Your D&D Character Builds SUCK. This is why.
Exaggerated? Yes. Passionate? Also yes.
Your fun is valid. You play however you want.
Dungeons & Dragons and many other TTRPGs like Pathfinder have a "build" problem. But it's not all your fault.
Credit where credit is due:
Art assets at 6:04 by printableheroes
"Airship" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Anxiety" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Chase Pulse Faster" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Fluffing a Duck" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Hall of the Mountain King" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Local Forecast: Elevator" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Long Note Two" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Mysterious March" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Quirky Dog" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Run Amok" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Two Finger Johnny" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Unanswered Questions" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Volatile Reaction" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Winner Winner" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Music: Funny Quirky Comedy by Redafs.com, Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
Banjo Fever by Alexander Nakarada (CreatorChords) | creatorchords.com
Music promoted by www.free-stock-music.com
Creative Commons / Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
You might not know it, but your advice feels very different than other Dnd KZheadrs. At least in my opinion, you bring like Matt Colville level critical thinking to the table, and it's very much appreciated. So - and I mean this in the best possible way - please keep dancing for us, video monkey.
maybe Matt Colville that drank a bit too much coffee...
He's the hopped up 3 AM Matt
He must know this since it seems to be the exact reason he's invested the time to create his channel and his videos. So glad that he made the decision to bring his philosophy on GMing to KZhead!
video monkey omg im dying hahaha
True…but the energy is psychotic. 😂
My DM Side: 'See! We should focus on the fun, not bloated rule sets and build optimization.' My Player Side: (Hisses loudly in optimizer)
Yeah that's not me at all. Not me at all...
@@DeficientMaster "Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game." I have suffered this old maxim as DM and I have being guilty of it as a player.
I once made a clown and chose all his sorcerer spells based on how easily I could use them to replicate clown gags (Shocking Grasp joy buzzer, Blindness pies to the face, etc...)
@@derricgreene Those are easily the best kinds of characters, both as a player and as a DM. I once played a bard that was just a nonmagical dude who worked as a personal trainer in a gym, so all of his "spells" were just training tips and motivational encouragement, maybe some energy supplements. Outright the most fun character I've ever played, no question.
I'm not quite a full-on optimizer, though at the same time Hexadin is basically my favorite build both because of its power (Being able to use my Casting Stat as my Stabbing Stat is kinda crazy) and because I am a complete slut for spellsword gish type builds and it really just handed me everything I could ever want on a platter. Edit: Which, Admittedly. That's a problem that I'm not sure how to handle it. If my magical heroic power fantasy is best brought out by a dumb optimized build, then how do I NOT do something stupid with it?
My wife and I recently started a D&D. One of the players (being completely new to TTRPGs) chose a totally weird, unconventional build: Dragonborn Wizard; main stat: STR At first, the DM and I were like, “uhh are you sure? You might not like that once you learn how this game works…” But then I heard myself and changed course. We should let him decide if it’s good or bad. So far, he was enjoying the heck out of his character, and his character *is* awesome. Who doesn’t love a muscle wizard? After getting past the optimized “correct” way to play, I realized his character was the most interesting and memorable in our party. It’s especially easy to tell someone they’re playing wrong when they’re younger or less experienced. Just remember that they’re ALSO less funneled into certain ways of thinking. New players can be super refreshing 😊
I'm really curious now! How did the player play his Dragonborn wizard? I'm curious to hear some anecdotes and stories!
@@cubescihist6737I'm playing a Githyanki abjuration wizard no multiclass and it works well. Armor and swords are enough to make him decent on the front lines and magic just enhances the experience. The arcane ward makes it so keeping concentration spells up easy. But most builds can be viable if you put a little time and energy into it
This resonates. A little over a year ago I got invited into a (5e) D&D group via a mutual friend. I wasn't new to TTRPGs (my first session was in '89, and I gamed extensively through high school, college, and into the early 2000s - but in all that time I'd never actually played D&D. I was joining a campaign that had already started, so my character didn't appear until episode (session) 10. I really had no idea what I wanted to play, but I found out what everyone else was playing and tried to slot into a relative void in class/abilities. Despite there already being a rogue in the party, one of the first and "stupidest" concepts that popped into my head when looking through the options was a Swashbuckler (soon to be) ex crew member on a pirate ship who probably had a higher opinion of her own notoriety than anyone else in the world. She also happened to be a Centaur, and as a Rogue, also had *no* proficiency in stealth. Or Sleight of Hand, or most of the other typical "sneaky Rogue" skills you'd commonly expect. At best she had middling combat skills, but where she truly excelled was in things like Perception, Persuasion, Intimidation, and Deception. Her approach was more, "Why do all the work when I can get someone else to do it for me?" She was, essentially, more like a Bard than a Rogue, but the idea of a semi-incompetent "seahorse" amused me greatly. Despite that, I initially discarded the idea because it was "too silly", and felt like I had some weird "responsibility" to bring a more useful character to the table. She wouldn't go away though, she stuck around in my mind and no other more practical concept I could come up with connected with me as a player nearly as much, so in the end I decided to go for it. She's been an absolute blast to play, and for the longest time kept most of the other players guessing and trying to figure out whether she was a total idiot, or actually *really* amazingly skilled and just hiding it. We're 52 sessions in now and only recently have they truly started to figure her out. She's impulsive, at times flighty, reward oriented - except when to everyone's surprise - she's not. On a random whim one session (after the party seemed to find themselves surrounded by fire after each major battle) she started carrying bags of marshmallows around with her, and she's been passing them out to random people she meets as the party makes its way across the game world. It was only when she recently reached level 9 that she acquired proficiency in stealth, after being absolutely terrible at it up to this point. The in-game joke is that she *finally* realized that just because she can't see them, doesn't mean they can't see her. She constantly refers to the group's Ranger (who seems to be obsessed with trees) as, ""The weirdest Druid I've ever seen." It's something we've all just had fun with. She's so far from an optimized build it's borderline criminal by today's gaming standards, but she's SO MUCH FUN. Not just for me, but for everyone else in the party as well, because when she runs off and does something stupid we all (including myself) only know it's either going to be an absolute disaster, or completely awesome - but it's going to be interesting either way, and that helps drive a LOT of RP. Combat-wise, yes, she's fallen into a bit of a rut, but I've viewed that as playing more to her strengths than anything else. She has a shortbow for range, but with her increased speed (50), her bread and butter is, and always has been, hit and run tactics, where she'll close to melee range, attack with her rapier, and then dash out of range again before they can counterattack. But even then, she'll be creative as needed - recently when fighting a Big Bad in a blinding cloud, she pulled the necklace of fireballs with its two remaining charges off of her neck and threw it to the ground in front of her, where she could hear the target but not see it. Anyway, I'm rambling - but YES! "unconventional builds" really are the most fun, IME. Steamrolling everything with a perfectly planned and optimized build is fun for a little while, but gets stale quickly. I love that even I have no idea how what my character does next will pan out. Heck, half the time as a player I find myself saying, "This is incredibly stupid and is probably gonna get me killed, but it's what she'd do right now", and that has resulted in some of the most tense and emotional and memorable moments in the campaign. Despite all of her flaws, or more precisely *because* of them - she's the best character I've ever made or played in all my years of tabletop gaming. The only thing she's optimized for is fun - and that was the result of taking a "silly concept" and running with it, throwing all planning to the wind, and letting the game and story drive her growth and skill choices as she gains levels. It's never about choosing "what's best mechanically", it's about "given these options and her experiences, what would she do?"
Muscle wizard is near the top of the list of things I want to play if I ever get out of the DM chair. The concept is a farmer's son who just happens to be maaaaaybe the smartest kid in a small community, which isn't saying much, but the resident hedge wizard needed an assistant and at least one parent was willing to let their son hang out with the weirdo.
@@Flyingbrickyard wow! That’s a fun ramble! It’s obvious you’re really enjoying your goofy character. Imperfect characters have so much more …character. More memorable and engaging. :) I especially felt this quote of yours: "This is incredibly stupid and is probably gonna get me killed, but it's what she'd do right now.” Our muscle wizard is the 10 yr old son of other players, so when his character approached an obvious trap with gold as bait, everyone yelled, “NOOOOOO! Timmy, DONT DO THAT! Come on! If you want to play, you have to remember you’re part of a team!” etc. Then he pointed to the (often under utilized) “Flaws” section of his character sheet, where he had written, “would do anything for gold.” I had to stop the uproar (mostly from his parents and older sister who interpreted his actions as “typical Timmy” bullshit) to commend the kid and say, “no he’s right! And it’s awesome that he knows his character that well!” So the trap is sprung. Indiana Jones bolder accelerates toward him. No where to hide, he strikes a strong man pose to catch the massive rock. Rolled 1. Flattened. DM has the death talk, and explains death saving throws. Rolled 20. Muscle wizard re-inflates like Wiley Coyote, and hops back on his feet lmao All said and done, DM awards inspiration to Timmy for playing his character well. 😂 I doubt we’ll forget that, especially Timmy!
