General Tabs 0:00 Intro 1:12 City of Arches! 2:00 Disclaimers 2:43 Big Thoughts 5:57 Quick Flip 6:23 Table of Contents 7:19 Welcome to Adventure 9:00 Exhaustion 10:11 What Mike Doesn't Love 11:20 Rogue 11:58 Weapon Masteries 15:23 Surprised By Character Origins 17:02 Species 20:12 Heat Metal 20:40 Forcecage 21:01 Leomunds' Tiny Hut 22:26 Compatibility 27:07 DMG Speculation 27:50 Good for New Players, Playing the Game 32:25 Creating a Character 32:53 Character Sheet 36:11 Why This is the Best RPG Book Ever (Heroes Feast) 37:40 Word Mike Loathes (Utilize) 39:00 Prone 40:19 Missing Things (Downtime, Deities, Session 0) 46:07 Backgrounds Bugaboo 50:48 Conjure & Summon Spells 53:13 Feats 55:28 Rules Glossary 57:29 Backstory, Be A Nice Player, Marching Order 58:45 Final Conclusion
The idea that individuals can be surprised rather than ALL of them being surprised makes perfect sense to me, I don't really understand why people can't wrap their head around it.
Agreed. And also, it always felt like a “Gotcha!” As a player, it felt *soo good* to get Surprise on an enemy. But it felt brutal to be surprised! This simple nerf is elegant and necessary. I’m onboard with it.
that's a misunderstanding of the issues. so the way earlier editions would run it, at the start of combat there was an often invisible ROUND 0, also called the SURPRISE ROUND. so in the case of a surprise attack people would roll perception checks (spot, listen, survival, sense motive, etc.) and if you passed you would get to act during round 0 and if you failed you had to wait till round 1. 5e's answer for this was to instead make surprise a condition, so if you had the surprised condition you couldn't act on the first turn of combat. some of the big problems with surprised as a condition, is that the first sentence of the condition says the DM can just unilaterally decided who is or isn't surprised at a whim... or with a passive perception DC (it says stealth check, but the dm chooses the stealth roll of the monster so it's a variable DC) the issue isn't that people are trying to say that one member of the party can't be surprised because another member passed their surprise check, in fact the rules for every edition effectively say "members of a group can be surprised even if other members aren't" the issue is that many DMs would do a weird hybrid SURPRISE ROUND where if the monsters would get a whole round to attack without the players being able to use reactions or free actions. this is mostly possible due to the fact that 5e allows DM's to just say "fuck it, you're surprised". that paired with the fact that 5e monsters and players are tuned for players to have 3-5 encounters in an adventuring day, but most DM's and parties run 1 encounter long rest repeat it leads to DMs feeling like they need to sneak more hits in from their monsters to even stay competitive.
@@NoESanity pretty good write up and demo of the worry on surprise rounds/round 0. Do you like the new rules change? Just disadvantage on initiative? I guess it’s only appropriate for tables that have every character and monster act in initiative order. For tables they have moved to “characters’ turn / “monsters’ turn” it sort of washes out. Thoughts?
Sly you finally hit on something in this video that I had been thinking but had not put the thoughts to actual words yet. You pointed out that D&D seems to be playing "catch up" mechanically to the ttrpg scene and yea, I think you hit the nail on the head and wrapped up every issue I have with current day official dnd vs everything else out there.
23:56 I think sub classes are very clearly defined by the Lv3 Sub Class Feature. The Base Class tells you when you gain a subclass, not the subclass. Seems easy.
I think all WotC needs to do to make mixed-species characters supported in the rules like they were before (half-elves, half-orcs etc) is to introduce species origin feats. Like, okay, take human and, instead of taking one of the background origin feats, take the “elven lineage” origin feat which gives you a little splash of elf species bonuses
@@joncarroll2040 seems easy enough to implement since everyone gets an origin feat so you just say swap out the one you'd get from you background for a species one
Use: Means to employ something for its intended purpose. For example, you can use a pen to write a letter. "Use" is a simpler word and can be used when something can be taken, held, or deployed. It can also be used as a noun or a verb. Utilize: Means to employ something for a new, creative, or strategic purpose. For example, you can utilize a pen to make a hole in paper. "Utilize" often suggests finding a new, practical, or profitable use for something. It's borrowed from Middle French and first appeared in English in the 1800s. "Utilize" is only a verb.
Thanks for posting this again. It would have been nice if youtube allowed you to unblur the original upload, but I am glad this is available. I made sure to watch this version all the way through again to help with metrics... thanks for all your hard work, it is appreciated. 🙂
I feel like also the book could say, “and is now Prone.” Capitalizing Prone would let you know it’s not a roleplaying descriptor; it’s a rules mechanic!
@@thecrossroadstavern1447 possibly, but it's important for rule books to stay uniform. when something applies, enters, or causes a condition, we call it the ___ condition, because there is a big difference between "leaving the target blind" and "gives the target the blinded condition" fluff needs to step aside for clarity, or else we get stupid issues like "fire ball says it creates the burning hazard, so my fireball should do an extra 1d4 damage every turn because the grass is on fire. " or "i'm a medium creature but i only drank 3750ml's of water, does that mean i gain a full as point of exhaustion?"
RE: The lack of cultural & background specifics - It's unreasonable to expect them to define mechanics tied to cultures for Krynn, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, Demiplans of Dread, Sigil, etc. They're trying to make this sourcebook applicable to whatever world or setting you want to use it in. The price for this flexibility is the loss of entries like "Due to the influence the Undying Court has in their daily lives, characters raised among the Aerenal elves of Ebberon gain training in History and Religion." (and repeat for every culture and subculture in every major WotC IP). This is clearly seen under the Orc entry: "Orc youths on some worlds are told about their ancestors' great travels and travails. Inspired by those tales many of those orcs wonder when Gruumsh will call on them to match the heroic deeds of old and if they will prove worthy of his favor. Other orcs are happy to leave old tales in the past and find their own way."
@@imayb1 Tying feats and ability score increases to background gives an incentive for DMs to involve their players in the world they're creating by making custom backgrounds that fit their own settings. Just letting players minmax their abilities, feat, and starting skills completely removes any reason to make characters that aren't optimized. Furthermore, I think it's important to remember that the DM has veto authority on characters you bring to the game. Your table may be fine with minmaxing everything and ignoring the flavor text of the backgrounds, and if you find that sort of thing fun then more power to you, but that doesn't fly at mine. When my players choose a background I expect them to incorporate it into their backstory or they will be asked to make changes. The way backgrounds are handled in 5.5 is my favorite part of the book exactly because I will be able to make custom backgrounds that will let my players play characters pulled right out of the different cultures that will be present in the game world.
Quentin from Canada nice video. I think I will use this more as a resource book . I have pre bought the PHB, DMG and MM package....this reminds me of AD&D changing to the 2nd edition rules in the 80s when I played as a teenager
Backwards compatibility is pretty important for people who are currently running games and want to convert to 2024 for subclasses -- I'm in a campaign that's been going on for almost 2 years, and some of the players are classes that aren't in the new PHB, but it can be converted over without too much trouble.
