We Read through some super controversial opinions about 5th edition from Reddit! Wanna hear the full conversation? Follow the Podcast! Spotify: open.spotify.c... Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple...
Thanks Jack! We're just happy that 200 people like our videos haha. Make sure to share our videos on discord, reddit, Facebook, etc. And we will keep growing.
The reason why I could never consider anthropomorphic races to be "bad" even though I somewhat dislike them in my own worlds, is because i consider stat-blocks for races to be abstractions to facilitate concepts, the stats of a Loxodon are there to facilitate the concept of an Elephant Man. Those stats can be used to facilitate other concepts though. I will just give an example here using dimension 20, there is Kugrash, he is a tiny little dirty rat man... they used Gnome stats for him. The stats fit what his deal was as this character, the stats of the gnome allowed his character concept. Anthropomorphic species stats arent there to tell you "PUT THIS IN YOUR WORLD" they are there to say "if this thing exists in your world, here is that codified" There are truly a thousand ways an Elephant Man could come about, or something with stats similiar to an elephant man, and I would rather have the stats and not need them, than need them and not have them.
Exactly right. And to me this is the healthiest attitude. We should support creators that pour time and energy in to meticulously crafting homebrew stats that we will probably never use lol Also if you aren't already checking it out I'd love for you to check out the podcast, Urk. We're trying out best to carve out a little community here. Rock on.
@@josephjacobsonfilms I did check it out, I dont agree with everything you guys say but it sounds like you got some good thoughts. Let me know if you guys ever want a guest star in the form of a lowly webcomic writer and artist.
To the simplest question, "What class is Gandalf?" or "What class is Conan?" three different people will give three different answers. Classes are too big a brick in the character building system.
Baked in flavor is fine as long as the DM knows that it's simply flavor and the player should be able to change everything as long as it doesn't change the mechanics too much. Though more DM's should be more creative, allowing a Tempest Domain Cleric to take more lightning based spells for example, since they really don't have access to more than just the ones in the players handbook.
You're awesome! Too bad spotify podcasts are unavailable in my country (russia). I'd greatly appreciate if you'd upload full versions on youtube or somewhere
@@josephjacobsonfilms I'll try to find it elsewhere but idk, it's not that obvious if you don't mention every platform yourself in the video Still, having full versions here would be oh so much more convenient since I'm not subscribed to any podcast service other than TH-cam premium
1. D&D is a game about archetypes. Everything is an archetype, and thus has tropes and conventions that it falls into. If you don't like that style of play, or prefer to be able to build into anything, then perhaps the game system isn't for you. A point buy system, like GURPS for example, would be more your speed. 2. DMG is good, but half baked. Many of the systems put forth feel incomplete, or like they needed further iteration on their design. Encounter design, for example, needed a few more passes. 3. Wildshape is debilitating, and offers little more than flavor and some utility (size change, and fly/climb/swim speed, as well as an hp bump). A Druid is primarily a spellcaster, and wildshape completely cuts that out of available options. You have to pick one or the other, and it really kills the class imho. 4. Different races are good or bad, depending on a) the flavor of game you want to play, and b) the world you're playing in. If you're trying to play a gritty political low magic/low fantasy setting, yes a rabbit person is going to completely break that immersion. But if you're playing in an "Alice in Wonderland" type whimsical or nonsensical setting or feel, then they're enhancing to the experience.
I cannot say that the Druid wildshape discussion was productive. Not to be presumptuous, but it didn’t seem like either of you knew much about the class or subclasses. The left guy (I just found the channel) kind of said just “One subclass can’t have cool stuff that happens to be weaker because it causes the player to be in a predicament” which is funny considering the topic is wildshape, and wildshape subclasses are the strongest Druid ones.
Nah,play a grunt with telepathy. (Either one level of Aberrant Mind, or take the feat). Then have your grung talk, and/or act like Animal from the muppets, but have his telepathic speech be perfect, posh common.
This IS spicy. I am not sure I would be cool with it happening at our table, but as always if it makes your game more fun then it's the best decision. Thanks so much for chiming in, really hope you're following along and if the mood strikes you check out the podcast too!
we have a system for that in D&D, its the player asking "can I do even though ability/spell/whatever does not state that is possible" then the DM makes the judgement call.
17:53 I'm old-school BX 1e and 2e and completely agree that the proliferation of cartoonish races is stupid. 5e indulges every power gamer and snowflake fantasy to absurd lengths. In the right campaign, anything _can_ work, but people want to play anything they think of _all together_ without regard for setting.
For a channel with only 200 subs this quality is amazing keep it up lads
Thanks Jack! We're just happy that 200 people like our videos haha. Make sure to share our videos on discord, reddit, Facebook, etc. And we will keep growing.