I think one big reason players end up focusing on character builds is because that is their version of "lonely fun." The reality is that most folks spend less time actually at the table playing than they'd like due to life, work, and other responsibilities. So, most of us spend more time engaging with the materials of the hobby in our free moments alone - but that "lonely fun" is vastly different for the GM vs. players. The GM's solo engagement with the game world covers so much more - the setting, all the NPCs, the factions, the events in the world, all the mechanics, all the PCs, etc. Their portal into the game world is expansive because they're handling/creating everything of interest behind the curtain. On the other hand, a player's main portal into the world when they're away from the table is much narrower - basically just their character. I think this is why players fall down the "build" rabbit hole - that's what they have access to engage with when they're looking for some RPG "lonely fun." This is why I prefer being a GM. Both at the table and away from the table my brain needs more to stay engaged. My lonely fun is an entire world rather than just a single character. I got back into "D&D" a few years ago through a wonderful rules-light game called Knave created by Ben Milton over on the KZhead channel Questing Beast. Having no classes was liberating because it highlighted the fun and freedom of "tactical infinity" in TTRPGs. It was more immersive as a player and a breeze to run as a GM. Because it's so lightweight it was easier to get to the table with less prep and overhead. Two thumbs up for more rules-light gaming 👍👍
echoing the "lonely fun" perspective! i'm a newer player that hasn't gotten many chances to actually play the game at a table and so most of my time engaging with this hobby that i've fallen really quickly in love with has been character creation. i felt really called out by the opening of the video because i've been so desperate to find a group to play with i've been making characters almost non-stop to quell the itch, and i already know they'll likely never see the light of day. what hurts even more is getting all these ideas for character "builds" but never feeling quite satisfied with them because they're made in a vacuum; there's no world to go by and no campaign to attune them to, so if anything they end up feeling flat
You make a good point about builds being a way for players to engage away from the table. It’s sort of a chicken-and-the-egg thing with relation to content aimed at players. There are LOADS of KZhead videos, for instance, about the myriad ways you can improve your DMing skills, but scant content about being a better player. It’s an area ripe for exploring, I think, but we’d have to look at the engagement numbers. There are so many topics - how to support your fellow players, in game ways to show your appreciation for all of your DM’s hard work, how to engage with the campaign world, how to build a backstory that supports play at the table, roleplaying tips to make your character stand out, etc.
yep and their are even some dms that take away your ability to make your backstory or ignore it completely so the only things you have is combat growth
Great take also can we get rid of the term “ lonely fun” I used have so much fun reading or playing video games by myself or KZhead or whatever I just hate that term it makes it feel like it’s a less valid form of fun.
I'm old school and from the 1E years. Lonely fun. I would call my existence back then as a forever DM exactly that. I grew to love my lonely fun. It was lonely though. Even if it was fun and frustrating and exhausting and wore my creativity down to exhaustion. Game time as a forever DM after weeks of lonely fun? It NEVER turned out as I thought it would. The dice disagreed with me. The players thought of stuff I hadn't expected. The 1E set was very explicit in many of the rules and there were MANY taboos to sidestep or keep holy. Halfling wizard? Forgetaboutit. 15 level Elf Magic-User? No way. Humans: Dual class. Demihumans: multiclass. That was carved into stone.
Ya know, you’re the first “anti-optimization” person I’ve seen that didn’t just respond with some variation of, “wHaT dO yOu ThInK tHe Rp StAnDs FoR???”, and I respect that. Your insight makes a lot of the changes over time make a lot more sense. Funny thing is though, I solved the problem for my group with copious amounts of duck tape lol. All of us, including me the DM, are min-maxers. In my current campaign, everything is almost as strong as they are, and we are using the custom crafting rules from Xanathar’s. I’ve seen more creative play in this campaign than many others, just because the players have the option to use new tactics, train abilities, or build equipment in response to an area’s specific threats. Overall, this prevented the “mid campaign boredom” because it was impossible to solve the game. The main weakness of this solution is that it requires a lot of time to do right. It definitely won’t be a good solution for incredibly busy people. lol that’s it for my Ted Talk. Love the videos my guy, keep up the good work👍
I'm still getting only, "I yuck your yum," just with good presentation and editing; he still talks down to people. I actually quite admire the OSR playstyle and I understand how it turns a _lack_ of rules into agency; the only thing stopping me from getting into it is OSR _gamers._ Some of them seem to be under the impression that modern games with intricate buildcraft are some sort of anomalous quicksand into which players got stuck in by accident, and if only they could pull these victims free they'd all instantly understand _true_ roleplaying.
@@ikaemos ever thought that maybe they were right and you were wrong ? Just asking for a friend... (-; 🎯
Imagine Playing some kind of Role in this Game
@@ikaemos Yeah, his humor can be abrasive, but he at least provides reasons why he thinks the way he does. I kid you not, the 7 or 8 times I’ve asked people why they don’t like min-maxing, they’ve all said, “because it’s a role playing game.” No elaboration at all. At least DM makes points, even if it’s with snark lol.
Hey. You’re really fucking good at this. I don’t know if you had KZhead channels before this or work in video production in another realm- but you bring so much personality and knowledge to a wonderfully, tediously crafted but effortless feeling video! So just, yeah, it’s great, thanks for sharing it with us. :]
Oh wow you're like... a REAL KZheadr.
@@DeficientMasterand yet you’re still better at it after like 3 months!! 😂😂
@@DeficientMaster Brizzy is amazing 🥳✨
people would hear someone speak earnestly and from the heart and think "wow, he's a fantastic entertainer, i bet he has tons of experience acting"
@@DeficientMasteryou're so good that I bit my hand a few times.
I understand your frustration! My first DM ever unintentionally saved me from builds. In 2012, when I was in 8th grade, my friend introduced to me dnd 3.5 (and partially 4e). We were exited to play together, but I had a language barrier. Everytime when they tried to explain rules to me, I was confused. So they simplified the game for me to it's maximum: I was required to tell what I want to do and roll a d20. Nothing else! I asked to be an elf druid - sure! I asked if I can turn into an animal - sure! I asked if I can do it multiple times -they said no, once a day and tried to explain the rules. I didn't understand, but I agreed. They sighed and told me that i can wildshape as many times as I can. That is when I got that spark!!! Even though I barely remember these oneshots, I remember how much FUN and CREATIVITY there was at the table CONSTANTLY!!!
This was me as Meen Meen Nups. "You're a Gungan Jedi", was all I needed at the time. Then I play a few more sessions and look up all the listed Force powers and Lightsaber related feats and now I'm using Force Slam and Force Lightening every chance I get.
It's funny, that grognard type of play you described, where every object is a tool, is _exactly_ how I like to play. My current character, a Fighter/Rogue who's going to take a few levels of Bladesinger Wizard next, is made to do _exactly_ that: Use traps, items, tactics and general ingenuity to win. I took the level of Rogue to get Expertise in Thieves' Tools (for trap-making) and Investigation (to uncover as many monster facts to exploit as possible). In a recent fight against some witches, we tried to take them by surprise, but they noticed us and got a higher initiative. So, plan B: Set their lair on fire using oil, a lantern I made sure was lit beforehand, and Action Surge. They were busy using their lair actions keeping the fire in check and had to leave the lair to fight us. But I also really enjoy Builds. My reasons are not because I want to be a power gamer, but because they help me realise my character concept WHILE still being effective. I never stick to a build, I only take its interesting ideas and use them for myself. And to that end I really appreciate Colby of D4: Deep Dive's approach of pushing the concept to its limits, because it lets me alter it while keeping a decent level of effectiveness AND gives me the most amount of tools to use. A Build, for me, is a proof of concept. Not the character I want to play.
There is something immensely satisfying in creating a character whose toolkit reinforces their story and concept. When your abilities allow you to demonstrate the core ideas of the character mechanically and thematically. Wonderful stuff.
I had the exact same problem. My answer was a different ruleset. Found Basic Fantasy. Everything is free in PDF download, and if you WANT a physical book it's sold at cost. Very basic and rules light. It's not for everybody, but I liked it and as a father of 3 it worked for what I needed. Hopefully, should people hit that point, they can find the solution for them.
Basic Fantasy is an amazing game. I can not recommend it enough!
My suggestion is a different game entirely, instead of just a different iteration of D&D. Chronicles of Darkness, Blades in the Dark, Dogs in the Vineyard, Shadowrun Anarchy, something like that.
@@AspelShuyinsome people would rather stick to a setting or aesthetic though, and different games do different things in that regard.
I second Basic Fantasy. I just started playing through the Morgansfort adventure with my wife and kids on Sunday and had a blast. I'm not a fan of D&D (specifically the IP) and generally prefer Savage Worlds as my go-to RPG, but BF seemed simple enough to play and I had a blast running my family through the first couple rooms of the Olde Island Fortress. I think my favorite thing about it is that all the players need to choose are their race, class, and equipment and they're ready to dive into the dungeon. I supplemented with a few additional races and classes, then threw them into the adventure.
I've played a few sessions of it, and honestly, while I dislike the system (due to it sharing the bones of other old school games), I did at least appreciate that I could ignore the parts I didn't like unless they were specifically relevant. My suggestion in this camp is actually Castles and Crusades, as it was just inherently more fun for me due to feeling like there was more feedback between the game and my character's abilities
As a longtime, now retired 5e DM, I feel so seen.
Same. This speaks to me lol
For real, it's so cathartic. Switching away from D&D and similar systems in favor of more narrative ones recently has been a revelation.
Ditto, dude. I literally posted this on Reddit and got roasted. But damn, this is so well explained compared to me!
Same! Honestly, I didn’t even fully understand my feelings on this until this video. Now understanding them, I am going to try something new: I am going to get a group of players together, tell them about the world(its magic, technology, gods, etc), and tell them to have a very good understanding of who their character is. I will give them each 6d6s, and then whenever they need to roll, what they are doing is described, and then they determine how many dice to roll, coresponding to how good they think their character is at that task. The rest of the table, and especially the GM, is there to double check them, and make sure they are consistent. The GM sets a difficulty for the action by determining the “depth” and “width” of the task. The depth is the number that a die has to roll above to succeed, and the width is the number of dice that have to succeed for the player to succeed. I think this needs a good deal of maturity and experience from the players and the GM, but it forces players to think outside the box because there is no box to think inside of. It also allows for players to tell stories with their characters rolls by adjusting(usually subconsciously) the number of dice they roll for certain actions(with GM supervision). I don’t know if it will work well, but it seems to address both my problems with the system limiting player creativity and the players limited ability to affect the dice to tell their story.
If you don't play dnd then what other systems do you try? I wanna get into something new
As someone who's only getting into D&D now, this video is super helpful. Having seen the optimised builds videos, I can't say they appealed to me very much. I can't imagine playing a role-playing game and making character build choices centred on optimisation rather than what your character would want, even if it's somewhat sub-optimal. Just found your channel, and I absolutely love it, been bingeing all your videos
The stupidest thing about builds is they are so theoretical and don't take into account that in order for your power to 'really COME ONLINE' at level 12 you'll have to be playing a game for maybe a year+ with a set of mechanics you have no real attachment to and half functional power combos that won't do the cool thing you want them to do for another 6 months, that's the main reason I've seen these build-monkey types get incredibly bored. They didn't come up with it themselves, they just followed a guide online and they barely understand it
Optimised build videos are to role Play what painting by numbers is to art.
