon 5E ... well played, sir!
Five best things about D&D 5E? These are ideas I've incorporated into my 4E campaign: 1️⃣ Combat advantage/disadvantage roll twice taking better/worst of the two rolls. 2️⃣ Combat disadvantage as separate from combat advantage ~ immobilized & weakened enemies also suffer combat disadvantage. 3️⃣ Feats are much stronger now, the way I envisioned them being back in 3E. 4️⃣ Resistances are half damage, rather than decreasing damage by a flat amount ~ I use both kinds, just to mix things up. 5️⃣ Every class has two strong saving throws ~ in my game, every class gains one of either FORT, REF or WILL that enemies attack with disadvantage.
You had me at Led Zeppelin!
I immediately typed the same thing!
Led Zeppelin sux. Only 2 good songs, and they stole everything. Look it up.
One thing you said that I think about constantly as a DM is that leveling up is an illusion in terms of power, that the monsters are always going to be as powerful as the players. True, however, in regards to spell casters, its fun to level up and use new spells, some of the spells in 5E are really fun to explore. As a DM I find it fun (and challenging) to trip up my characters with artifacts that thwart their spells, or allow them to use new spells in interesting ways.
mho they should actually get more dangerous as you level. There should be at least a good reason for the domain level play/ retirement at name level.
One stunt I did was to have an army of ~300 Goblins be on their way to a village, and the lvl 1 characters have 5-6 days to get the village ready to receive the army. At about level 7, I sent them against an identical army of 300 Goblins. The players were able to use hit and run tactics to destroy the goblins, even though they didn't have the days of preparation or the rest of the small village to help out. That showed them the difference in power they now had
5E Sings "I wanna hold your hand. I wanna hold your hand!"
"More Motorhead and less Maroon 5" this made my night.
'More Motörhead, less Maroon 5', perfect description!
I just want to say THANK YOU for making a top 10 list style video that isn't a half-hour long. I mean, I get why someone would want to take time to explain their PoV and all (cough youtube algorithm and monetization, cough), but sometimes I'm just looking to kill a few minutes, not watch people rant on about nothing just to fill time.
So, yeah, good vid, keep up the quality content =)
"More Motorhead and less Maroon 5" Hahahaha, best quote ever!!
Here are my Top 5 Best and Worst things about 5th Edition.
Top 5 Best:
1. Proficiency (Bonus) System: Elegantly creates staggered tiers of play and handles advancement nicely.
2. Backgrounds: Good way to customize a character with proficiencies outside their class or race.
3. Saving Throws: I like how they’re tied to ability scores. It makes all the ability scores more useful.
4. Advantage/Disadvantage: Speeds play and dispenses with a ton of floating modifiers.
5. Conditions: These feel like good common sense rulings with easy application for frequent situations.
Top 5 Worst:
1. Too Much Magic: I dislike how nearly all classes have a pathway to magic. I dislike how a Wizard using a Firebolt cantrip is the equal of a Fighter with a bow in combat. I don’t think Wizards should be as involved in combat as much as martial classes. I don’t like the idea of casters throwing spells as bonus actions like a hipshot in the middle of melee. I realize I’m in the minority. Mechanically it’s fine. It’s just a flavor thing I don’t like.
2. Too Many Non-Humans: The 5E human is fine. I just think other races are overpowered. And corny. I don’t want to play Thundercats (Tabaxi), TMNT (Tortles), or Go-Bots (Warforged). Again, a lot of this is my personal distaste for something I see as silly, not inherently bad.
3. Too Much Healing: Short rests, long rests, multiple death saves, tons of healing magic (Healing Word) makes it too hard to die - as much as the hit point bloat.
4. Too Many Player-Side Dice Rolls: I prefer referee-side reaction rolls, morale rolls, and surprise rolls (vs Passive Perception). To me, the spirit of the game is the back-and-forth question and answer interaction between the DM and the players. Player-side rolls like Investigation or Insight can short-cut this kind of exchange.
5. Class Features and Feats: I think they complicate the action economy with a bunch of conditional circumstances and special circumstances that prolongs combat and make the PCs feel like superheroes.
Prof. DM: "Humans characters are weak and boring"
Variant Humans: 👀
Optional Rule: Uses Feats. Arguably the only way to even have humans in D&D sense 3rd edition, but it is what it is.
I don't have a problem with humans being mistaken for being weak and boring. More races having Darkvision is boring. Races not having penalties is less interesting.