Thank you! I thought that Hasbro was overreaching during your original video, and it's nice to be able to glimpse at some of the material in the new books.
I have a sneaking suspicion that DMG2024 will NOT have additional conversion tools/ advice for pre2024 content. I feel like they are moving forwardand not turning back, going all in on 2024 rules being THE way to play 5e... 🤷
They are going all in on 2024, with anything updated replacing the old, but the old stuff that wasn't updated is fine to use. I'm honestly not sure what other guidance people require regarding backwards compatibility.
Re: the verbiage of saying "...has the Prone condition..." Instead of "...is knocked prone..." I think the reason for this is so they can lump all "conditions" together in the glossary, and by saying "prone condition" you know to check the glossary under C for Conditions and not P for Prone. The verbiage change that threw me and I'm still not quite sure why they changed is the fact that they replaced "known" for casters like Bard and Sorcerer to "prepared", even though the mechanics of how they gain spells is exactly the same.
WOTC has already said that there will be details on how to run a Session 0 in the DMG, so it's not really necessary from the player standpoint. The player isn't running it and doesn't really get to tell the Dungeon Master what should go in it. DMs, on the other hand, set up and facilitate the session for the players, so the nuts and bolts details need to be in the DMG. The new PHB provides enough info to let players know generally what a Session 0 is and what it is for, that it is something to reasonably expect from a DM (and, implicitly, something to ask a DM about), and the broad game issues that can be addressed. What else do the players need on their end?
So backgrounds best idea is to essentially just get a background from an old book since they have actual features, and then also gain an origin feat of your choice? Really begs the question as to why anyone would want to use the new ones. I don't mind someone saying "Well Im going to be a Farmer to be a tougher Barbarian" because if they want to be optimized, fine, as long as they have fun. But I feel like the conversation will probably go "Well I'd rather my character is a Hermit, but I want them to be bulky, so I'm going to pick a 2014 Hermit and then take Tough."
@@chrisramsay8795 I think even from a Roleplay perspective it makes far more sense to do the old background method since some of those feats may not apply to the character fantasy as well as another would even if the flavor of the chosen background did.
This seems to be a thing a lot of TH-camrs who are talking about backgrounds which I can't fathom. Just because your background is a specific job, it doesn't mean that is your whole life was that specific job. In your example you say, for a fighter to be optimal, they can't pick entertainer. You are right that the majority of their background should align with the optimal build, but conflating backstory with background are two different things. The background is initial training. It's probably a formative time in the character's life that has given them specific traits. Think of it like school. A wizard could have grown up on a farm but also have gone to school later in life after showing an aptitude for magics. Nothing stops you from having a backstory which ties back to a specific way of life. Training is really what the background is about. I'm not sure why everyone continues to hound on this. It feels like a lot of people want the book to sum up everything and neatly write their backstory. This takes player creativity out of the equation and the justification for this is there is no mechanicaly tie in. You used the entertainer example for fighter, and you are right, taking the farmer talent is more optimal. Here's an easy way to put entertainer in your backstory. Ok, you spent the first 16 years of your life on a farm. Hard work from sun up to sun down. One day a band of minstrels passed by your farm and asked your family if they could rest there. They had been on the road for many days and wanted some time off the road. They offered your parents a small but respectable sum of money to stay in the barn. Your parents agreed so the minstrels stayed on your farm for 2 days, which allowed you to make a connection with the leader of the band. When they left, you felt you were missing something so that night you snuck away, caught up with the troupe and continued traveling with them. Intoxicated with the way of life, you did not feel the need to go home but instead you wrote letters to your family regailing them with your travels. Over the next couple of years you learned (insert appropriate skill). The rest of the story is up to you. If a gm would block you from taking an extra skill not in the background because it clashes too much with the book, it may be time to consider getting a new gm. I know people harp on the making "small fixes" the designers should consider, but the conversation with the gm about making their character what they want, is the game. The book can help lead new players to discovering a character they like, but it is not stopping a person from being creative.
55:10 Yes, you have to declare you are using lucky before the roll, it gives advantage/disadvantage and you can’t have advantage/disadvantage after the roll!
I was ok with the move a more heroic game back in 2014 (as someone who did not play 2e-4e) relative to what I played as a kid. This edition just takes things too far IMO, removing a lot of the dramatic tension, which was already teetering. There is nothing wrong with playing characters who are super-heroic from the start, but it just isn't for me.
44:54 I do think session zero and downtime activities belongs in the DMG and not the players hand book. In the old core books it was really annoying to flip the through 2-3 books to understand a rule. Looking at you 5e14 stealth rules 👀
Maybe. Players should know about Session zeroes. I personally think they are a waste of time. Also, the DMG is also used to clarify what was in the PHB and may add somethings to it.
@The_RealWilliam hmmmm... I can respect your opinion on session Zeros, but disagree. I certainly don't think Session Zeros are a waste of time. Moreover, I disagree that the DMG should just be a supplement that only clarifies rules or adds to what's in the PHB. That mentality is what made DnD confusing in past editions. The PHB is how players play the game and should largely be focused on being a player. The DMG is how the DM plays the game and should be largely focused on the DM. Furthermore, rules should be stated clearly in their entirety in one source and not have bits and pieces scattered across the core books. Besides Session Zero and downtime, another example would be ability score adjudication. Ability score adjudication should only be in the DMG, in my opinion. The players should know that they have the option to use Persuasion in a social interaction so that should be in the PHB, but they shouldn't be bogged down by the mechanics of social interaction that are listed in the DMG.
I think most people are absolutely going to mix old subclasses with the new base class combos. Most playgroups that play D&D have probably played les than 3-4 characters in their ENTIRE lives. It's very likely they haven't even SEEN many of the other subclasses, let alone been in a game with them and heaven forbid played them for themselves. I think most people are gonna say "i want to use the new fighter base class with the echo knight subclass" and that's going to be perfectly reasonable to do.
Conjure Spells used to have other uses than dealing damage.(I am trying to avoid the uti... word here) I really hate what happened to the creative use of spells, especially the conjuring spells...
Use: Employ something for its intended purpose. Utilize: Make use of something in a way that might not be its direct or original purpose. example you utilize a frying pan as a weapon, but you use a sword as a weapon or utilize your sword to hammer a nail. okay they use the incorrect term in the Tools section ... not always but at least multiple times, which suggests they don't understand the difference. hmm - not sure I agree with their Class overview complexity: Rogue Average, Wizard High, Paladin High, Barbarian Low, Druid Average, Sorcerer Average, Warlock Average - if you treat a rogue as low then you are going to get a dead or imprisoned rogue. Backgrounds ... Feat: should be a short list of recommended and pick one from the list instead of just one default Skill Proficiencies: a short list with pick two from the list instead of two defaults Yes ... role play as your character doesn't mean you have an excuse to annoy the other players the Multiverse/planes .. yes, in the wrong book - but I disagree about replacing it with a section on gods since that is world or campaign orientated and thus more DM suited. Anything about gods in the player's book would be very generic and maybe have class implications. Mixed species ... um nope, not recommended - way too many hybrid races/species ... unless you like mules, so if they can breed together without significant hassles (ignoring social ones) then they are basically the same species.