@@PlotsAndPoints this is why I like complexity in character creation (haven't played yet but Pathfinder seems good for it). Otherwise, I like a simpler, lighter rule set.
Y'all need to realize that other, less shitty RPGs exist.
@@robertschroeder9858 Pathfinder is not nearly as complex as people make it out to be or as crunchy (at least 2e); it just has a lot more options. This _can_ be crunchy optimization but it's far more built around being able to express a character in so many ways. It's great.
A big whole in this video, which I wish you cover, is the adventure style itself. What the table concentrates on. If combat is taken out, what would be the majority of time in the session be taken up by. It’s maybe themes like Blades of the dark, a lot less combat and more thief guild missions from Skyrim. A more social/intrigue/faction play session? Please make a video showing what Would be happening for 3-4 hours if combat did not time sink. Paint me a picture mr piano man, paint me a dream
That all depends, but in games where there has been 0 combat, I've done everything from spend 4-5 hours in a near real-time conversation with NPCs (usually at important parts, like talking to a ghost for a quest, or interrogating the BBEGs right hand man.) to doing weeks of downtime and RPing multiple small scenes with every party member doing something different. It could also be skill challenges, like a whole puzzle/trap dungeon, or chasing down, tracking and trying to capture a bounty.
What whappened to the whole?
I didn’t even know combat was required in dnd till my third time playing. I thought it was a role playing game which could have action.
The simplest answer here is more encounters. If each encounter is taking 45 minutes to an hour, imagine all the stuff you could get done if each encounter only took 5 to 10 minutes.
There's this thing called role play. My current group I DM just had their first combat in 4 sessions. Plenty of dice were rolled in each session but it wasn't focused on fighting, it was focused on being in the world and figuring shit out as their characters.
On the topic of character optmization, even though I'm waaay more of a player interested in creating a nice story, most of my tables were alongside newbies or first-timers, so while creating my character I've usually felt like an optmizer since I've knew more about the system and there was some things I'd never pick up since I know they're useless/don't work well. Then, one day, I played a oneshot with a friend where I showed up with a fun and interesting character but with well tought sheet thingies; meanwhile, this friend's friend was presenting his character and he had like 3 different classes, where he stitched a chaotic backstory as to make some sense of that, all of that so... He could heal a lot of HP with Goodberry using feats of said classes. When he explained that I was like "Oh. OH. So apparently I've never been an optmizer at all." I had no problem whatsoever with that, but I couldn't help but wonder why he was doing all that effort and spending time to play a TTRPG when he could obtain a better result just playing any RPG game on a computer or console.
I do actually like character builds, but only when they’re focused on playing out the fantasy of a certain character instead of trying to break the game. For example, I create characters to learn the rules of RPGs, and made one in Vaesen yesterday. I wanted to make a pugilist/boxer character, so I focused my efforts on doing that while also thinking about what else a character like that could do. The build was really good at unarmed fighting, but not to the point where it broke the game (I think, haven’t played Vaesen yet but it’s on my list) because that’s the fantasy I wanted for my character. I like builds because they can differentiate a character and showcase their personality through how they fight. I hate multiclassing for the same reason.
Yeah, there's a difference in trying to make THE BEST CHARACTER EVER and just having a specific vision in mind and trying to do that vision particularly well. In a current game, I'm playing a pugilist boxer/wrestler whose also a tank. Obviously I want to pick feats to be a good tank because my character is supposed to BE a good tank, but it's also important to remember people aren't defined by one thing so she has stuff unrelated to tanking to round her out.
@@amelialonelyfart8848 The pugilist class by Benjamin Huffman? Thats one of my absolute favorites! Played the dog subclass one time and had a lot of fun.
Literally the type of character I've been working on, tanky grappler/ pugulist that I'm focusing solely on that fighting style, which I worked into his BG. And the main thing I love about my dm is that he allows homebrew stuff, like I usually enjoy perusing the dnd 5e feat wiki to find specific types of feats that can make my character both a beast in combat but also fun for role play or passive buffs like a +5 on passive perception bc he's been on the run for decades and got a habit of being more paranoid type of thing
This is funny, because I've seen the exact opposite complaint within MMO forums about Theme based class design verses role optimization based class design. For those wondering, most of its coming from Guildwars 2. "E-spec sucks because other E-spec does the same thing with less steps". And it got worse over time as more of the old WoW/WoW-clone player base made their way into game, along with some of the Ex-Blizzard Raid designers. Every class in the game is pretty flexible from a role perspective, but Raids ended up codifying roles build metas, due to several buffs that started out unique, but ended up being distributed to each class. So in an ironic twist, by giving each class access to similar group buffs, it ended up making specific classes "better" at the job, and causing alternatives to be ignored 90% of the time. It ignores so much of what the game does well, because Raids are too focused on total DPS output; which in turn causes the meta to get hyper fixated on things that boost DPS metrics. And to break that habit, you'd have to design class specific side mechanics for the raids..... which eventually get broken by players figuring out a design flaw, or the class itself changing in a balance pass. I can't express how sad this makes me, because when the game first added formal raids 2 years into its life, the singular meta Tank build came out of the Mesmer, which is famously a top PvP duelist class, due to strong 1v1 capabilities. It didn't even need a healer to back it up, since it just avoided taking damage. But whats most insane, and why I love bringing it up, is that the Chronomancer E-Spec (designed and added specifically for Raids), exposed a design flaw in conventional Raid Comps that enabled 1 Chrono Mesmer to compress 3 roles into one build. Boss Tanking, Group invulnerability (aka Panic button), and group DPS increase by way of 2 AOE buffs, Quickness (Attack Speed) and Alacrity (Cool down reduction). It was supposed to be a support build that only really added Alac and Quickness; but since the core trinity designs demand a Tank to control the boss, it makes sense the class that was already good at avoiding damage in 1v1 scenarios would be a competent tank.
@@freelancerthe2561 I mostly agree tbh. As much as I like unique builds, I very much prefer most of your abilities come from a central class or other defining set of features. I drastically prefer TTRPGs with classes (and especially lots of classes) because it makes your character unique and gives them a niche. I think character expression works best when a character falls under the banner of a class while having some variation under it (which is something 5E actually does really well with its subclass system). It’s also a reason why the new edition isn’t looking very promising, since they’re marginalizing all the classes and giving them copy paste features like extra skill proficiencies and whatever the hell the weapon mastery system is.
What a treat and worth the wait! A 17 minute video!!! I got super excited when I saw that, and you did not disappoint, sir. It must have taken you forever to plan, animate and edit. Thank you for the opinions, the knowledge and the fun!
“They all picked one of the blue ones!!!” I didn’t expect to be personally attacked
Whilst I agree to an extend, it does simply boil down to this: Every person has their own preferences about what to get out of a game of DnD, you just gotta find people that have those same big lines in common. Love party dynamic RP and social encounters? Play with similarly minded people and DM, the internet is here it's easier to do so than ever.
I don’t mean this perjoratively but you really might just have more fun playing a war game. Some of them have continuing narrative for a whole war, and you can make a whole backstory for your army. You’ll know *for sure* that your opponent has the same goals as you for the session even if you make a backstory and they dont
@@andrewenderfrost8161and I'd reply that :not everyone wants to deal with an army , some people want the fantasy of the skill focused single character who is an expert due to the math elements ...the idea it's got to be a war game who fulfills this role is simplifying the views of ops /others and forgetting not everyone wants to play pvp but pve with ever increasing odds. I say this as someone who's very much into the T'au but not into the fact that the meta of war games have them focused to units I don't like at all and that I have to pay or print in order to use instead of *Puts down a single figure* here's my fire caste warrior who's stuck in a crazy situation where he has to get back to his sept after accidentally getting trapped on ship that got shot through the warp to the other side of the galaxy from T'au space, I'm here with a sister of battle, a guardsman who was about to be up for inquisitor and a mechanicus...and did I mention the system we find ourselves in is one of mostly Ork and Tyraids battling with some Eldar presence? Mind you that's my custom hack of Rogue Trader with a touch of Only War
@@andrewenderfrost8161 not really the same thing as a roleplaying game tho, as adjacent as it may be
@@andrewenderfrost8161 being the general of an army isn’t quite the same as being a individual that has to deal with conflict in a tighter scale.
I'll do you one better- Literally just play something else. Since 3.5ed D&D _specifically_ has encouraged this sort of thing. Want to avoid it? Play literally any other RPG (that isn't Pathfinder) and go ham.
Brilliant vid as always! I’ve been having a lot of fun with 5E atm after 2 home brew rules. The first is long rests only being available in cities and inns which completely changes any ‘balance’ seen in online builds since everyone’s resources are stretched over a much bigger time period. The second is using ‘hero points’ whenever player do anything cool or creative. Hero points can be spent in varying quantities to let players bend or break the rules to actually do whatever they want. They reset to 1 at the start of each session so everyone’s encouraged to use them as often as possible. In my game it’s helped bring back some of the creativity of those early days we all long for.
could you expand on/give examples of that hero point system? i'm interested in using this for my own home campaigns!!
Sounds to me a lot like "FATE" points. :)
Hmm I like the first idea, I guess for a city campaign the characters would only be able to rest where and when it made sense and was safe to do so. Not sure if this is the same thing, but this is from page 264 of the DMG. A player can spend a hero point whenever he or she makes an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw. The player can spend the hero point after the roll is made but before any of its results are applied. Spending the hero point allows the player to roll a d6 and add it to the d20, possibly turning a failure into a success. A player can spend only 1 hero point per roll. The second part also reminds me of the 5e variant rule called "Plot Points" on page 269 of the dmg.
@@vangandur3629 oh yeah good point! I tried out fate as a player ages ago, super cool system
@@FringeFinder I’ve defo not seen those rules thanks for pointing that out! I will have to crack out my dusty dmg and see if there are some cool improvements I can make to the way I’m using hero points in my game
Pathfinder 2e GM and player here. My last character was a thief rogue who died and became a ghost. This meant that I had to spend 10 minutes picking up anything, meaning I could almost never steal anything. It. Was. Amazing.