Even without the optional feat rule, which I have never seen not allowed, non variant Humans make the best monks, barbs, MAD, and gish builds.
most spells in D&D require a to hit roll or a saving throw. Some don't but they are they generally have weaker effects too
Dirk the Daring > current D&D
Dirk lost me a LOT of quarters back in the day. It got to the point I would give quarters to a better player to just be able to watch the game get past the first barrel ride.
@@MonkeyJedi99 lol same.
I agree! As a DM balance has been thrown out the window! Encounter building is a razor edge to see if my players can pull off a win as they frequently are facing encounters that should kill them. But they like it so I don't complain much. But to see them be a little more cautious at times is nice.
In my homebrew universe, humans are lobotimized, farmed and slaughtered for meat like cattle.
Calm down satan
@@svenabel2987 The rest of the races don't fare much better. It's a wild prison planet inspired by the deathgate cycle. Nearly no civilization and swarming with deadly monsters.
It's a Madhouse! A madhouse!!!!
I told everyone not to trust those dirty dwarves
@@ronniejdio9411 I think it was lizardfolk running the slaughterhouse last time I ran that episode.
Would love to see a video about how you would spice up the magic system. If you're not using spell slots then how would you qualify a spell as a success? On a ranged attack it's easy because you simply have to roll to hit, but what about when you're doing an area attack? Roll your spell save DC to see if it works? Increase the DC by the level of the spell? By how much?
D&D 5e worst thing? Wizards of the Coast is involved
100% Agee. WotC is going downhill faster that an avalanche
Well, you're not wrong there
How is the human not a good race? It gets larger stat buffs than every other race, they can put those stat buffs wherever they want, and they can start out with a feat. No other race can do that. They're the perfect race for min-maxers and that's why they're still the dominant species. Like the polearm master paladin with the tunnel fighter fighting style for infinite attacks of opportunity at level 2. Stacked with smite on every hit since smite is not an action and is not limited to once per turn.
I’m waiting for the people who act like 5e is some holy grail that can never be spat upon to come swarming into the comments.
Edit: I’m pleasantly surprised to not see any.
You are thinking of the 3.5 only crowd. Easy mistake lol
@@blesper3415 Never seen that crowd, although I assume they’re quite diminished now.
@@jessecollins3652 3.5'ers are folks who like the rules better than RP'ing. And that's okay if you as the DM understand your players' priorities.
@@ImperialValues Oh yeah, that would definitely make sense. My friends and I always used 3.5 for lighter RP, so I could see how someone could take that one step further.
It's actually MORE common to see that 5e, whilst a good game, has faults being discussed. The balancing of classes with short rest vs long rest was, personally, a piss poor choice and I much prefered the way 4e did it with everyone essentially being a short rest character. I know 4e gets a LOT of flak and it did do some things bloody terribly (monsters had waaaaay to much HP which made fights a slog, the constant need to add up all different bonuses for every little thing) but every character having an At will, per encounter and per day powers meant everyone was pretty damn well balanced and you didn't end up with Spellcasters vastly outstripping the martials come high level.
The prof mentions he enjoys Wizards being powerful BUT the whole 'you got 1 spell and like 2 hit points' was basically to balance out the fact a high level your were damn near god-like. With 5e Wizards are a touch more survivable now at low level whilst ALSO being god-like at high level. The trade off was IF you could survive to level 5 you'd start to see large gains (the whole Linear Fighters/Quadratic Wizards issue).
What should have happened is spell casters should have been buffed at the lower end and reigned in at the upper end instead of just buffed in the lower end.
The 'Adventuring Day' the whole game is designed around doesn't work because large amounts of players don't do 7-8 encounters per adventuring day unless it's limited to purely dungeon delving campaign. Meaning Short rest classes tend to get the short end of the stick because they shine in being consistent throughout encounters whilst long rest classes had to save resources for the big final boss of the dungeon.
CR is a shitshow, the balance is all over the place, monsters were balanced around a party not having magical items and the Action economy for big solo monsters without legendary actions and legendary resistances is out of whack. An Iron Golem is not a CR13 creature, it's more a CR10-9 creature because a large part of its CR seems to have been attributed to its immunity to non-magical weapon damage.
Can someone explain why disengage is good.
You forfeit all your attacks to not being hit (once) when you move out of combat.
Then on the enemy’s turn they follow you, move back in combat and hit you, now with multiple attacks (if they have that)
For when multiple are around you, you might have more speed, no guarantee they will follow you, they might incur opportunity attacks themselves
Maroon 5e made me laugh so hard
I have to agree so much!
As a high AC Paladin that has gotten nuked by way to many DEX save spells, yes, DnD is deadly enough.