I wonder if the change to "Species" is to basically say "not half-breeds" because theyre genetically different species? Which seems like to me considering how much of the player base wants to be half X and part Y raised by Z...
The word is too science-y anyway and doesn't make any sense if you're e.g. an aasimar. It's part of the corporation-ization of fantasy Wizards were talking about during the late 3rd edition era. Fantasy is stripped of its mythological roots and made into science fiction. This is way too colorful and sanitized to carry on the d&d legacy. Removing the "problematic content" just rounds out all the corners until it's this strange bland pastiche of actual D&D.
I appreciate you're surprised they didn't change species up entirely for heritage and culture, but I think they almost *can't* without an edition change. in order to make this 100% backwards compatible with original 5e, it needs to be tweaks more than anything.
There's really no reason to detail session zero stuff in the PHB, as it is something the DM plans. Including hard and fast elements to what a session zero includes creates expectations in the players' heads, and not all DMs will have the same idea about what a session zero entails.
38:00 UTILIZE is not actually synonymous with USE, they are actually close to opposites. When you USE something, it is performing its intended function. so hammering a nail with a hammer is a USE of the hammer, cutting your steak is a USE of a steak knife When you UTILIZE something, it is performing an unintended function. So you can UTILIZE a hammer to tenderise your steak or UTILIZE a knife to screw in a screw, even though those are not intended uses. while common speech allows use to use either USE or UTILIZE interchangeable and be understood, they do have their own meanings and place within our lexicon.
On the topic of the character sheet. I haven't yet found a pdf version only a bundle of 50 printed ones with a folder for sale on dndbeyond. They surely wouldn't try to only sell them, would they?
I disagree. In most settings, knowledge of the multiverse seems likely to me to be something very esoteric. Some Wizards and NPCs might possess such knowledge, but how many others? This is very subjective, but I feel like this could easily have been shuffled into the DMG. I won't be surprised if much of it is repeated in the DMG. Most settings I've run or played over the years have their own cosmologies, anyway. WotC has a thirst to shoehorn them all together in order to market their "multiverse".
@@elementzero3379 I don't know what you mean by "most settings"? It's just weird that anyone would think PC's don't need to know about Multiverse. Descriptions of the Multiverse have existed in probably every edition of the PHB, not just 2024. 🤷🏿♂
@@The_RealWilliam You're right, it's usually in the PHB. Its presence doesn't bother me. I just agree with those who believe it doesn't need to be there in lieu of something more useful to players. Settings: Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Ptolus, Drakkenheim, etc... These are settings. Settings generally start out with their own distinct cosmologies. Eventually, WotC begins trying to transplant cosmologies and cross-pollinate. The latest efforts have been pushing this shared, unified multiverse. The concept has been around for ages, but they're really leaning into it in recent years. For some settings, like the Realms, this works fine. The Realms were created around that very conceit. For others, like Eberron, which were built around a rich and unique cosmology, it just doesn't work. Again, it's not a big deal. It's easy to ignore anything that doesn't work for our own table.
@@elementzero3379 Thanks for clarifying what you meant by settings, since the only settings I have ever been in were Greyhawk and Mystara. I have yet to play anything in Forgotten Realms.I have only become interested, in the (not so) new owners, work within the last year. But I can't see characters fighting Mindflayers, Gythis, Devils or anything outside of the Material Plane, and they don't get curious as to where they come from. But it is what it is, we (including the TH-camr) disagree on this issue.
@@The_RealWilliam I can see why you feel that way. If I were a person in such a world, I'd definitely be curious; but I'd almost definitely be a Wizard, as well. 😄 In most settings, it's less about a lack of curiosity and more about a lack of access to the information. The settings I listed are accidentally useful in showing an array of common knowledge. The Realms probably has a higher threshold of general knowledge than most. Many people know that Devils come from the Nine Hells, and probably know that Demons are different and from the Abyss. They know about the Triad (a divine alliance of gods) and Mount Celestia, and understand generally about such planes. In general, because of the importance of the gods in the Realms, people know more. In Eberron, there are 12 planes strongly connected to the world. Most people have general knowledge of their traits and influence on the world, and with which of the 12 moons each plane is associated. They don't often see extra-planar creatures, though, so they know very little about such things. The differences between demons and devils is irrelevant to the common citizen. They're both evil monsters they are unlikely to ever meet. Instead of associating creatures with the planes, they're more likely to think of monsters as coming from Khyber, Eberron's subterranean interior that is riddled with connections to demiplanes and pocket dimensions. Your average person in Eberron has learned that Fiends once ruled the world in ancient times, and that they are now bound inside Khyber after being defeated by the dragons. This is a gross oversimplification of the reality of their world, but it is mostly true. In settings like Ptolus, Drakkenheim, or Athas/Dark Sun, you have worlds that are cut off from the planes to varying degrees, and thus have very different cosmologies and understandings of such things. Most people in DnD worlds simply don't need to know the specifics, and might have a hard time finding an expert who could explain it to them. I usually think it's silly when DMs expect their players to pretend they aren't familiar with trolls and their weakness to fire, or that they're unfamiliar with owlbears. These creatures are the wildlife of their world. If these creatures are common, rather than rare or singular, everyone should know a little bit about them. I've never encountered a grizzly in the wild, nor a shark, but I've learned enough to have in mind some "do's and don'ts" if I ever do encounter them.
There won't be rules for mixed races with unique features because that will be too hard to code for D&D Beyond and video games. Ease of coding will be a driving factor in rules changes going forward.
Hi. Completely not about this video but should still generate something for it. Can I get the workbook or/and the companion book in a markdown format for Obsidian in any official source or is it more do it by hand method that I have to use? Either is fine. Just asking if I have an opinion to save a little time.
Yeah, I wish the backgrounds were geared more towards where you were as a child or young adult. Backgrounds all sound very odd to me; like, we are making level 1 characters right? Things like Folk Hero or Criminal sound like you had a whole profession that would have or should have lead to you gaining a level at some point. I seriously feel like a template could have been created for people to create backgrounds. It just feels short sighted.
It's easy enough to create one. You can also re-create the old fluff and ability modifers for e.g. dwarves and elves by creating the 'mountain clan warrior' or 'high woods hippie' backgrounds. Dwarves would get Str, Con, Wis, and the Tough feat.
@@edheldude Easy enough for you or me. I'm thinking of new players or new dms. There is a better way for a company that is creating the game to leave something like this more modular and not appear so structured and closed in to those coming in to the game.
@@iraedei They're not really creating this for us anymore. It's for the new kids, and making it simpler and more straight forward helps them navigate the game.
While "wolfball" is a great name, I think this was a missed opportunity to refer to that concept as "furball" 😂 Also, great breakdown of the new book. Thanks!
I like the way backgrounds work in the book. It balances things. The new books have a limited set of gears to use, and I plan to use those instead of picking any. If you are worried about optimization, opening the options does not help. It is worse.
Yeah I don't get that complaint - it's not like all players optimize their characters so there is no reason to make the backgrounds be optimal in the sourcebook. If you play with players who like to min max then change those rules instead of asking everyone to go by that.