DuDe, i just discovered your channel. mad editting - "pressing paper buttons" - your content is entertaining and inspiring AF at the same time. I pray that youll get the rewards you so heavenly crave (from the godess of dnd tubers).
Games that I’m currently playing that fix this issue Old school essentials Cy_borg Mausritter Dragonbane Best part is…. The prep for any of these games is fast and done at the table. And making a character is sooo fast if someone wants to sit down with us …. They just do. And they are playing in a few minutes
Love it. This is why you're one of the girls.
Building on this for anyone else who's scrolling for game recommendations. Most of what I've listed below is what I have laying immediately around me, can be had for free or very little to get, but please consider supporting these creators. Shadowdark: 5e "inspired" old-school gameplay. Pretty hard NOT to know about this one at this time Cairn, Runecairn: The first is generic, the second is dark-souls and norse-inspired. Both are 3-stat booklet games that offer a LOT of room for creativity. Liminal Horror: Modern/scifi/horror gameset. 3 stats and no waiting. Mothership: 4 stats, 3 saves, sci fi horror. There is a massive market of community-made stories, settings, adventures, etc. and most are two-sided, trifold adventures that can be read in one bathroom break.
I will also add the Weird West TTRPG, GUN. Very different from D&D, but brings a lot of interesting and fairly unique mechanics. GUN is also rather fast to start, as little prep is needed for each session, and character creation is largely randomized by design.
Dragonbane is so good, just a lighter DnD that encourages creativity.
I would recommend the old D6 system (D6 Fantasy/Sci-fi/Adventure, Star Wars D6) Also, running a TinyD6 game with my kids now, which is super-simple but also helps them with the "me-sa can do ANYTHING?!" 😁
Idk if it's just my particular algorithm showing, but I'm seeing these kinds of sentiments more and more these days. I fully agree btw. For me, I jumped into the hobby right after 5e came out, and so I didn't get to experience the old school tropes that tend to be the advertised D&D experience. But once I started interacting with the greater community, it seemed like people looked down on the tropes and wanted to make extra-special super-unique unicorn OCs, whereas I was perfectly fine with my Human Fighter because it was my first time playing one and I wanted that kind of experience. Over time, I've drifted over to the OSR side of things, and even though I'm currently running a 5e game, I'm always extoling the virtues of other games whenever a typical 5e snag comes along. As one of my players (who is starting to share a lot of my similar frustrations with 5e) puts it, "When everything is special, nothing is special."
My experience is the same. I think playing the tropes is dope, because I haven't got to experience it for myself yet. A Tiefling, an Aarakocra, and a Water Genasi walk into a bar. No, this isn't a joke, this is session one of a save-the-world 5e game. But your fun is valid. You play however you want.
@@DeficientMaster I don't fault anyone btw. My first character was literally just Guts from Berserk because I thought that would be fun. Turns out, playing a character someone else wrote adds a lot of limits and restrictions if you're trying to play that character accurately. What I thought I wanted wasn't actually what I wanted. My first Level 0 mud farmer in a DCC funnel that I played like a stolen car was much more fun. That guy ended up with a tentacle leg and evil spells. Guts couldn't do that (if you care about Guts at all).
Oh boy this conversation. "When everything is special, nothing is special." Some of my players want to play a drow. When they come to me with that, I ask them one question: "Do you want the average NPC to hate or fear you?" Its gonna be a thing. Make it a thing. Its the trope. Tropes are good. Exceptions are the exception. The problem is that the game assumes that "you are an exceptional being". I think that is a very, very big mistake. Especially if you start at level 1.
@monkeibusiness Exactly. This is why I also only let my players start with a backstory that is no more than 3 bullet points that can fit on a single index card. The story we are about to share should be the defining moments in this character's life. If you show up with an epic backstory full of thwarting other world-ending threats, there's a chance that the story of the game will pale in comparison. Also, a big backstory sets an expectation for a PC character arc, rather than just letting one organically happen. So when it doesn't happen, or feels like a tacked on side quest, the player feels slighted. With my index card system, I do allow the players to add backstory bullet points periodically, so it increases the chance that it will actually be relevant to the current game. Instead of a rival from your past created in a vacuum, now the rival from your past is the NPC the party meets in the tavern, and it adds to the overall verisimilitude.
@@iansharp1543 Thats a nice approach. Im gonna steal that.
The way I fix it is just don't play DnD.
I think the video, here, definitely is onto something, but I also don't think it's as clear-cut as presented (and I disagree that you can get the same experience - even for that level of complexity - at a video game as you can at a table; though I acknowledge that sometimes I absolutely *also* want to play a video game of that format as well: I would assert there's room for both and both can be good, if different, experiences). But over-all, a decent set of points made, and worth thinking about. One of the interesting things about codification of skill sets is that it happened more-or-less by player-driven demand and, over the course of Advanced 2e, became increasingly stratified, so that by the time 3e baked that level of specificity into the rules, it was a de facto acceptance of what had been expected for a long time anyway. You can see this in the proliferation of player's options books in 2e, the separation of kits (some of which were truly terrible) and skills (especially thief skills were part of the beginning of this change all the way back in their original introduction) and, of course, non-weapon proficiencies. Most of these things started as optional rules in 2e, but by the end of that edition, they were expectations at many tables, and no longer really "optional." This, of course, was tacitly encouraged by TSR, as it meant they sold more books. Then in 3e it started granular and into and blasting through 3.5's attempts at crackdown and codification the options just exploded into realms of impossibility (or at least improbability). The option-bloat was real and, though (like 2e before it), it had attempted to cast these options as explicitly not-guaranteed, the internet culture that developed over time came to expect that any option was on the table. This is especially true of prestige classes. And it makes sense - you bought a book, shouldn't you be allowed to use it? But with this bloat plus mechanical precision comes unexpected and unintended side-effects, and so you end up with builds that absolutely explode tables, while you end up with other builds that are almost entirely ineffectual, and you stumble across builds that are just what the game expects. And, of course, there's an endless demand for more. PF would initially clear this out, but they built in additional complexity into the base level and then things just kind of exploded from there. When 4e came along, it realized the option-bloat of 3e/3.5e (PF wasn't invented, yet, and wouldn't be until after 4e was released) was a potential problem, and both codified the math into a simpler less option-heavy format, and then proliferated those options right back in with feat- and power-diversification (much of went into a level of mathematical precision that was not appreciated by many at the time - and still isn't by most, because it's not intuitive to most players, and has a high [in fact the highest of any edition] round-to-round memory-to-play burden baked in - while 3e/3.5e/PF absolutely could get to those extremes, the game functions well without them, but 4e just kind of expected that level of commitment every round). 5e attempted to correct course pretty hard by (as many said it should, during 4e's lifetime) "flatten the math" - this, then, was the origin of bounded accuracy. But 5e also opted to de-diversify powers, going back to the 3e system of class features, but under the 2e system of "ask your GM" optional rules. It does a decent job over-all, but it obviously has its flaws, as you've pointed out... to the point where the D&D movie actively avoided following the rules, because it would have been confusing, diluted the value of individual party members, and confused an audience. (Also, as 5e has aged, it's shifted very much so away from "all creatures use the same rules" to "monsters just do what they do; players go by the rules" which sort of makes sense, but also creates a very unbalanced and inconsistent world-building experience that can feel more empty to some.) ((And also, also, they refuse to call it "5.5e" or "6e" and insist on "OneD&D" - no, wait, sorry, uh, "the 2024 revision of the game; definitely not 6e, guys, don't worry about it" which is so incredibly silly, and they have entire articles written by "it's not 5.5e" - articles that prove it really is 5.5e and also they don't know what the ".5" actually represented. Aa;ldhnfa;klfgna;klsdhfgaksdjfnh. ANYway. Ahem. Still absolutely going to look at it, though.))
Really good video! I started with 5e and this is a big reason why I’ve given up on the system after about playing it about six years. Initially, it started out fine but then, as mentioned, we all saw “the code” and went from there. Over the years, it felt like I wasn’t challenging them as players, I was just competing with the numbers on their character sheet, especially at higher levels. This burned me out overtime (and 5e is the big thing, so I couldn’t really switch easily) and ever since, I now default to Fate Core RPG, as I prefer games that emphasize who and what the characters are and seeing their actions have impact.
Anyone reading this comment follow this man's path to freedom. Fate Core rpg is absolutely brilliant
I rarely ever hear anything about FATE. How is it? I’ve toyed with running it every now and then.
@@surprisedchar2458 It's a very flexible and fluid system. The best way I'd describe it is "Movie Logic." The game focuses more on who and what the characters are as they do their actions. You only focus on what needs to be focused on. Compared to Fate, 5e is more of a resource management system which gets worse at higher levels for the DM to challenge.
Man, this is something I’ve been trying to put into words for years, and you’ve done it while also being absolutely hilarious! I’m definitely adding this to my short list of “RPG content that legitimately shifted how I think about my games”
Once upon a time my sister built a druid to participate in a discord guild. She was very happy with her druid. People liked her druid's personality and quirky actions. Then, someone else built a druid with a similar concept but it was better optimised. Suddenly, my sister didn't care about her character's personality anymore. She was upset because she wasn't as useful (optimised) as the other druid. "I built my druid wrong," she said. "I don't want to play as them anymore. But I really liked this character. But I can't fix it or it'll look like I'm copying the other player. I can't do anything." She abandoned her druid. Recently, she's joined a proper campaign. And she built a druid. Guess which build she went with: her original build that was created with enthusiasm and now had a chance to live a new life in a new setting? Or the other player's build which was perfectly optimised for combat? :/ Her guild druid deserved better than this.
awesome video! I love your style and all the physical props and jokes :D kudo’s!! I also like making my characters through what feels right instead of what’s best. Interesting to see what systems support this best!