The reason why I could never consider anthropomorphic races to be "bad" even though I somewhat dislike them in my own worlds, is because i consider stat-blocks for races to be abstractions to facilitate concepts, the stats of a Loxodon are there to facilitate the concept of an Elephant Man.
Those stats can be used to facilitate other concepts though. I will just give an example here using dimension 20, there is Kugrash, he is a tiny little dirty rat man... they used Gnome stats for him.
The stats fit what his deal was as this character, the stats of the gnome allowed his character concept. Anthropomorphic species stats arent there to tell you "PUT THIS IN YOUR WORLD" they are there to say "if this thing exists in your world, here is that codified"
There are truly a thousand ways an Elephant Man could come about, or something with stats similiar to an elephant man, and I would rather have the stats and not need them, than need them and not have them.
Exactly right. And to me this is the healthiest attitude. We should support creators that pour time and energy in to meticulously crafting homebrew stats that we will probably never use lol
Also if you aren't already checking it out I'd love for you to check out the podcast, Urk. We're trying out best to carve out a little community here. Rock on.
@@josephjacobsonfilms I did check it out, I dont agree with everything you guys say but it sounds like you got some good thoughts.
Let me know if you guys ever want a guest star in the form of a lowly webcomic writer and artist.
Loved the video and will check out the podcast!
To the simplest question,
"What class is Gandalf?" or "What class is Conan?"
three different people will give three different answers.
Classes are too big a brick in the character building system.
Baked in flavor is fine as long as the DM knows that it's simply flavor and the player should be able to change everything as long as it doesn't change the mechanics too much. Though more DM's should be more creative, allowing a Tempest Domain Cleric to take more lightning based spells for example, since they really don't have access to more than just the ones in the players handbook.
You're awesome! Too bad spotify podcasts are unavailable in my country (russia). I'd greatly appreciate if you'd upload full versions on youtube or somewhere
Hey there! It should also be available on apple podcasts and a handful of other platforms. Would that work for you?
@@josephjacobsonfilms I'll try to find it elsewhere but idk, it's not that obvious if you don't mention every platform yourself in the video
Still, having full versions here would be oh so much more convenient since I'm not subscribed to any podcast service other than TH-cam premium
@@Trokkin I will definitely try to make this happen. Thanks so much for following along. Really hope you continue to enjoy the show!
1. D&D is a game about archetypes. Everything is an archetype, and thus has tropes and conventions that it falls into. If you don't like that style of play, or prefer to be able to build into anything, then perhaps the game system isn't for you. A point buy system, like GURPS for example, would be more your speed.
2. DMG is good, but half baked. Many of the systems put forth feel incomplete, or like they needed further iteration on their design. Encounter design, for example, needed a few more passes.
3. Wildshape is debilitating, and offers little more than flavor and some utility (size change, and fly/climb/swim speed, as well as an hp bump). A Druid is primarily a spellcaster, and wildshape completely cuts that out of available options. You have to pick one or the other, and it really kills the class imho.
4. Different races are good or bad, depending on a) the flavor of game you want to play, and b) the world you're playing in. If you're trying to play a gritty political low magic/low fantasy setting, yes a rabbit person is going to completely break that immersion. But if you're playing in an "Alice in Wonderland" type whimsical or nonsensical setting or feel, then they're enhancing to the experience.
I cannot say that the Druid wildshape discussion was productive. Not to be presumptuous, but it didn’t seem like either of you knew much about the class or subclasses. The left guy (I just found the channel) kind of said just “One subclass can’t have cool stuff that happens to be weaker because it causes the player to be in a predicament” which is funny considering the topic is wildshape, and wildshape subclasses are the strongest Druid ones.
Nah,play a grunt with telepathy. (Either one level of Aberrant Mind, or take the feat). Then have your grung talk, and/or act like Animal from the muppets, but have his telepathic speech be perfect, posh common.
Very hot take, I do not care if my players "Cheat occasionally" if it moves the game forward.
This IS spicy. I am not sure I would be cool with it happening at our table, but as always if it makes your game more fun then it's the best decision. Thanks so much for chiming in, really hope you're following along and if the mood strikes you check out the podcast too!
we have a system for that in D&D, its the player asking "can I do even though ability/spell/whatever does not state that is possible" then the DM makes the judgement call.
17:53 I'm old-school BX 1e and 2e and completely agree that the proliferation of cartoonish races is stupid. 5e indulges every power gamer and snowflake fantasy to absurd lengths. In the right campaign, anything _can_ work, but people want to play anything they think of _all together_ without regard for setting.
Headed to the podcast!
Sweet! Hope you enjoy it doug!
Podcast listening time
You're the best, Nevile. Enjoy it!