If you use Shortsword (Vex) and Dagger (Nick) and you attack with Shortsword as PART of that attack you can also attack with Dagger. Question: I use my first attack with Shortsword, hit and get advantage on my next attack. I use my Extra Action to attack with Shortswrod and Dagger as part of the same attack. Do I roll 2d20, 3d20 or 4d20? Which weapon gets the Advantage and do you roll for the Dagger? Is it going to just add the damage to the attack? There is difference if you roll 2d20 or 3d20 or 4d20 🤔 You might get advantage on both of the attacks or only one of them or just roll one advantage for both? I see, you take 1 level Fighter for two weapon fighting and pick Shortsword and Dagger so you can make 5 attacks as Monk at level 6 🤔Two with Shortsword, Once with Dagger (As part of attack action) and Flurry of Blows kicking twice 🤣 Unarmed Strike does not require free hand as you can just kick.
Maybe if you can't figure out the couple extra options as a rogue/fighter just play something else. Ort find another game. I want complexity, not dumbed down combat.
Mike... Mike... 😊 Worry not.. With all those options, players will wind up focusing in on those neat thief things. 😃👍🏻 Might be a lot at 1st but players will focus those options for their Play style.
My players are 5th level and want to convert their characters to the new rules. One of them has a subclass that isn't in the 2024 Player's Handbook, so it's very nice for him that his subclass from an older book is compatible with the new rules.
Not sure how much sarcasm is there, but depending on which subclass, it can be potentially slotted into the new subclass levels (always starts at 3). I ask about the sarcasm because it's feeling like the rules while incredibly similar, are different enough that conversion looks to be tricky. I've heard at least one subclass, the shepherd druid I think, just doesn't work under the new rules because of dropping out hit dice from monsters.
@@LithmusEarth No sarcasm. He is a Path of the Giant Barbarian. The only difficulty is how to intrepid the Crushing Throw feature of the subclass "When you make a successful ranged attack with a thrown weapon using Strength, you can add your Rage Damage bonus to the attack’s damage roll." since all Rage Damage has been chanced in the new rules so all Barbarian get Rage Damage to all Strength-based attacks including attacks with thrown weapon not only melee weapon attack as it used to be.
@@sortehuse Oh like are you getting nothing from the Crushing Throw feature, or are you getting double the effect. Since it used to be that you didn't get it i suspect, this (without looking at it) just became a redundant feature. So I think you get nothing from it.
@@sortehuse I suspect nothing from the bonus. since the old way it worked, with the feature you got what is now normal. I suspect it just means the feature is worse.
On the top of Utilize vs Use, you don't think the wording "use the Use action" is less awkward wording? Utilize might be technically incorrect but its close enough to a synonym that it works. I do agree about "has the Prone condition" though, it should be "GAINS the Prone condition."
They've been moving away from gods for several editions. (I had a fight on reddit about this) Since 2nd edition, you don't have to have a deity to be a cleric or paladin. Without gods or alignment, where does divine characters draw their power from? They are just another type of magic-user. They do this for the atheists and other people who hate organized religion. It's a game, but these players can't even pretend that gods influence the world. Sad, really.
As an atheist and a gamer… and an adult, I have no problem parsing the followers of Pelor or Vecna, Olidamara, or Cuthbert from modern gods. Talking about this as a gaming book, I’m with Mike. It was a miss to not include a starter pantheon of gods like 3e PHB had. The Cleric, the Paladin, the Warlock… every character really. So much character source material just obliviously wiped away. :/
I'm a Christian, and false idol worship presented in the books has always bothered me. If you are a believer then why would you want to even pretend to worship fake gods? I, for one, am glad that they're moving away from having deities mentioned in the rulebook.
@@Quadrilli0n I'm neck deep in Pathfinder 2e as well. But Shadowdark is also great, and ICRPG, and "Tales from the Loop," and "Blades in the Dark" and "Cairn" and "Daggerheart" and several others. I didn't find the mechanics of "Vaesen" fun, but the idea is amazing. But "Delta Green" and "Call of C'thulu" will scratch that supernatural itch for you. And "Marvel Multiverse RPG" is a homerun for the Supers genre!
Strongly dislike the art _because_ it's "Happy 5e" tbh. It's safe and clean and sanitized. Everyone looks like they spend hours doing their hair and makeup. It feels very anti-adventure to me.
Anti-adventure puts the feeling I have about the art into words. A lot of it just feels so artificial and safe, with a couple of exceptions that I’ve seen in this video.
Should never have been “Species.” Should be “Origin”. Should never have been “Utilize.” Should be “Interact.” We will never have 3.0 again. And that breaks me.
Thanks for posting this, am extremely pissed off by what I saw at the 20:00 mark These morons couldn't even fix Flame Blade to work like Shadow Blade, it was such a simple fix, it was so obvious but I guess taking a 3 level dip to get a sword made of fire on my ranger or fighter or even monk is too OP apparently and pure druids are still expected to walk up onto melee range to use this worthless spell
General Tabs
0:00 Intro
1:12 City of Arches!
2:00 Disclaimers
2:43 Big Thoughts
5:57 Quick Flip
6:23 Table of Contents
7:19 Welcome to Adventure
9:00 Exhaustion
10:11 What Mike Doesn't Love
11:20 Rogue
11:58 Weapon Masteries
15:23 Surprised By Character Origins
17:02 Species
20:12 Heat Metal
20:40 Forcecage
21:01 Leomunds' Tiny Hut
22:26 Compatibility
27:07 DMG Speculation
27:50 Good for New Players, Playing the Game
32:25 Creating a Character
32:53 Character Sheet
36:11 Why This is the Best RPG Book Ever (Heroes Feast)
37:40 Word Mike Loathes (Utilize)
39:00 Prone
40:19 Missing Things (Downtime, Deities, Session 0)
46:07 Backgrounds Bugaboo
50:48 Conjure & Summon Spells
53:13 Feats
55:28 Rules Glossary
57:29 Backstory, Be A Nice Player, Marching Order
58:45 Final Conclusion
You are a lifesaver. Thank you for this.
Sure, I’ll watch again. Last time I basically listened while driving around. Love the content. Like the camera angle and reasonable thought process.
The idea that individuals can be surprised rather than ALL of them being surprised makes perfect sense to me, I don't really understand why people can't wrap their head around it.
Agreed. And also, it always felt like a “Gotcha!” As a player, it felt *soo good* to get Surprise on an enemy. But it felt brutal to be surprised! This simple nerf is elegant and necessary. I’m onboard with it.
that's a misunderstanding of the issues.
so the way earlier editions would run it, at the start of combat there was an often invisible ROUND 0, also called the SURPRISE ROUND. so in the case of a surprise attack people would roll perception checks (spot, listen, survival, sense motive, etc.) and if you passed you would get to act during round 0 and if you failed you had to wait till round 1.