Great video! I can't imagine how long it took to make a 17 minute video with the amount of editing you put into these beasts. One of the perks of having players who don't speak a lick of English: I'm pretty sure none of them have ever heard the word "hexblade". It's great. They pick the elemental adept feat and go "WOW THIS IS SO STRONG, HOW IS THIS EVEN ALLOWED" and I'm over here, cursed with the knowledge of what lies in the deepest parts of the abyss (reddit), and I'm like "Yes it is, baby boy, you make sure you tell yourself that every night before you go to bed. Do not ever succumb to the temptation of peering beyond the veil. For it will break you, and everyone you love." And since you asked KZhead friends to make recommendations: in horror games like Call of Cthulu, as well as in the OSR sphere, your skills aren't "what you're good at" so much as they are "stuff that maybe won't get you killed instantly if you're lucky". Even if you're proficient at something, you *generally* don't want to be asked for a roll, because rolling is, in and of itself, a fail state. And that changes the way people approach those games significantly. Because when you can't rely on having a +14 auto triple advantage +1d4 guidance + lucky feat + silvery barbs on every single ability check... You're going to want to explore all of your other options first. You're going to ask about what's in the room, and interact with the world in an immersive way. Your character sheet isn't a video game menu showing you what your different moves are anymore. If you want to know what you can do, you're going to have to talk with a human being.
My laptop was begging for the coup de grâce. The roll as a fail state is exactly what I look for anymore. I still play around with the modern systems because I play these games with friends first and foremost & I'm not too high and mighty to play what they want, but when you're playing at my table, we're playing a game that involves conversing with a human being within the game's fiction 1st and looking at our character sheets for what to roll 2nd.
You two are the most helpful dnd youtubers for me right now. Love you
@@DeficientMaster I absolutely agree that some systems (especially D&D 5e) can be extremely restrictive. That said, I've found myself a bit frustrated with the OSR approach of rolls as a failure state: I could not really enjoy the character I was playing. Our characters "won", but I realized I didn't actually care about them. I'll explain: the few times that I played OSR, I put myself into the practical, creative mindset that is expected for that type of play, to think outside your character sheet and so forth. And it was effective. We did come out on top. We did solve problems. We did "win" the scenario. But I always felt that I did so by using my own skill as a player and nothing that was particularly unique about the character I rolled, so it didn't really matter who they were. You might say that should not matter: every character is unique, it depends on how you roleplay. And it would be true. But I'm talking more from a gameplay perspective: if I always have to think outside the box, then it doesn't matter what's inside the box, so I will always approach the game in the same way independently on what is inside the box. And at that point, no character feels unique, or something I can look at and say "wow, I can't wait to play as that and tackle the game from this very unique perspective". Because yeah, I can roleplay whatever character I'm playing as. But let's not kid ourselves: a lot of the time spent playing any RPG will be spend staring at problems and trying to think of solutions to go around it. If character skills are relevant, your character will inform how you can approach a problem. If they are too relevant, they will give you only one good way to approach a problem, which is bad. Personally, I'd like to strike a balance between open systems where everything is up to the imagination and closed system with codified rules for everything, a game that is open and where rules can force you to focus on some areas where your character is good at, but at the same time the rules should give you tools that you can play with in ways that might not have been obvious or that you otherwise would not have assumed your character would be able to do.
Dude I just found this channel and a new video hits NOW… it’s a sign.
Yea dude. This channel is great. Every single video is AMAZING.
Awesome video with really great points. Reminds me why I fell for ICRPG and TinyD6 rulesets. The focus on just having fun over "winning" or being the "best". Appreciate the insights and what things look like when you go down that road. Suits says a game is voluntarily attempting to overcome unnecessary obstacles. With that in mind I'm curious what the balance is between saying no because limitations breed creativity (as a group of course) and "Meesa can do anything."
My two big problems with 5e are: - The gaps in DM tools. We're talking really basic stuff like suggestions on when/how best to give out magic items, and also their costs in GP (arbitrary ranges suck) - DM traps. 5e stopped doing the "Ivory Tower" game design of previous editions on the player side- but hidden throughout the DM material are things that feel *made* to warp your game. Flametounge is #1 to me; because it's so unassuming as an "uncommon" magic item; but it nearly *doubles* the damage output of any martial that picks it up- it's like having haste always on, or having smites always on, or being 5 levels ahead of the damage curve. Play BG3, and realize that for all the broken shit in that game, they still don't have a Flametounge. The Everburn Blade is *the best* weapon until you find another weapon with bonus damage- and that's only a d4! And Larian "gets away with it" because they know most players have a quick save before a fight- and therefore they aren't afraid to TPK. Live DMs meanwhile have to live with the warp no. The only alternative is to warp all the rest of the players, or remove the Flametounge from the game somehow (maybe even ooc)
flame sword cool tho
There is exact prices for the rarity of items. Its in XGE and its not just ranges. Also flametongues aren't uncommon magic items they are rare and I know you don't play the game cause we know that the fucking Dragon wrath weapons are better. Take a flame tongue but make it radiant or force or any other dragon breath type damage and once per day allows the player to do a cone attack for basically a breath weapon damage on crit 5 damage of the type oh and +1 to +2 to +3 to hit and damage. BG3 also is more like 2014 5e than anything it plays like it. It plays like D&DNext rather than 5e proper.
@@WhyYouMadBoi My bad, they're rare not uncommon. They're still far lower rarity than they suggest. I don't play the game? I've played it since it was D&DNext- I was off by one rarity, chill. Point is- there's a lot of magic items of higher rarities that don't multiply damage. The equivalent rarity Dragon Wrath still only does 1d6+1 extra damage, plus the critical effect. That series is also more like an artifact, because of how it upgrades...
also, XGE still gives ranges, compare/contrast to PF2 which is really specific on item pricing and what level said item relates to
@@Inuvash255A 2d6 extra dmg weapon attunement rare is mid at best.
I realy love your vids
Honeyy get upp!! Deficient Master just dropped a new video!! 🗣🗣🗣🗣
Great video as always! I love the energy and message your channel is bringing to the table. Very much needed these days in the TTRPG world :) I'm a huge fan of OSR and ultralight RPG systems that give you just enough rules to get you going. An x-in-6 chance of doing whatever (anything feasible, that is) is the only tool I usually need to resolve uncertainty. Even for crunchy games, I'd add that, from a GM perspective, it really pays off to focus on things that are not combat. We've grown accustomed to the formula where a session is basically a series of combat encounters strung by some roleplaying in between. Put different challenges that cannot be solved with violence in front of your players! Two princes hate each other and are on the brink of war, and one of them asks the party to liaise to strike a truce. A plant needed to cure a whole poisoned town can only materialise when no one can see it. A friend of the party has been falsely accused and will be executed unless the real culprit is brought forward. The party is suddenly cursed with a weakness spell that doesn't allow them to carry too much weight, but they need their supplies, torches and tools to get out of the dungeon, not to mention to transport the giant magic statue that will end the prophecy. Offer different problems and the players will reach out for different tools. Tell them in advance so they don't start building the ultimate killing machine before the campaign starts!
I love that I don't have to agree with every point you make to enjoy your hot takes 😆 Your videos are entertaining, insightful, and super meta for the experience most of us 5e DMs have had as the game gets more and more bloated. I'm not sure there is much of a solution other than to ride the wave and toss whatever you want at the wall to see what sticks for your group. I'm still having fun with 5e, but videos like these tell the story of a good majority of frustrated DMs. Keep posting that spicy content and I'll keep watching 😁
Another amazing video that summarizes my feelings (though in all honesty it doesn't stop me from min-maxing when I'm playing unlimited 5e). This is the reason why I'm really enjoying running and playing Savage Worlds. I wouldn't call it rules lite because the code is definitely there but with it being classless, setting agnostic, and have no true path to perfect optimization it really does lend itself to a stronger player experience where they say "I can do anything?" and I really like that.
When I play in "build" type games I still look for the best choice. It's the Pathfinder in me. Send help.
The 3.5 in me says the same thing. I still try to make my build make sense to my character but... I also love just being the very best like no one ever was
11:12 Complete games are better and less profitable. Games like Blades in the Dark or World's Without Number give you all the tools you need in the base game. You see less optimization and content online for them because it doesn't need to be created. For this reason, good and complete games don't advertise themselves as well because because once you have them you don't need to go online for help.
Great video, good talking points. The takeaway for me was "play however you want" for one reason. Im going to dm for the first time, and it's going to be more story oriented rather than a typical D&D camp. Also, i laughed when I saw your pfp turn around for McDonald's bit 😂😂
This reminds me of when I first was invited to join a friend in playing D&D. When I was making my first character, I was frustrated in how limiting the rules as written were, despite how many options there are. I appreciate your videos for really expanding my understanding on how to approach TTRPG's
Damn man you content is really amazing, i cant wait until your channel blows up and i can be like "I watched that guy befor he had a million followers."
you're like jim carrey's dnd uncle this is awesome
You make some good points. As a long time DM, I get bored with combat, so I tend to throw it in as capstones to big parts of plot, but not throughout. I like multiclassing, as part of the "do anything," you can dip in and out and grab what you want, especially as high levels don't usually offer a lot of good stuff.
The ever increasing passive aggressiveness of, "your fun is valid, you play however you want" is exactly how I feel where your trying to help but people are more about being stubborn than actually willing to listen, and we are forced to be polite about it. Also, beware of the bewitching calls of the rules light 'story games' that are Powered by the Appocolypse, they may seem like they give you player agency but they fall into the same character build problem, but from the story side where your pretty much forced to play as "Jim the Jock" or "Arty the Romantic" but with the name erased and written over by you. So yeah... I suggest mausritter or maybe a more niche game like DeadHalt.
I really appreciate you opening up the comments to RPG recommendations at the end there! A lot of people get angry when you suggest another game as a solution to a 5e problem. It sounds like you might really enjoy Dungeon World! Or maybe another game in the PbtA family. The core appeal of those games, to me, is that they rip the tactical war game out of the roleplaying game, leaving just the roleplaying part. That really fun “meesa can do anything?!” element of RP, where it’s just a conversation between you and the GM with the occasional dice roll? That’s how **everything** works, including combat.
As a GM I absolutely loved running Dungeon World, how it puts "fiction" before "mechanics" and also how it keeps GM on their toes by forcing an active resolution of players' failed rolls. The players though, they were like oh no where are my builds. They didn't get the point at all.
People get angry with suggesting other systems because some just don't want to play other systems. They are happy with 5e on the whole but may have one or two issues with it.