5e's answer for this was to instead make surprise a condition, so if you had the surprised condition you couldn't act on the first turn of combat. some of the big problems with surprised as a condition, is that the first sentence of the condition says the DM can just unilaterally decided who is or isn't surprised at a whim... or with a passive perception DC (it says stealth check, but the dm chooses the stealth roll of the monster so it's a variable DC)
the issue isn't that people are trying to say that one member of the party can't be surprised because another member passed their surprise check, in fact the rules for every edition effectively say "members of a group can be surprised even if other members aren't" the issue is that many DMs would do a weird hybrid SURPRISE ROUND where if the monsters would get a whole round to attack without the players being able to use reactions or free actions. this is mostly possible due to the fact that 5e allows DM's to just say "fuck it, you're surprised". that paired with the fact that 5e monsters and players are tuned for players to have 3-5 encounters in an adventuring day, but most DM's and parties run 1 encounter long rest repeat it leads to DMs feeling like they need to sneak more hits in from their monsters to even stay competitive.
@@NoESanity pretty good write up and demo of the worry on surprise rounds/round 0. Do you like the new rules change? Just disadvantage on initiative?
I guess it’s only appropriate for tables that have every character and monster act in initiative order. For tables they have moved to “characters’ turn / “monsters’ turn” it sort of washes out. Thoughts?
Sly you finally hit on something in this video that I had been thinking but had not put the thoughts to actual words yet. You pointed out that D&D seems to be playing "catch up" mechanically to the ttrpg scene and yea, I think you hit the nail on the head and wrapped up every issue I have with current day official dnd vs everything else out there.
The genie is out of the bottle now, they can't ask the entire internet to blur pages.🤣
they can and probably will. it's WotC, if you don't remember to pay your gaming licenses they will send ruffians to your house.
23:56 I think sub classes are very clearly defined by the Lv3 Sub Class Feature. The Base Class tells you when you gain a subclass, not the subclass. Seems easy.
I think all WotC needs to do to make mixed-species characters supported in the rules like they were before (half-elves, half-orcs etc) is to introduce species origin feats.
Like, okay, take human and, instead of taking one of the background origin feats, take the “elven lineage” origin feat which gives you a little splash of elf species bonuses
That's basically how Pathfinder does it
@@joncarroll2040 seems easy enough to implement since everyone gets an origin feat so you just say swap out the one you'd get from you background for a species one
Use: Means to employ something for its intended purpose. For example, you can use a pen to write a letter. "Use" is a simpler word and can be used when something can be taken, held, or deployed. It can also be used as a noun or a verb.
Utilize: Means to employ something for a new, creative, or strategic purpose. For example, you can utilize a pen to make a hole in paper. "Utilize" often suggests finding a new, practical, or profitable use for something. It's borrowed from Middle French and first appeared in English in the 1800s. "Utilize" is only a verb.
Thanks for posting this again. It would have been nice if youtube allowed you to unblur the original upload, but I am glad this is available. I made sure to watch this version all the way through again to help with metrics...
thanks for all your hard work, it is appreciated. 🙂
I think simplifying some things would be worth it. I like that they put some more into how to play for a new player and ads a lot of context.
“Has the prone condition” is worded to easily direct the reader to find more details about Prone in the list of other conditions.
I feel like also the book could say, “and is now Prone.” Capitalizing Prone would let you know it’s not a roleplaying descriptor; it’s a rules mechanic!
@@thecrossroadstavern1447 possibly, but it's important for rule books to stay uniform. when something applies, enters, or causes a condition, we call it the ___ condition, because there is a big difference between "leaving the target blind" and "gives the target the blinded condition" fluff needs to step aside for clarity, or else we get stupid issues like
"fire ball says it creates the burning hazard, so my fireball should do an extra 1d4 damage every turn because the grass is on fire. " or "i'm a medium creature but i only drank 3750ml's of water, does that mean i gain a full as point of exhaustion?"
RE: The lack of cultural & background specifics - It's unreasonable to expect them to define mechanics tied to cultures for Krynn, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, Demiplans of Dread, Sigil, etc. They're trying to make this sourcebook applicable to whatever world or setting you want to use it in. The price for this flexibility is the loss of entries like "Due to the influence the Undying Court has in their daily lives, characters raised among the Aerenal elves of Ebberon gain training in History and Religion." (and repeat for every culture and subculture in every major WotC IP).
This is clearly seen under the Orc entry: "Orc youths on some worlds are told about their ancestors' great travels and travails. Inspired by those tales many of those orcs wonder when Gruumsh will call on them to match the heroic deeds of old and if they will prove worthy of his favor. Other orcs are happy to leave old tales in the past and find their own way."
Exactly! So why didn't they leave a modular option of "choose a feat and two skills". The flavor text is just that; flavor!
@@imayb1 Tying feats and ability score increases to background gives an incentive for DMs to involve their players in the world they're creating by making custom backgrounds that fit their own settings. Just letting players minmax their abilities, feat, and starting skills completely removes any reason to make characters that aren't optimized.
Furthermore, I think it's important to remember that the DM has veto authority on characters you bring to the game. Your table may be fine with minmaxing everything and ignoring the flavor text of the backgrounds, and if you find that sort of thing fun then more power to you, but that doesn't fly at mine. When my players choose a background I expect them to incorporate it into their backstory or they will be asked to make changes. The way backgrounds are handled in 5.5 is my favorite part of the book exactly because I will be able to make custom backgrounds that will let my players play characters pulled right out of the different cultures that will be present in the game world.
@@russelldelancy9028lame
I bought the 2014 core box set on sale and the new 24 handbook. Wow so much easier to learn to play using the new book night and day!
Quentin from Canada nice video. I think I will use this more as a resource book . I have pre bought the PHB, DMG and MM package....this reminds me of AD&D changing to the 2nd edition rules in the 80s when I played as a teenager
glad for you!
hope the frustration you felt earlier fades away in no time
S2
I'm looking forward to the review in this style for the DMG.
Backwards compatibility is pretty important for people who are currently running games and want to convert to 2024 for subclasses -- I'm in a campaign that's been going on for almost 2 years, and some of the players are classes that aren't in the new PHB, but it can be converted over without too much trouble.
Page through begins at 5:57
Welcome Back. I'm rewatching this but it's not a podcast this time.
heroic feast is also missing the part about the WIS saves so probably won't get used as much any more.
Thank you! I thought that Hasbro was overreaching during your original video, and it's nice to be able to glimpse at some of the material in the new books.
They were t overreaching (legally); they were just be stupid
D&D 5e isn't Heroic Fantasy. It is super heroes in plate mail.
I've been saying this!!!
If you think 5e is for super heroes... you need to test 3.5 jajajaja
I have a sneaking suspicion that DMG2024 will NOT have additional conversion tools/ advice for pre2024 content. I feel like they are moving forwardand not turning back, going all in on 2024 rules being THE way to play 5e... 🤷
They are going all in on 2024, with anything updated replacing the old, but the old stuff that wasn't updated is fine to use. I'm honestly not sure what other guidance people require regarding backwards compatibility.
I agree and it doesn't bother me. How much hand-holding is really needed? It's not that complex.
"Has the prone condition" tells you where to look for the description of prone, under the conditions section
Re: the verbiage of saying "...has the Prone condition..." Instead of "...is knocked prone..." I think the reason for this is so they can lump all "conditions" together in the glossary, and by saying "prone condition" you know to check the glossary under C for Conditions and not P for Prone. The verbiage change that threw me and I'm still not quite sure why they changed is the fact that they replaced "known" for casters like Bard and Sorcerer to "prepared", even though the mechanics of how they gain spells is exactly the same.
ira probably just unifying the language and Prepared was the choice of word used.