Agreed, I've been running PbtA games for a while now and they are much more fun for me as a GM. Highly recommend everyone to at least take a look at them.
@@kimitsudesu Yeah it is a very very different philosophy of play. Even as the GM it can be hard to switch over. I think it’s something the whole group has to be very intentional about.
@@tuomasronnberg5244peanut butter temple arena?
Another genius video. Truly. Yes, some other KZheadrs have touched on these points, but your approach is holistic and critical, while maintaining balance.
Great video. I love the editing. That must be so much work, though.
Excellent points, and hilarious as always. I wish there were other game recommendations IN the video, but I understand the urge to sidestep that landmine. Don't want to upset 5e Stans feeling gatekept coz you told them to try a different game. 😂 I'm not against character builds inherently, but I prefer to create a build as a suggestion rather than a road map. The pre-selected abilities are locked behind if/then questions. "IF we defeat Duke Dunderhead and rescue Princess MacGuffin, THEN I'll multiclass into Paladin of the Crown and swear my Oath to her rule." or "IF Duke Dunderhead's wedding ceremony is completed before we can rescue the Princess from him, THEN I'll cave and make a Pact with Baeelzibooty the succubus for the power to usurp him." The thing is, nothing in the rules encourages or rewards this extra effort or the surrender of optimal options for the sake of the narrative, and so it's hard to find other players with similar values to play this game with. When these kinds of decision point are part of the SYSTEM, then you can count on everyone to do it because it's a rule and there are reward structures for it. Thumbs down for the 4e slander though. 😤 It's so trite. Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies gave players so many role playing opportunities you couldn't get otherwise, and gave characters a sense of lateral growth and finality that normally is only found in fiction first games. I'm glad MCDM has been so successful. We'll see all the best parts of 4e get a revival, and people will realize it's what they've been asking for this whole time.
(Even) as someone who is currently building a rules-heavy, build-heavy system, this is one of the most important TTRPG videos of all time, imo. Many people, myself included, are stuck in this paradigm where we need rules for everything, and feel compelled to build around the given options. My first intro to DnD was in 3.5e, and even though I still find building characters wicked fun, I'm also so desperate to encourage players to play non-optimal builds, that a lot of the game I'm designing centers around the idea. A lot of the (potential) magic in TTRPGs has been lost as we've moved more toward streamlining and optimization, and away from talking, building, and just enjoying the human experience.
Its called real life. Where there are rules for everything. We have limited options for success, and a great many options for failure.
Here is a tip. If your game is about something it should either have NO mechanic for that thing, or entire complex system for that thing. For example, in a game about sneaking there's no skill called "sneak". And if there is well... The game isn't about sneaking, even if it claims otherwise.
My guy, just play powered by the apocalypse
Your example of "warlock dips making no sense" when I made my water themed sorlock I made her patron/mermaid demigod mom an important element of the story. Sure I picked fathomless warlock because I liked the tentacle of the deep feature, but that was because I liked the idea of commanding a water whip with my bonus action. And I picked divine soul sorcerer for access to cleric spells, because it has cool water spells and healing I can flavor like a waterbending that sorcerers don't usually get. And out of the flavor text and personality I imagined I made something fun out of it. But that was fun because I made the build myself based on what I wanted from my character rather than stealing builds online with no actual thought. I like taking strong options, but I'm taking Tidal Wave rather Fireball, Hypnotic Pattern or Spirit Guardians, not because it's any stronger outside niche situations, but because watching my water sorcerer use water to kill things sounds more fun and thematic than the stronger options
I GM to a group where I am the one who got each and every one of them into TTRPGs, originally with D&D 5e. Since they all had video game backgrounds, it went about how you described, everyone doing weird builds and stuff. I was so burnt out, it genuinely felt like a second job. What saved me was buying Pirate Borg at a local store just on a whim for the nice art it had, and deciding to run a oneshot. Everything is randomly generated in Pirate Borg. You can't even pick what ability you get on a level up, that is random too. My biggest min-maxer happened to roll a character that was nigh-useless in combat with any traditional weapons. He figured out he had good stats for using grenades specifically, and spent two sessions figuring out a way to acquire them in large quantities. One of the other players was getting no combat spells, he kept rolling for better and better Clairvoyance, so he had to switch from kicking down doors to quietly consulting with ghosts about what is in each room, and using that information for some very creative ambushes.
Everyone should try Dungeon Crawl Classics if you are looking for rules light game that is both silly and chaotic. Warhammer 4e is a great game if you want more of a crunchy game with the ability to do builds that dont overpower an entire game. And Call of Cthulhu if probably the best game made (totally only my opinion), but not really for a fantasy genre so not always everyones cup of tea.
DCC is a blast!
This was fantastic. I was laughing so hard I could barely breathe with the head-pat graphic. If I had to name a system, it would be Olde Swords Reign or Cairn. Cairn is my ... well ... it's kind of an obsession lately. You can do anything with that system and it's incredibly simple. I'm sure you knew about Cairn before I did, though!
I've seen so many recommendations for Cairn here and in some of my other videos & I haven't checked it out. Definitely will though!
@@DeficientMaster nice. Olde Swords Reign is cool too. It's got the same idea as basic fantasy - pdf is free, books printed at cost, etc, but it takes the OSR mentality and builds it on the 5e SRD. It's actually really cool and the community is really giving it a heck of a go as well.
I love Cairn, but my players got PTSD from it! We now play Olde Swords Reign, and it really hits the sweet spot. Free, and compatible (mostly) with Basic Fantasy RPG, which has an insane amount of extra content.
I agree, to an extent. I made the transition from dnd to pf2e since I like how solid the system is, which yeah codifies game, but it doesn't leave you hanging when someone thinks of something outside the box, most of the time. I like building characters, but because I like the challenge of exploring how and why the build came to be. And I am not afraid to go off of my previous path if I think its thematically apropiate during the actual game. I build my character from levels 1 to 20, and while I am subscribe to a lot of the optimizer channels I rarely build one of those kinds of characters myself. I usually grab a mechanic or an idea and build a character, not just numberwise, but roleplaywise as well. For example, I have a level 3 Inoxerable Iron Magus with Chronoskimmer archetype (free archetype variant rule) with the College Dropout background, and his background is that he was a time magic apprentice that made a mistake and destabilized his timeline, and he uses heavy armors and weapons as its easier to ground himself on a timeline with their weight, and I thought of that beacuse the idea of going slowmo, just to slash at light speed with a stupidly big ass sword was a cool concept to me. And I come to find that often I prefer to just embody that character and how he relates to the world around him than I do combat (keep in mind Magus is a spellsword class, and combat IS its main focus). I ground my combat mechanics in a path so I can explore how I will reach it. I know when we level up, I will grab Striker's Scroll and Turn Back the Clock. Striker Scroll is a change I made when I saw how it performed and helped my pave a new way, with my Magus studying scrolls and how to apply them to his spellstrike so his mind can be free to control better his timeshenanigans, leafing to his Turn Back the Clock feature. But in the end, we can play however we want.
Exactly. I find it disingenuous that when he describes a bloated system, he refers to Pathfinder. He's right when it comes to Pf1e, but he's incorrect about Pf2e, which has been around for several years now. Talking about ttrpg complexity and referring to Pf1e is like trying to advise a current dnd5e player about problems only Dnd3.5e had
This is probably one of if not the best YT video I’ve seen talking about DnD. This is the first video I’ve seen this guy make and I’m willing to bet 30cp the rest of his videos are just as good if not better. Good job man. Keep up the good work. Everything about this video was 11/10.
My old D&D games had so much crazy homebrew that the combat became more like JoJo's Bizarre Adventure than it was... how everyone else does D&D. Two of the villains had an instant kill mechanic. It was so fun and creative I dont think less rules is inherently better. You just need the rules and mefhanics to be applicable in the widest array of possibilities as you can. Now we play a low power post apocalyptic ttrpg of my own design. My players are building all kinds of wonky stuff.
Super entertaining and informative. I started with D&D 1st edition back in the early 80s and moved on up through AD&D then MERP and eventually to Rolemaster ... which has LOTS of skills. However these days I look at skills differently. Anyone can ride a horse. Just say so in your background. Who cares. But if you plan to use that horse in combat and jump over tall obstacles and kick dudes in the head ... perhaps a skill check is warranted. The rest is just "saying yes" to players doing imaginative things. There are two extremes for a TT game system with the issues you point out: (1) have "no system" and it is all improv and theater of the mind, rules be damned, or (2) highly rule bound with super tedious mechanics and action rounds that take 30+ minutes in real life and bring everything to a grinding halt. I don't like either ... and somewhere in the middle is nice. A DM should very much be involved in the character build process for their world and campaign. This includes watching out for one dimensional min-maxers, but also so lesser experience players get "tools" they can use to help the party in unique situations. Those can be skills, feats, spells, or a jaunty tune. Whatever. With a balanced party, the fun never ends. Your channel should have like 500k subscribers. It is all better content than most of the drab stuff out there. Keep it up!
It is very much up to the DM as well. I once rolled a character in a new campaign. Had a lot of ideas about the character, and spend a ton of time preparing all of the RP aspects. I used multiclassing as a character choice, less than a build choice, and prioritized wisdom over constitution as my secondary stat. So what happened. A few sessions went by with one brutal combat after another, and then my character was eliminated in an almost TPK. Lesson learned. With my replacement character I still spent lots of time thinking about backstory and role playing. But I definitely also optimized for survival. Came to the table with a wizard multiclass with high AC, high constitution and lots of mobility. He wasn’t always the highest damage dealer, and often played a more support oriented role. But he definitely had a solution to survive almost anything the DM threw at us, and the tools to avoid getting pined down.
I have to say I agree with and recognise a lot of what's being said in the video, like the initial phase of wonder about the game leading to staleness, and the lack of viable options leading to the same actions being used, but especially the last point about lighter rules systems resonated with me. I joined a group a while ago where we play Monster of the Week, and even though we were all restricted to being Mundanes, normal people essentially, I found that sense of wonder again, of being able to do anything, because the MotW system encouraged improvised actions, and fucking around and finding out. I haven't felt that in a long time for 5e, because it went from anything goes to only certain viable and codified actions you could take. All in all a great video, I'm looking forward to future videos. On a unrelated note, the last 15 seconds reminded me so much of the time where I was a new-ish DM and tried to figure out sensible rules for DnD 5e. I kept looking at rules and design paradigms from other TTRPGS and tried to fit them into 5e, and eventually I just kept getting thoughts about the Ship of Theseus: "When is this not 5e anymore? When should I look for something else?"
My copy of Shadowdark came in recently, i think it nicely solves the trouble of skills by giving you advantage on skills that might relate to your background or class. Anyone can try to pick a lock, but a Thief is less likely to suck at it. Overall, it's a super pared down system, with descriptions for each class fitting on one or two pages.
Great video with valid points! I feel like every game system has its pros and cons, to be honest, whether it's rules-dense or rules-light, combat-oriented or narrative-driven. How well the pros shine and how bad the cons stand out can really depend on the type of game being played, the skill of the GM, and the people around the table. Regardless of what you're playing, your mileage is going to vary depending on those factors. I'll admit that more rules-dense systems like D&D/Pathfinder, which do tend to emphasize combat, can feel more like tabletop video games...but ultimately, the combat rules are only one part of the larger system, and you don't have to emphasize it at the table as much as it's emphasized in the rulebook by page count. I've been running a Pathfinder 1e game for almost two years now, with a party of six. Two of those characters are nearly useless in combat because of how their respective players built them: one focuses almost exclusively on item crafting, and the other is our socialite. Even among the more traditionally combat-oriented characters in the party, as far as I am aware, none of the players are coming to the table with pre-assembled builds found online, or even pre-planning their level-up perks. Early on, our warpriest made attempts to circumvent combat through negotiation, and I thought that was great. As for myself, I tend to aim for a more narrative-driven game. Combat serves its function, but that isn't always the goal when I sit down to prep for a session. Maybe only a third of my sessions even feature combat encounters. Currently, we're running an investigative murder mystery, and everyone seems to be having fun leading up to the final confrontation. Sure, if you're basing a system only off of its combat prowess, it can feel stale and video game-y. But a ttrpg can (and probably should) be more than just a combat simulator. I don't like to homebrew stuff; I tend to stick to rules as written/intended as much as I possibly can, and I've had the same group of friends come back to my sessions every other week for almost two years. Playing video games is fun, playing them online with friends can be fun. But nothing beats sitting around a table with the people closest to you, playing pretend, rolling dice, and creating something unique that you'll all remember. That's something a video game can't do. But, as said in the video, you play how you want to, and how you have fun. :)
I think it's the best and the most important video you've uploaded. In a culture where the most popular content is focused on building the strongest characters, people need to learn what is the real strength of TTRPG's. I believe that optimizing may be a great option if everyone (with Game Master included) is aware of it, and the session is PRIMARILY around combat. But in every other case, people should now that optimizing can make the rest of the table less enjoyable experience and that it is really fun if your character has visible weaknesses. But the most of youtube videos doesn't mention the negative effects of minmaxing and it won't change untill video creators start talking about it. And because you put more attention to things that are REALLY important in RPG's, I think you should be among the most popular TTRPG tubers. Hell, you should by FAR surpass them. Thank you for turning the community in the right direction
It's a game that lives and dies with the people around the table, the most vital artery being the GM. Most TTRPG advice comes down to communication and interaction with people, not game systems. My best game was in Pathfinder and even had PvP. On paper it should've been a dumpster fire, but the game wasn't my best because of the rule set, but because we as a group trusted each other and we let the characters & developing story dictate what happened instead of "Muh precious build" or "Muh precious world". Your words are too kind.
DMs will see this and just think “hell yeah”. Another banger video! Got to ask: where do you get those color minis with the helmets? Love those!
Peeples from Amazon. Hats are LEGO.
@@DeficientMaster awesome, thanks for answering and the great videos! 😄
I think it's important to have your character still be functional in a mechanical sense. You can flavor anything however you want, but you still wanna be able to land attacks. Nobody has fun missing every attack four combats in a row, even if your character is clumsy and a beginner.
Exactly this. I don't play dnd to play an incompetent buffoon who seems to be attacking with their eyes closed. How do you reconcile designing a character that is extremely capable both in and out of combat without optimizing? When the fantasy fails to align with the character's capabilities and performance, the character kinda starts to feel like a fraud.
But you don't need to optimise everything just to be able to land attacks. And you can definitely still have fun if you don't hit anything if it fits the character. I have a storm sorcerer suffering from amnesia and who's just an average guy other than the fact that he has storm related magical abilities who has only +2 on cha and a redemption paladin who's more of a tank/support rather than someone who deals damage with a +1 on strength. Both of them are still very fun.
@@Eo-ms3kw Yeah, that's fine as long as the DM pulls their punches and doesn't run truly deadly encounters.
I’ve had the same thought of trying a new game system that encourages out-of-the-box thinking and allows for more varied gameplay, but every time I bring it up at my table my players say it would be “too hard” to switch to another rule set. It’s frustrating, because I mostly play D&D for the story and role play with friends. I could care less about the mechanics. Thanks for making another awesome video! Made me laugh out loud at work multiple times.
meanwhile d&d is harder than any of those game systems the vast majority of the time I would just refuse to run and find another group but I have that luxury
I use my builds like a loose guideline for I think would be useful at that time, but as sessions go on, it changes, for example, I had a Warlock/Bard, initially he was setup to only have a minimal amount of bard, but after meeting the party, he leaned more into his music than his pact, and his spell selection changed too, which made for a hilarious set of hijinks with the party Sorcerer. It's something to look back on and realize how much they've changed from the original thought you had, which I think is kinda fun to see happen.
I think optimization isnt bad per se, the lack of willing to RP, or try new things that kills the moment
"I choose TTRPGs because they can offer strengths that no other medium can emulate - and combat is *not* one of them." Fucking THANK YOU, JESUS CHRIST.
You put into words how I feel about Dungeons & Dragons. I've always had a sort of guilt about not "liking" D&D and turning to games where only the creativity and enjoyment of the game master and players are important. BTW, Video and editing always top-notch!
[Engaged comment to feed the algorithm] In all seriousness though your stuff is amazing and I hope your channel keep growing! Funny, informative, a third thing, your vids have it all. You're one of the few creators who's videos are an instant watch for me and I'm really glad you wandered into my recommends!
xD and I just spend an insane amount of money on that MCDM game, way to make me doubt myself :p But no, I really am excited about focused tactical combat that revolves around pushing my paper buttons. Seeing combat evolve and come to a conclusion is enjoyable in a different way from the creative improv that you described in your video. The thing is I ALSO really get excited by the idea of combat avoidance and not taking unneseccary risks that could easily end you. And the concept of not being stuck in a narrow lane that guides my future path to the horizont. Those things might be a dichatomy? I'm not sure. I'm glad that other games and other playstyles exist, and from experience in other fields I can relate to the pain of seeing your favourite diminishing. As always, great video, superb editing, please keep it up, your voide is really unique and valuble.
I'll give MCDM a plus for at least planting their flag and stating that it's going to be a tactical heroic fantasy. D&D wants to be everything. It was a dungeon crawler first and has now evolved to a heroic power fantasy. They're keeping the name for marketing purposes alone.
They've got the negotiation system, which might encourage players to think about encounters. I didn't back the game but Im sub to their patreon. Really interested to see what they do.
I love all of the points you make, I just want to add that I believe these things can co-exist. I find it a matter of over the table intentionality that's almost as hard to pin down as tone, but if we look at the Dimension 20 core cast for example, we can find wickedly competent players who also understand that the most important thing is the fun nutty nonsense and creativity they bring to the table. I think many players do eventually make there way to that space of freedom and creativity again, but it takes a level of reflection and party support to figure out what exactly is the fun that you play this game for.
Love it! I have been dabbling with White Box, EZ D6, Index Card RPG, Dragonbane, and just using my own best judgements for my players to keep it simple and fun. So far it's working out pretty well.
I don't know how the hell i found this channel, BUT I'M SO GLAD I DID! Instantly subscribed
You really, really should look *back to the past* with Oldschool Dungeons & Dragons. Trust me, it's something incredibly special.
Does someone know where to buy those simple minis that can wear lego hats? 2:11[I'm talking about these ones]
In case anyone is wondering, he uses Peeples board game pieces, and Lego accessories to dress them up. He'll use a reusable art putty to help some accessories stay on.
@@sweatyetiTHANK YOU! Like serioulsy I was looking for those for a while now!
@@Tomatowski No problem, friend! :)
it's funny because i'm having this discussion about keeping or changing our game system (adios dd5 and pf2, hello, fate and pbta) with a dm/player friend of mine... we're both having fun with our campains , but feel that the "build" problem takes over what we really want for our players: their creative inputs in our little imaginary worlds. so thank you for this video, it will definitely help us!
Man everything I wanted to say is already well said by you lol. I personally don't mind the separation between roleplay and combat, but it really frickin sucks when they're as separate as they are in D&D. You can barely tell what the creature (even persons!) in front of you is capable of. And yet somehow these systems manage to be both unpredictable and monotonous; your enemies will surprise you with new effects and mechanics but it'll still take the usual 3 hours to resolve. Hell I had this crap happen in Divinity Original Sin 2 - I love the game but I got sick of how different build choices barely matter past a +10% to total damage in one round of every 5. I want my actions to have consequences! But I do like your note on how we've had universal options stripped away from us, I'm a huge lover of those well over build power and I've always yelled "add more universal options", so from now on I'll be yelling "get rid of those niche skills so everyone can use them, you don't need Ride skill checks"!
As a baby DM, I only allow builds that you can explain via in game story or back story. If you want to dabble into warlock, we have to make a whole ass story arc. Who's your patron, who'd you meet them, what's your relationship with them and so on. I also think if you're going to pick up a new feature that makes you all of a sudden proficient at something, you need to work in you trying it out before leveling up. I'll even give you a watered down version of it ahead of time if I have to.
I am a Druid. I summon 8 velociraptors.