WOTC has already said that there will be details on how to run a Session 0 in the DMG, so it's not really necessary from the player standpoint. The player isn't running it and doesn't really get to tell the Dungeon Master what should go in it. DMs, on the other hand, set up and facilitate the session for the players, so the nuts and bolts details need to be in the DMG. The new PHB provides enough info to let players know generally what a Session 0 is and what it is for, that it is something to reasonably expect from a DM (and, implicitly, something to ask a DM about), and the broad game issues that can be addressed. What else do the players need on their end?
I like the rules and the layout of the older book better.
So backgrounds best idea is to essentially just get a background from an old book since they have actual features, and then also gain an origin feat of your choice? Really begs the question as to why anyone would want to use the new ones. I don't mind someone saying "Well Im going to be a Farmer to be a tougher Barbarian" because if they want to be optimized, fine, as long as they have fun. But I feel like the conversation will probably go "Well I'd rather my character is a Hermit, but I want them to be bulky, so I'm going to pick a 2014 Hermit and then take Tough."
Or you invent your own background: _Muscle bum._
optimisation vs roleplay
@@chrisramsay8795 I think even from a Roleplay perspective it makes far more sense to do the old background method since some of those feats may not apply to the character fantasy as well as another would even if the flavor of the chosen background did.
49:55 Does your house rule suggestion override the background’s ability score bonuses? Because that is +2, +1. Which is what the background gives.
This seems to be a thing a lot of TH-camrs who are talking about backgrounds which I can't fathom. Just because your background is a specific job, it doesn't mean that is your whole life was that specific job. In your example you say, for a fighter to be optimal, they can't pick entertainer. You are right that the majority of their background should align with the optimal build, but conflating backstory with background are two different things. The background is initial training. It's probably a formative time in the character's life that has given them specific traits. Think of it like school. A wizard could have grown up on a farm but also have gone to school later in life after showing an aptitude for magics. Nothing stops you from having a backstory which ties back to a specific way of life. Training is really what the background is about. I'm not sure why everyone continues to hound on this. It feels like a lot of people want the book to sum up everything and neatly write their backstory. This takes player creativity out of the equation and the justification for this is there is no mechanicaly tie in.
You used the entertainer example for fighter, and you are right, taking the farmer talent is more optimal. Here's an easy way to put entertainer in your backstory. Ok, you spent the first 16 years of your life on a farm. Hard work from sun up to sun down. One day a band of minstrels passed by your farm and asked your family if they could rest there. They had been on the road for many days and wanted some time off the road. They offered your parents a small but respectable sum of money to stay in the barn. Your parents agreed so the minstrels stayed on your farm for 2 days, which allowed you to make a connection with the leader of the band. When they left, you felt you were missing something so that night you snuck away, caught up with the troupe and continued traveling with them. Intoxicated with the way of life, you did not feel the need to go home but instead you wrote letters to your family regailing them with your travels. Over the next couple of years you learned (insert appropriate skill). The rest of the story is up to you.
If a gm would block you from taking an extra skill not in the background because it clashes too much with the book, it may be time to consider getting a new gm. I know people harp on the making "small fixes" the designers should consider, but the conversation with the gm about making their character what they want, is the game. The book can help lead new players to discovering a character they like, but it is not stopping a person from being creative.
55:10 Yes, you have to declare you are using lucky before the roll, it gives advantage/disadvantage and you can’t have advantage/disadvantage after the roll!
RE: toaster instruction language & "have the prone condition" -they should have just used particular font format types for game terms. Problem solved.
I was ok with the move a more heroic game back in 2014 (as someone who did not play 2e-4e) relative to what I played as a kid. This edition just takes things too far IMO, removing a lot of the dramatic tension, which was already teetering. There is nothing wrong with playing characters who are super-heroic from the start, but it just isn't for me.
I’m really really really hoping to learn about the blur while you describe what the artwork looks like! My lawyer approves!
Making new backgrounds will be in the dmg, and they are up to the dm working with the player.
I doubt it. The process seems straightforward enough in the PHB.
44:54 I do think session zero and downtime activities belongs in the DMG and not the players hand book. In the old core books it was really annoying to flip the through 2-3 books to understand a rule.
Looking at you 5e14 stealth rules 👀
Maybe. Players should know about Session zeroes. I personally think they are a waste of time. Also, the DMG is also used to clarify what was in the PHB and may add somethings to it.
@The_RealWilliam hmmmm... I can respect your opinion on session Zeros, but disagree. I certainly don't think Session Zeros are a waste of time. Moreover, I disagree that the DMG should just be a supplement that only clarifies rules or adds to what's in the PHB. That mentality is what made DnD confusing in past editions. The PHB is how players play the game and should largely be focused on being a player. The DMG is how the DM plays the game and should be largely focused on the DM. Furthermore, rules should be stated clearly in their entirety in one source and not have bits and pieces scattered across the core books.
Besides Session Zero and downtime, another example would be ability score adjudication. Ability score adjudication should only be in the DMG, in my opinion. The players should know that they have the option to use Persuasion in a social interaction so that should be in the PHB, but they shouldn't be bogged down by the mechanics of social interaction that are listed in the DMG.
@@fatewalker I don't have time to read your response, but it appears to be well thought out and the least I can do is read it when I enough time.
@The_RealWilliam respect you brother. I am long winded when I first wake up lol.
I prefer the 10 step exhaustion from the playtest
At 10th level a Monk no longer suffers Exhaustion levels. 👍👍
Awesome to post this second video!
You rock Sly! Thanks for making this. ☺️
I'm certainly curious about it, but I'm still so unbelievably finished with WotC
I think most people are absolutely going to mix old subclasses with the new base class combos. Most playgroups that play D&D have probably played les than 3-4 characters in their ENTIRE lives. It's very likely they haven't even SEEN many of the other subclasses, let alone been in a game with them and heaven forbid played them for themselves. I think most people are gonna say "i want to use the new fighter base class with the echo knight subclass" and that's going to be perfectly reasonable to do.
Conjure Spells used to have other uses than dealing damage.(I am trying to avoid the uti... word here) I really hate what happened to the creative use of spells, especially the conjuring spells...
Use: Employ something for its intended purpose.
Utilize: Make use of something in a way that might not be its direct or original purpose.
example you utilize a frying pan as a weapon, but you use a sword as a weapon or utilize your sword to hammer a nail.
okay they use the incorrect term in the Tools section ... not always but at least multiple times, which suggests they don't understand the difference.
hmm - not sure I agree with their Class overview complexity: Rogue Average, Wizard High, Paladin High, Barbarian Low, Druid Average, Sorcerer Average, Warlock Average - if you treat a rogue as low then you are going to get a dead or imprisoned rogue.
Backgrounds ... Feat: should be a short list of recommended and pick one from the list instead of just one default
Skill Proficiencies: a short list with pick two from the list instead of two defaults
Yes ... role play as your character doesn't mean you have an excuse to annoy the other players
the Multiverse/planes .. yes, in the wrong book - but I disagree about replacing it with a section on gods since that is world or campaign orientated and thus more DM suited. Anything about gods in the player's book would be very generic and maybe have class implications.