What if they want to build a completely unique "class" through their multiclassing? As in, they aren't a paladin, or a warlock, but are just using them mechanically to portray a "Mage-Knight" or "Spellsword" class totally divorced from the lore of the warlock or paladin? Basically the old, "I was always a Mage Knight in training, you just never asked."
The insanity increases
And that's why I run my own 15 pages long ruleset. It's based off zero edition, so it's only 3 classes, and super simple. Streamlined, straightforward, rulings by me, the GM, more than rules. And collaborative storytelling at the table.
I did do more things before I dug into 5e on my own time. Improvise was my first action, but I rarely do it anymore because what if I try something others can through class abilities?
To summarize: I want to play how I want to play and I want to DM people that want to play how I want to play. A problem generally solved easily by a session 0.
Nah
I feel as though this is just a psyop to play more OSR. And it's working.
🤫
Had never thought about it like that, but now I can totally see what you mean. Thanks, that was super-interesting and will influence my future course!
Thank you for the video! I’m actually trying to figure out a homebrew way to put old school D&D into 5e and cut out stuff like skills, most races, fancy abilities, unnecessary rolling, and being more of a referee than a DM. If people have advice, I’d love to hear ideas, especially on how to convince players to let go of the arcade style of play for something more simple and realistic. Also I have looked into 5TD. Looks promising
I never played old school dnd, but I have a few things that might help with letting go of the arcade feel: Skills: Be very flexible on what can be used when. I tell my players, “Skill usage is based on *how* you do it, not *what* you’re doing.” When you play it like this, I’ve found a lot of players start to be more generalists since any lack of skill can be compensated with good roleplay/strategizing. Unnecessary rolling: Every role should have a benefit or drawback for succeeding or failing. If you find a role that’s missing one of those things, I recommend one of the following based on the situation: 1. Get rid of the role (the obvious but sometimes unsatisfying answer) 2. Add the missing effect (my usual choice, but sometimes it’s more trouble than it’s worth) Races: This is an unpopular suggestion, but there’s nothing wrong with limiting/banning races based on the setting. I’m running a game where there’s basically no animal races, and hobgoblins and warforged are KoS. That being said, a couple of my friends have described it as being one of their favorite settings they’ve played in. Just make sure everyone’s interested in playing a setting like that before they make their characters lol. Hope this helps, lmk if you want any clarifications or anything👍
I tried multi classing once in the middle of the campaign saying it was for character reasons when in reality I wanted to have reckless attack on my Paladin then realized this goes against my entire character and came to my dm “hey can I go back to being a full Paladin ?” He said sure but I had to earn it and it led to one of my favorite role playing moments that made a huge bond between my character and another players as we prayed to my paladins god to make sure her dead brothers soul could pass peacefully after she was forced to kill him. I honestly always try to persuade my players from multiclassing just cause it always feels fake at that point.
I like Dungeon Crawl Classics "Quest for it" mentality. It's not a hard coded rule, but more of a mentality of play. Your players want to do or get something weird/cool? Quest for it. Want to play as a dragon? Quest for it. How your DM handled your Paladin was dope.
Great video as always! Love the editing and very informative too! Honestly I do infact make builds, mainly for roleplaying and to bring a character concept to life. I am currently playing an Alternate Fighter (by Laserllama) who is an Alchemist (Quartermaster reflavor) who makes soda potions and goes into a sugar rush mid combat. Out of combat his knowledge in magic and ritual casting (ritual caster FTW) helps provide utility and solutions more then just "I hit hard." And it's been hella fun! Also I love my weeaboo fighting magic, if caster can do reality warping stuff, martials should be able to teleport behind you once per day and say nothing personal lol
Love this. “Builds” is a term from video games. TTRPGs are not that, nor are they meant to be. I also love Dungeon Crawl Classics. It makes this style of play almost impossible with the randomization. So players play their characters, not their stats. Oh, and they have WAY more fun in the aggregate. There are those who love that style of play, and good on them. But it’s not welcome at my table. I’ve tried accommodating it and all it does is marginalize everyone else. Nothing like hearing that player tell another player “no, you can’t buy that broadsword because you can’t use it because your build doesn’t support it.” Yes, you can buy it. Yes, you can use it. And you’re going to flail around wildly because you’re not good at it…yet.
Love me a DCC session zero funnel. It's been the best way to give my table a sense of Meesa can do ANYTHING? Regardless of game experience level.
Rules light(er) Systems I like: Cairn by Yochai Gal Grok?! by Lester Burton Shadowdark by Kelsey Dione Snomes by Firith Studio Dragonbane by Free League Beetle Knight by Jim Hall Mouseritter by Isaac Williams
Fellas, is it bad to want a capable character? (I also hate lock dips and dipping in other classes just for a few bonuses without any justification in character) But the rest feels......quite aqusatory of something I never actually did. It's kinda why I love playing the barbarian, since I can focus on combat, but everything else is veery customizable and able to be woven into the narrative as it unfolds
You can always be a warlock mechanically without being a warlock narratively. For my hexadin I basically just flavor eldritch blast as a holy spear of light granted by their oath. I feel like people only have a problem with hex dips because of how universally good they are for certain classes. I doubt people would even care about them if they were suboptimal, but because they're optimal everyone jumps on them like they're public enemy #1, like "how dare you pick a clearly strong option, you fiend."
well said. optimizing violence (in my experience) has never been very interesting. BUT...when players are into it banning stuff doesn't go over very well. i've found it fair in the past to let obscene build combos function in the game exactly as they are designed to work (and get really excited for the players when they go off), but to also introduce problems that just can't be solved through violence or their very very specific build focus.
That's an interesting way of letting them discover the problem themselves. Let them have their fun with their "OP" builds for a bit and then wait 1-3 sessions for them to get bored. God mode is only fun for about 15 minutes.
No matter how optimized you are, it's never "God mode." If a dm wants to challenge you, you will be challenged. Optimizing for combat doesn't have to come at the cost of not optimizing for RP. You can do both at the same time. I just want to play a capable character without glaring weaknesses that are likely to end their story prematurely. If you can't fight effectively, you're not cut out to be an adventurer and would likely not have survived to level 5 realistically, especially in a particularly brutal, high combat campaign. Different things work for different campaigns. If your players roll up to Tomb of Horrors with full combat optimization, they're going to have a terrible time. But if you roll up to a combat heavy, brutal meat grinder campaign with a twig of a Bard built solely for roleplay, you're actively a detriment to your allies.
I'm introducing D&D to my friends and they have gone into it with the mindset of optimizers... But without actually understanding what the optimization is for or why they're doing it. I asked for a simple backstory (who are you, where do you come from, what was your upbringing like, what made you want to start adventuring) and said it could even just be a bulletpoint list that they can flesh out later. It has been over a month without getting a single backstory because they're all convinced that they have to read the ENTIRE LORE of D&D and Faerûn to answer those simple questions. I told them that any world-specific information they want, they could just describe to me and I could help them with, but they just refuse. Plus, even though they constantly talk about not wanting too much overlap in abilities so they don't "step on each others' toes", basically no one took any proficiencies other than Stealth, Sleight of Hand, Deception, or Persuasion.
The funny thing is, part of this depends on the DM. You can still try just about anything, but the DM needs to have the right balance of what is feasible and what isn't. I wish I could better convey to my players that lassoing a spinning blade trap could pull them out of the pit they're in, but without spelling it out. Again, there does need to be a line. Let's say a guy tries to keep his blade in a foe and keep twisting every turn to automatically damage that foe. He's either going to need an ability to let him do that or there's no reason every other creature won't try to do the same against them and it becomes a weird mess of blade twisting and grappling every combat. But to address the over reliance on a character's abilities, it would go a long way to make it worth a character's effort to not use their abilities. Say what you want about 4e, but it had some instances where you could turn a trap against your foes and save your own resources for later. On top of all that, it's also your job as the player to look for things to do that aren't on your character sheet. Ask if the stalagtites might fall if shot, ask if puddles are good for conducting electricity or being frozen, ask if the beasts would chase some rations rather than you, etc.
Well, you hit the spot on this one. Minmaxing indeed kills the fun for me. And I see this happening with my players as well. So I encourage them not to do it, as it is not necessary to succeed in the end. After all, my experience is that people usually have the most fun when embracing their character flaws.
i only really did a "build" when i built a character with a crossbow in mind as their main weapon. I was variant human so i picked up crossbow expert and since we started at level 4 i increased my DEX to 20, as well as picked up archery as my fighting style since i was playing a ranger. at the end of our last session i got a +1 crossbow that turns into a +2 crossbow against undead. we were level 5 by then so our proficiency bonus was +3. All of that totaled up to a whopping +12 to attacks against undead
Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 4th Edition. My group and my DM went through Pathfinder 1e and 2e, DnD 4th and 5th edition, and the OSE version. While all the systems had their perks, they also all felt one-noted, especially during combat. We started WFRP 4th edition a few months ago, and really haven't looked back at all. It's roleplay heavy with so many options for character builds and routes for development, and every individual skill and characteristic is utilized in gameplay. 3/4 of our session time is character roleplay, and we usually add in that little bit of combat for those players we have who are playing combat heavy characters. The rules are so simple to follow once you get the hang of it. No more adding damage 4d6, plus 3d6 sneak attack + 1d4 poison, and "oh wait I activated *this* feat so that's another 2d6 damage"!
I'm building a hybrid approach. You're right - computers are faster and flashier. But the fixed worlds of video games and repeat content don't give the vibe that a co-op in a world of our imaginations brings. I'm a programmer and a DM. So I'm trying to build a system that has the speed of a video game for rule/number crunching, but the flexibility of the TTRPG. It's an experiment, but your video has made me change something - I was going to have abilities be given out as a choice each level with some choices coming from RP opportunities (like your faction you're learning under), but now I think I'll give a default ability or two per level and then permit players to unlock other abilities so long as they find/achieve X faction/teacher/requirement and they've hit the level requirement. I was worried that giving players similar abilities would reduce their uniqueness, but I think it's more important to tell them 'no' much less and to keep them from feeling a need to optimize. And any ability that flavors a class' "yes"es should be slapped on. The player can decide where they actually specialize by how they use the toys.
Yes i waited 2 weeks for this🎉