Mixed species ... um nope, not recommended - way too many hybrid races/species ... unless you like mules, so if they can breed together without significant hassles (ignoring social ones) then they are basically the same species.
The art is very similar to the first and second addition art
Yay! Back again 🎉
I wonder if the change to "Species" is to basically say "not half-breeds" because theyre genetically different species?
Which seems like to me considering how much of the player base wants to be half X and part Y raised by Z...
DMB will have blend rules, I bet.
The word is too science-y anyway and doesn't make any sense if you're e.g. an aasimar. It's part of the corporation-ization of fantasy Wizards were talking about during the late 3rd edition era. Fantasy is stripped of its mythological roots and made into science fiction. This is way too colorful and sanitized to carry on the d&d legacy. Removing the "problematic content" just rounds out all the corners until it's this strange bland pastiche of actual D&D.
I appreciate you're surprised they didn't change species up entirely for heritage and culture, but I think they almost *can't* without an edition change. in order to make this 100% backwards compatible with original 5e, it needs to be tweaks more than anything.
There's really no reason to detail session zero stuff in the PHB, as it is something the DM plans. Including hard and fast elements to what a session zero includes creates expectations in the players' heads, and not all DMs will have the same idea about what a session zero entails.
its good for informing new players that they may have a session 0 and what that used for when playing in a campaign.
38:00 UTILIZE is not actually synonymous with USE, they are actually close to opposites.
When you USE something, it is performing its intended function. so hammering a nail with a hammer is a USE of the hammer, cutting your steak is a USE of a steak knife
When you UTILIZE something, it is performing an unintended function. So you can UTILIZE a hammer to tenderise your steak or UTILIZE a knife to screw in a screw, even though those are not intended uses.
while common speech allows use to use either USE or UTILIZE interchangeable and be understood, they do have their own meanings and place within our lexicon.
Just saying this is great the 4th time listening to it. Hope they listen to you in 2034
On the topic of the character sheet. I haven't yet found a pdf version only a bundle of 50 printed ones with a folder for sale on dndbeyond. They surely wouldn't try to only sell them, would they?
Finally, very exciting
Asking if the PC's really need to know about the Multiverse is like asking, do we really need to know about outside our solar system?
I disagree. In most settings, knowledge of the multiverse seems likely to me to be something very esoteric. Some Wizards and NPCs might possess such knowledge, but how many others?
This is very subjective, but I feel like this could easily have been shuffled into the DMG. I won't be surprised if much of it is repeated in the DMG. Most settings I've run or played over the years have their own cosmologies, anyway. WotC has a thirst to shoehorn them all together in order to market their "multiverse".
@@elementzero3379 I don't know what you mean by "most settings"? It's just weird that anyone would think PC's don't need to know about Multiverse. Descriptions of the Multiverse have existed in probably every edition of the PHB, not just 2024. 🤷🏿♂
@@The_RealWilliam You're right, it's usually in the PHB. Its presence doesn't bother me. I just agree with those who believe it doesn't need to be there in lieu of something more useful to players.
Settings: Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Ptolus, Drakkenheim, etc... These are settings. Settings generally start out with their own distinct cosmologies. Eventually, WotC begins trying to transplant cosmologies and cross-pollinate. The latest efforts have been pushing this shared, unified multiverse. The concept has been around for ages, but they're really leaning into it in recent years. For some settings, like the Realms, this works fine. The Realms were created around that very conceit. For others, like Eberron, which were built around a rich and unique cosmology, it just doesn't work.
Again, it's not a big deal. It's easy to ignore anything that doesn't work for our own table.
@@elementzero3379 Thanks for clarifying what you meant by settings, since the only settings I have ever been in were Greyhawk and Mystara. I have yet to play anything in Forgotten Realms.I have only become interested, in the (not so) new owners, work within the last year. But I can't see characters fighting Mindflayers, Gythis, Devils or anything outside of the Material Plane, and they don't get curious as to where they come from. But it is what it is, we (including the TH-camr) disagree on this issue.
@@The_RealWilliam I can see why you feel that way. If I were a person in such a world, I'd definitely be curious; but I'd almost definitely be a Wizard, as well. 😄
In most settings, it's less about a lack of curiosity and more about a lack of access to the information. The settings I listed are accidentally useful in showing an array of common knowledge.
The Realms probably has a higher threshold of general knowledge than most. Many people know that Devils come from the Nine Hells, and probably know that Demons are different and from the Abyss. They know about the Triad (a divine alliance of gods) and Mount Celestia, and understand generally about such planes. In general, because of the importance of the gods in the Realms, people know more.
In Eberron, there are 12 planes strongly connected to the world. Most people have general knowledge of their traits and influence on the world, and with which of the 12 moons each plane is associated.
They don't often see extra-planar creatures, though, so they know very little about such things. The differences between demons and devils is irrelevant to the common citizen. They're both evil monsters they are unlikely to ever meet. Instead of associating creatures with the planes, they're more likely to think of monsters as coming from Khyber, Eberron's subterranean interior that is riddled with connections to demiplanes and pocket dimensions.
Your average person in Eberron has learned that Fiends once ruled the world in ancient times, and that they are now bound inside Khyber after being defeated by the dragons. This is a gross oversimplification of the reality of their world, but it is mostly true.
In settings like Ptolus, Drakkenheim, or Athas/Dark Sun, you have worlds that are cut off from the planes to varying degrees, and thus have very different cosmologies and understandings of such things.
Most people in DnD worlds simply don't need to know the specifics, and might have a hard time finding an expert who could explain it to them.
I usually think it's silly when DMs expect their players to pretend they aren't familiar with trolls and their weakness to fire, or that they're unfamiliar with owlbears. These creatures are the wildlife of their world. If these creatures are common, rather than rare or singular, everyone should know a little bit about them. I've never encountered a grizzly in the wild, nor a shark, but I've learned enough to have in mind some "do's and don'ts" if I ever do encounter them.
There won't be rules for mixed races with unique features because that will be too hard to code for D&D Beyond and video games.
Ease of coding will be a driving factor in rules changes going forward.
How is the price a "good deal" when you already own more than half the contents?...
Hi. Completely not about this video but should still generate something for it.
Can I get the workbook or/and the companion book in a markdown format for Obsidian in any official source or is it more do it by hand method that I have to use?
Either is fine. Just asking if I have an opinion to save a little time.
I was late to the game and just watched the blurred version this morning. I should have been a bit more late lol.
Yeah, I wish the backgrounds were geared more towards where you were as a child or young adult. Backgrounds all sound very odd to me; like, we are making level 1 characters right? Things like Folk Hero or Criminal sound like you had a whole profession that would have or should have lead to you gaining a level at some point. I seriously feel like a template could have been created for people to create backgrounds. It just feels short sighted.
It's easy enough to create one. You can also re-create the old fluff and ability modifers for e.g. dwarves and elves by creating the 'mountain clan warrior' or 'high woods hippie' backgrounds. Dwarves would get Str, Con, Wis, and the Tough feat.
@@edheldude Easy enough for you or me. I'm thinking of new players or new dms. There is a better way for a company that is creating the game to leave something like this more modular and not appear so structured and closed in to those coming in to the game.
@@iraedei They're not really creating this for us anymore. It's for the new kids, and making it simpler and more straight forward helps them navigate the game.
Why is everyone in the artwork so happy? Are they on something?
'Utilise' only used by those lying to me, trying to trick me out of my money.
So WOTC then.
Deception DC 15
Anything is forward or backwards compatable if you got a paper and pen. 😂
But like perspective. If a 3 rd party just published the weapons mastery I would pay $20 just for that….
Just import it into the 2014 game for free from the UA playtest.
You sound like a not-angry Bill Burr.
While "wolfball" is a great name, I think this was a missed opportunity to refer to that concept as "furball" 😂 Also, great breakdown of the new book. Thanks!
I like the way backgrounds work in the book. It balances things. The new books have a limited set of gears to use, and I plan to use those instead of picking any. If you are worried about optimization, opening the options does not help. It is worse.
Yeah I don't get that complaint - it's not like all players optimize their characters so there is no reason to make the backgrounds be optimal in the sourcebook. If you play with players who like to min max then change those rules instead of asking everyone to go by that.
Oooh, utilize is a word you despise in DnD? I hate “depict” which is the same kind of thing, rather than “show”!
Guess who's back... back again... UNBLURRED"S BACK
Tell a friend!
If you use Shortsword (Vex) and Dagger (Nick) and you attack with Shortsword as PART of that attack you can also attack with Dagger.
Question: I use my first attack with Shortsword, hit and get advantage on my next attack. I use my Extra Action to attack with Shortswrod and Dagger as part of the same attack. Do I roll 2d20, 3d20 or 4d20? Which weapon gets the Advantage and do you roll for the Dagger? Is it going to just add the damage to the attack? There is difference if you roll 2d20 or 3d20 or 4d20 🤔 You might get advantage on both of the attacks or only one of them or just roll one advantage for both?
I see, you take 1 level Fighter for two weapon fighting and pick Shortsword and Dagger so you can make 5 attacks as Monk at level 6 🤔Two with Shortsword, Once with Dagger (As part of attack action) and Flurry of Blows kicking twice 🤣 Unarmed Strike does not require free hand as you can just kick.
Maybe if you can't figure out the couple extra options as a rogue/fighter just play something else. Ort find another game. I want complexity, not dumbed down combat.
Mike... Mike... 😊 Worry not.. With all those options, players will wind up focusing in on those neat thief things. 😃👍🏻 Might be a lot at 1st but players will focus those options for their Play style.
rewatching to get the view count up
My players are 5th level and want to convert their characters to the new rules. One of them has a subclass that isn't in the 2024 Player's Handbook, so it's very nice for him that his subclass from an older book is compatible with the new rules.
Not sure how much sarcasm is there, but depending on which subclass, it can be potentially slotted into the new subclass levels (always starts at 3). I ask about the sarcasm because it's feeling like the rules while incredibly similar, are different enough that conversion looks to be tricky. I've heard at least one subclass, the shepherd druid I think, just doesn't work under the new rules because of dropping out hit dice from monsters.
@@LithmusEarth No sarcasm. He is a Path of the Giant Barbarian.
The only difficulty is how to intrepid the Crushing Throw feature of the subclass "When you make a successful ranged attack with a thrown weapon using Strength, you can add your Rage Damage bonus to the attack’s damage roll." since all Rage Damage has been chanced in the new rules so all Barbarian get Rage Damage to all Strength-based attacks including attacks with thrown weapon not only melee weapon attack as it used to be.
@@sortehuse Oh like are you getting nothing from the Crushing Throw feature, or are you getting double the effect. Since it used to be that you didn't get it i suspect, this (without looking at it) just became a redundant feature. So I think you get nothing from it.
@@LithmusEarth Yes, it used to be only melee attack, so I don't know if the player just get nothing from the feature or get double the bonus.
@@sortehuse I suspect nothing from the bonus. since the old way it worked, with the feature you got what is now normal. I suspect it just means the feature is worse.
On the top of Utilize vs Use, you don't think the wording "use the Use action" is less awkward wording? Utilize might be technically incorrect but its close enough to a synonym that it works.
I do agree about "has the Prone condition" though, it should be "GAINS the Prone condition."
They've been moving away from gods for several editions. (I had a fight on reddit about this) Since 2nd edition, you don't have to have a deity to be a cleric or paladin. Without gods or alignment, where does divine characters draw their power from? They are just another type of magic-user. They do this for the atheists and other people who hate organized religion. It's a game, but these players can't even pretend that gods influence the world. Sad, really.
As an atheist and a gamer… and an adult, I have no problem parsing the followers of Pelor or Vecna, Olidamara, or Cuthbert from modern gods.
Talking about this as a gaming book, I’m with Mike. It was a miss to not include a starter pantheon of gods like 3e PHB had. The Cleric, the Paladin, the Warlock… every character really. So much character source material just obliviously wiped away. :/
I'm a Christian, and false idol worship presented in the books has always bothered me. If you are a believer then why would you want to even pretend to worship fake gods? I, for one, am glad that they're moving away from having deities mentioned in the rulebook.
Why is that sad?
All this blurring - it's like pornography in Japan
I mean this _is_ pornography in Japan.
It still makes me laugh that they took out half-races. More of that west coast "just one drop" theory coming into D&D
There are a lot of games out there that are just as good or better, that are NOT made by companies that hate you. You should check some of them out.
what do you suggest? I'm into pathfinder these days i wonder if you something diffrent
@@Quadrilli0n I'm neck deep in Pathfinder 2e as well. But Shadowdark is also great, and ICRPG, and "Tales from the Loop," and "Blades in the Dark" and "Cairn" and "Daggerheart" and several others. I didn't find the mechanics of "Vaesen" fun, but the idea is amazing. But "Delta Green" and "Call of C'thulu" will scratch that supernatural itch for you. And "Marvel Multiverse RPG" is a homerun for the Supers genre!
@@Quadrilli0n My favorites: Worlds Without Number and Forbidden Lands.
Some people like D&D. My suggestion is that you learn to cope with that.
To little to late
Strongly dislike the art _because_ it's "Happy 5e" tbh. It's safe and clean and sanitized. Everyone looks like they spend hours doing their hair and makeup. It feels very anti-adventure to me.
Anti-adventure puts the feeling I have about the art into words. A lot of it just feels so artificial and safe, with a couple of exceptions that I’ve seen in this video.
Should never have been “Species.”
Should be “Origin”.
Should never have been “Utilize.”
Should be “Interact.”
We will never have 3.0 again.
And that breaks me.
Not until you release the retroclone.
Thanks for posting this, am extremely pissed off by what I saw at the 20:00 mark
These morons couldn't even fix Flame Blade to work like Shadow Blade, it was such a simple fix, it was so obvious but I guess taking a 3 level dip to get a sword made of fire on my ranger or fighter or even monk is too OP apparently and pure druids are still expected to walk up onto melee range to use this worthless spell
Thank you for your service 🫡